Austrian Econ Disciple
Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2009
- Messages
- 8,264
For there is no better option that makes sense to me. Land ownership gives me the opportunity to raise my own food, build my own home, live peacefully without others trespassing on my property without recourse. A chance at liberty.
You are a terribly unimaginative being. I feel some sorrow in my heart for such people. Here I let Bastiat talk through his grave:
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”
Yes, you've all ready said you think Socialism is necessary to take money, property, and belongings from one individual to forcebly give to another. You are a socialist if you prescribe your belief to this -- it is only in what manner and propriety you wish to foist it upon society. You simply cannot fatham a free individual giving to help those in need, or that those in need would come together to form mutual aid societies, and other non-profit, charitable organizations. From this your lack of understanding history, is shown to be the culprit for your thought process. Do you also think Americans simply died on the streets prior to Herbert Hoover and FDR? This is such a comical belief system.