Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (12205)	12/9/2009 5:50:17 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

but getting yourself killed in this scenario takes a really stupid move True, at least if it doesn't lead to a strong possibility of the scenario changing (or if it does, but you value your life more than the change, and most people, including me, would, its not severe enough imposition for me to give up my life, or even severely risk my life, for it, even if I know that doing so would end it). I'm not calling for revolution or shooting at "revenuers" or anything like that, just saying that not doing so doesn't mean you consent. Knuckling under to indirect threats of force isn't consent. Having the idea be popular, and or get a lot of votes, doesn't mean you consent. Also I'm saying that those who pass the law, are initiating the force and threats of force to compel people, and they are responsible for that. That doesn't mean anything will happen to them, or that I'd call for anything (other than them losing their seat in the next election) to happen to them, just that they are responsible, not that they necessarily should be thoroughly held responsible.