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.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (17599)	2/12/1999 12:48:00 AM
From: James F. Hopkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

Hi Blue; I can't put my finger on what size government we need to have. Smaller, & larger seem sort of arbitrary thingys, maybe it needs to expand or contract to some size but just how we determine what size is ideal I haven't given much thought to. I don't want government tossing TAX money into the market, via S.S. or any other way, and agree with CreemSpam on that, well that's an understatement I was against it before he said he was. But it's one of the few things I think he has right. There are a few lines I don't want to see crossed or even blurred. I have no idea of what would or will be ideal, as we rush into the future, and I'm very cautious about those who do, however I do have a few you better nots I'm convinced a tax system, with government and privet enterprise in some sort of balance, yet separate is the way to go, however much we have to cut or grow government to make it self supporting ( & no national debt that's not paid off within a year period ) is what I'd like to see them shoot for, not all this garbage about a balance budget, and double talk about a surplus when I can see with my own eyes the debt is going up every day. I've got no time to waste on any anarchist, if I had my way they would give taht up or I'd run em out of the country. My thinking gets more complicated than I have words to explain, I try to dig into things and apply say celestial navigation analogies to them. Every thing is not taht complex, but a simple fork in the road thingy most often don't work. I only have a small Library and in it is only one Law Book, if you could call it that. A line in it says ,but we felt the seller, as a public servant bearing public trust, was more culpable than the buyer Now I can extrapolate volumes from that one line, and it shapes most of my thinking when it comes to shades of gray. From it I also arrive at the point that the person paying the bribe is not as culpable as the public servant who is taking it, and so on, and so on. It was written by Leon Jaworski , in his "The Right and the Power" and my reason for studying it had nothing to do with Nixon, even though that's what it's about. More than that it's about how Jaworski analyzed things. While I can appreciate his style of thinking I don't agree with all of it 100% , yet I was very much favorable impressed. --------------- BTW my being a mariner, Lawyers avoid picking me for jury duty, most mariners see things in such a way, that say in a boat collision ( we very very rarely will place the fault on just one captain, there is a weighing or degree of responsibility imposed on both ) even the one who had the right of way is most likely going to be found at some degree of fault. Jim