Income Inequality

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay at
12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes -- the
premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than a
low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private property
has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this repeatedly.
It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is than one person we are socialist?

--
Republicans really aren't human beings, so there is no harm, no foul.

Kirby Grant - Nov 3, 2013

Telling us his views of the world.

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay at
12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes -- the
premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than a
low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private property
has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this repeatedly.
It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu


--
Ne obliviscaris, vix ea nostra voco.

Dhu on Gate wrote in news:Josku.366772$uR1.233475
@fx19.iad:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay at
12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes -- the
premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than a
low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private property
has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this repeatedly.
It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu



The real problem with socialism is you need 100% compliance. If there is
any dissent than the beleivers must compel the nonbelievers through any
means neccessary. And as populations increase the number of dissenters will
increase.

--
Republicans really aren't human beings, so there is no harm, no foul.

Kirby Grant - Nov 3, 2013

Telling us his views of the world.

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:29:28 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in news:Josku.366772$uR1.233475
@fx19.iad:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay at
12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes -- the
premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than a
low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private property
has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this repeatedly.
It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu



The real problem with socialism is you need 100% compliance. If there is
any dissent than the beleivers must compel the nonbelievers through any
means neccessary. And as populations increase the number of dissenters will
increase.

Na. That's the simplistic version. We need to unhinge the state of physical
boundaries and make it voluntary.

Dhu


--
Ne obliviscaris, vix ea nostra voco.

"Dhu on Gate" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:29:28 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in news:Josku.366772$uR1.233475
@fx19.iad:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay at
12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes -- the
premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than a
low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private
property
has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this repeatedly.
It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu



The real problem with socialism is you need 100% compliance. If there is
any dissent than the beleivers must compel the nonbelievers through any
means neccessary. And as populations increase the number of dissenters
will
increase.

Na. That's the simplistic version. We need to unhinge the state of
physical
boundaries and make it voluntary.

Seems to me it's always been utterly voluntary if you want to act like a
socialist, as long as you respect the rights of others.....so how's that
working out for you?

"Scout" wrote in message
...


"Dhu on Gate" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:29:28 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in news:Josku.366772$uR1.233475
@fx19.iad:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay
at
12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes -- the
premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than a
low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private
property
has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this
repeatedly.
It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu



The real problem with socialism is you need 100% compliance. If there is
any dissent than the beleivers must compel the nonbelievers through any
means neccessary. And as populations increase the number of dissenters
will
increase.

Na. That's the simplistic version. We need to unhinge the state of
physical
boundaries and make it voluntary.

Seems to me it's always been utterly voluntary if you want to act like a
socialist, as long as you respect the rights of others.....so how's that
working out for you?

crickets

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:29:28 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in news:Josku.366772$uR1.233475
@fx19.iad:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay
at 12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes --
the premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than
a low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private
property has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this
repeatedly. It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu



The real problem with socialism is you need 100% compliance. If there
is any dissent than the beleivers must compel the nonbelievers through
any means neccessary. And as populations increase the number of
dissenters will increase.

Na. That's the simplistic version. We need to unhinge the state of
physical boundaries and make it voluntary.

Dhu



You are unhinged. That is reality.

--
Republicans really aren't human beings, so there is no harm, no foul.

Kirby Grant - Nov 3, 2013

Telling us his views of the world.

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 02:58:12 +0000 (UTC), Guy Fawkes
wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:29:28 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in news:Josku.366772$uR1.233475
@fx19.iad:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:17:01 +0000, Guy Fawkes wrote:

Dhu on Gate wrote in
:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:00:02 -0800, Rudy Canoza wrote:

[followups vandalism repaired]

On 11/22/2013 11:44 AM, F. George McDumpster bull****ted:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:28 -0800, Rudy Canoza
wrote:

On 11/22/2013 8:21 AM, Baxter wrote:
Swiss voters on November 24 will consider capping executive pay
at 12 times what the lowest-paid worker at a company makes --
the premise being that a CEO should make no more in a month than
a low-level employee earns in a year.

A symbolic gesture at best. In any system in which private
property has any standing, this would be overturned.
======================
rec.bicycles.tech and can.politics removed from distro
-------------------------

Not so much for Art, but

You have me mixed up with someone else. You've done this
repeatedly. It's an indication of your increasing senility.


This "private property" problematic* results because of a
conflation between ownership and management/leadership.

There is no "problematic" [sic].

It's an incomplete "conflation" at best. Private Property
is nothing more than a useage covenant with society. Without
the presence of other humans there is no need to designate
property.

Dhu




So if there is [more] than one person we are socialist?

Only if they're on speaking terms ;-)

Dhu



The real problem with socialism is you need 100% compliance. If there
is any dissent than the beleivers must compel the nonbelievers through
any means neccessary. And as populations increase the number of
dissenters will increase.

Na. That's the simplistic version. We need to unhinge the state of
physical boundaries and make it voluntary.

Dhu



You are unhinged. That is reality.

I note the "voluntary" part. And when people decide to not go with
the flow....the Socialists will show up with guns and dogs and either
kill or imprison those very same people.

Its fascinating to watch the Anarchists do their thing. From
voluntary Anarchy to smashing in the doors and windows of those that
they dont like. Seems they tend to violently disagree with those that
dont agree with anarchy...but have made no acts against them.

Socialists created the death camps in Poland..and the Gulags in
Siberia and ran millions through both...terminally.

Socialists always have the weak minded working on their behalf..and
then when they win...they line those very same people up and shoot
them. Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc etc etc...and yet American
Socialists ignore that part..."it could never happen to them"

(VBG)

They ignore history as it repeats itself over and over and over again.


__
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer,
cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
- Heinlein

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...

Socialists always have the weak minded working on their behalf..and
then when they win...they line those very same people up and shoot
them. Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc etc etc...and yet American
Socialists ignore that part..."it could never happen to them"


Those leftists who consider themselves intellectuals may pretend they
can avoid the fate of the masses. They should consider what happened
to Marat, Trotsky, Kirov, Roehm and others who tried to remain true to
their original ideals when the powerful leader took the revolution in
a different direction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm
"Along with Gregor and Otto Strasser, Joseph Goebbels, Gottfried Feder
and Walther Darré, Röhm was a prominent member of the party's radical
faction. This group took the words "socialist" and "workers" in the
party's name literally -- putting them ideologically closer to the
Communists."

And further from the Fuehrer's goal of recreating Spartan-style
state-based socialism.

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:37:13 -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...

Socialists always have the weak minded working on their behalf..and
then when they win...they line those very same people up and shoot
them. Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc etc etc...and yet American
Socialists ignore that part..."it could never happen to them"


Those leftists who consider themselves intellectuals may pretend they
can avoid the fate of the masses. They should consider what happened
to Marat, Trotsky, Kirov, Roehm and others who tried to remain true to
their original ideals when the powerful leader took the revolution in
a different direction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm
"Along with Gregor and Otto Strasser, Joseph Goebbels, Gottfried Feder
and Walther Darré, Röhm was a prominent member of the party's radical
faction. This group took the words "socialist" and "workers" in the
party's name literally -- putting them ideologically closer to the
Communists."

And further from the Fuehrer's goal of recreating Spartan-style
state-based socialism.

Who needs revolutionaries when the revolution is done?

Dhu


--
Ne obliviscaris, vix ea nostra voco.