From: Max M (maxmcorp@worldonline.dk)
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 11:11:23 MST
Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
>I don't believe I said that, it isn't my typical label for socialists.
I'm sorry but it was attributed to Mike Lorrey, though I can easily see
the confusion with your name there by mistake.
> Max by referring to stable socialist societies I assume you are also
> referring to Hitler's Germany, the Soviet Union, China and the rest of
> those murderous excuses for a government. They are part of the
> socialist crowd as you well know.
Well according to "Godwin's Law" the argument is now over and you lost ;-)
But why on earth do you assume that that I include those dictator
states? I said no such thing. I said that a socialist society could
exist and be stable. Thus there is better evidence for those than there
is for a libertarian society. I did not say the a socialist society is
the best thing since sliced bread. Nor did I say that any state with the
word socialist in it was for the better.
> But, you refer to stable socialist societies like you have in
> Scandinavia. I don't want to insult your country. I suppose you are
> reasonably happy there. You have referred to extremely high levels of
> taxation which doesn't sound idealic to me. But none of that gets to
> the real problem. You are referring to countries that are small
> enough and far enough away that most of us haven't a clue what you are
> doing over there.
I do belive that about 96% of the worlds poulation live outside the USA :-)
> As to your use of the term libertarian. I believe I am a
> capitalist and yes that has been applied.
Well so am I. In fact I am a card carrying member of the most liberal
political party over here. But that does not mean that I have to believe
that an extreme political theory is the best solution there is.
So I wasn't talking about you at all then. I was talking about Libertarians.
regards Max M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:08 MST