Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/04/2003 1:54:56 PM PST by GreedyCapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: GreedyCapitalist

2 posted on 01/04/2003 2:53:54 PM PST by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GreedyCapitalist
Dropping the context of various concepts may serve your political purpose, but it does not make for an honest discussion of the issues at hand.

No it doesn't, but the Left are truly "Masters of Deceit" when it comes to making the simple, so simple that function is lost.

The best example is: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

The context that is ignored is that not every ones abilities are equal to their needs. It is a statement that is functionally simplistic. The dirty little secret of socialism/communism is that there is always a shortage of necessities. Food, healthcare, transportation. The Soviet Union during the Battle of Stalingrad in the 40's (rifle & ammo shortage) and in the 1970's (wheat shortage) are perfect examples.

Another out of context assumption of the Left is that poverty causes crime. The single most significant statistic is that the overwhelming majority of violent crime has caused a formerly prosperous urban area to become poor as the crime rate increases. Crime precedes poverty. An assertion that one will never hear from a Democrat.

The Left has no argument for its theories, when these theories are considered in the whole context of the subject. Theirs is the language of the neurotic. Context, reality and solution based on fact are not as important as urgency. They don't care if it's wrong, they want it now!

3 posted on 01/04/2003 3:23:26 PM PST by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: GreedyCapitalist
“DDT is bad” they say, so it should be banned. However, while all substances (even water) are fatal in sufficient doses, ignoring the potential benefit of a substance is irrational scare mongering. DDT has been shown to cause cancer in mice (but not humans) when ingested in helpings equivalent to 30 tons of treated crops a day, for a year, but it also reduced the malaria cases in India from 30 million to 50 thousand (and the number promptly went back up to 30 million when environmentalists banned it.)

This has always burned me up. No meaningful "cost/benefit" analysis is done in making these kind of decisions, just raw emotional pandering.

BTW, welcome to FR - great first post!

4 posted on 01/04/2003 3:49:19 PM PST by facedown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson