I thought that was a very fine reply by LPS5, but thought I'd add this. I don't see LPS5 kicking the downtrodden in the face. You say you fail to understand why he is kicking the downtrodden in the face...but first you have to ask, is he? There is grand difference between maintaining the right to refuse to give to the undeserving(as one may see it), and stealing from the downtrodden(which would indeed resemble kicking- if a wider class of people than the undeserving). Within our lives, we have choices to make within our sphere of influence. Considering that huge portions, up to 2/3's or so, of government welfare monies(in general) go to Government employees who administer it, I'd rather have the tax breaks and count on the American People to give at least half what they get back where it helps most, in community after community across the Country. More money to more helpful places(raising the lot of the downtrodden), would be the result. More neighbors could afford to help neighbors as/when needed.
The above simply is not in the realm of the immoral, as you may see.
I disagree with LPS5 if he believes there is to be a higher level of swindling going on with "less" regulation in place. The rule of law which you respect is relatively simple and covers all wrongdoing in the context of a trial. Regulations allow wrongdoing Corporations, for instance, to argue the they "met all their known legal obligations," and actually gain sympathy and acquittals. Removing regulations is a reward to to the people/consumers/downtrodden, while Corporations then will remain liable if they screw up in any de-regulated business they may be in, and without mercy & light sentencing, unlike now.
Freedom Works in many ways,
Dan B |
