Search results

Not if spending gets axed too. Not if government intervention gets taken away too.

If you write, you take on risk for a premium.

It's true that capitalism and socialism don't go together, and that it doesn't work.

Because you will provide it for free?

So people enjoy gathering food, people enjoy building shelter etc? If someone doesn't produce much, they can be described as poor. If someone else produces alot more, they can be described as rich. But that doesn't mean that the latter has taken anything from the former. Government...

And there are those who need the needy(for job security/power trips etc.).

What does that have to do with government intervention/redistribution?

So why the F... to you give a shit about gayness?

You're refering to the deficits? And nothing is free!

Those who follow the central planners blindly? Why not give the federal reserve/banks and other business protected by licenses etc, som competition instead?

I support abolishing government intervention in the economy/schools etc.

What does loving Ayn Rand got to do with a centrally planned/mixed economy?

But alot of the citizens are net receivers.

But it ain`t Obamas money.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202895/Kate-Middleton-topless-photos-Closer-Royals-confirm-legal-action-French-magazine.html

You do realize that there are more than two candidates?

In this house.

Both made money thanks to government intervention.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1TGTm9HBKH0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

But what does that got to do with coercion/vilolence, i.e. it`s possible to be altruistic without including governmental initiation of force?