I certainly admire her principled stance. However, accepting the premise that that money is basically "stolen" from us does it not make sense to get back as much of it as you can. Certainly not arguing. Just questioning.
People with principle department. As biographer Stephen Cox points out, the great philosopher Isabel Paterson refused to accept Social Security money because she had opposed the Social Security law.pic.twitter.com/rK1qTLWmbJ
-
-
-
Paterson loved to debate.
- Voir les réponses
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
Well, pedantic point, but some laws do privilege some people at other people's expense.
-
Laws can privilege some over others, absolutely—in fact, that's usually how they get through in the first place—but they do so with the first assumption that it is the government's power to apportion. Much like redistribution creates the idea that it's the gov's money to hand out
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
More fool her
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
Sounds like this Paterson would only be happy if she existed all by herself i.e. the only human on a/the planet - it would be her laws etc then if she wanted them & just whatever she wanted to do would be fine (and lonely?) quite odd but hey
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.