addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscontroller-playcrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1launch-new-window--smalllight-bulblinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonprintShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Re: [humanism-174] Who?

From: Greg P.
Sent on: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 12:14 PM
Even if we had a court system that would allow property 
owners to "sue Monsanto into oblivion", it doesn't 
necessarily work as a deterrent. Monsanto will just weigh 
the chances of getting caught (low), and then losing a 
lawsuit (even lower) against the increase in profits they 
will reap from not paying to treat their effluent in the 
first place.


On Wed, 7 Nov[masked]:56:01 -0500
  Randy Pelton <[address removed]> wrote:
> " Therefore, as an example,   the property owners 
>downstream from the Monsanto factory  would be able to 
>sue the corporation into oblivion for messing up their 
>land and water. "
> What a wonderful solution. Let the Goddam corporations 
>foul up the water and wreck havoc on the health and 
>welfare of the people and then sue the bastards. Let's 
>forget about organizing the system so that regulations 
>have some chance of preventing the corporation from 
>screwing up the environment in the first place and 
>putting people at risk.. Sure, lets do away with the EPA 
>and all environmental regulation. Let's deal with the 
>problem after the damage, injury and harm are already 
>done. This is bullshit. Your freakin solution doesn't 
>care about the welfare of people. And, yes, it should be 
>obvious that your comment has hit a raw nerve and pissed 
>me off! This is a goddam heartless point of view.
> You are wrong about my libertarian education. I have 
>spoken to many libertarians. I have read some of the same 
>libertarian literature that you and others almost 
>certainly have read. I did not learn libertarianism from 
>any anti-libertarians. I examined the libertarian 
>economic and political philosophy and literature and 
>concluded that while the libertarian viewpoint on liberty 
>has much merit, the libertarian economic view and trust 
>in free markets is pure bullshit.
> Randy
> ____________________­____________
> From: Russell Stanton <[address removed]>
> To: [address removed] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 7,[masked]:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [humanism-174] Who?
> The misunderstandings of libertarianism  are very 
> apparent now.   Who was it that taught you 
>antilibertarians­ about 
> libertarianism?   (it was antilibertarians I’d 
> suspect)    And now I also readily admit that there are 
> people I like to call Wall Street libertarians,  who 
>think corporations 
> actually should have human rights.   Those people really 
> libertarians at all!    Let’s  at least get that 
> straight.   ....Lots of other misunderstandings you’ve 
> -   in a libertarian  society,  individual rights,  
> which includes the rights of land owners,  reigns 
> Therefore, as an example,   the property owners 
>downstream from the 
> Monsanto factory  would be able to sue the corporation 
>into oblivion for 
> messing up their land and water.    I really wish 
>everyone would 
> learn more about the history of corporations.    It’s 
>almost as 
> important as understanding the money and banking 
>system,  and of course the 
> history of all of that.     There is a very active group 
> Cleveland  dedicated to monetary education and peace 
>activism (the two are 
> very related to each other).   I like them a lot except 
>that they want 
> the government to do too much for us.  But I do wish 
>more people would get 
> involved with this group.   Here is some info from their 
> newsletter....      ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­              
> Monetary History 
> Calendar
> We continue to publish weekly our monetary history 
> calendar. 
> http://www.afsc.n...­
> To receive them, see below. 
> Move to Amend – Ohio 
> http://movetoamen...­
> http://www.moveto...­
> Move to Amend - Cleveland 
> http://movetoamen...­
> http://www.facebo...­
> Move to Amend Summit 
> County
> http://movetoamen...­  
> ( You DON’T have to be a Quaker to join 
> them)               ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­      
>                     ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­          
>......And oh good grief how I wish everyone would 
> that the 1776 revolt was as much against the English 
>corporations as it was 
> against the King.  Early in US history people remembered 
>the dangers of 
> corporations.  Then they got lazy and stupid.  The 
>“eternal vigilance” 
> warning was not headed.    It was a very long 
> process that lead to corporations having the powers they 
>possess  today 
> -  and all of it was done with the help of your 
>mainstream politicians of 
> bothe 
> parties!            ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­             
> Yes we humans are not inherently rational.   We are 
>greedy and 
> wasteful  and have multitudes of bad traits -  with us 
>all having our 
> own unique  degree of those traits both bad ones and the 
>less bad 
> ones.    That’s exactly why a libertarian/  free market 
> system is the most fair sort of system.   I have to 
>suspect that most 
> people who don’t like liberty have probably learned all 
>about it from people who 
> don’t like liberty for other people  and only want it 
>for themselves 
> -  or else they are some strange sort of 
> psychopaths.     I only wish I could be better at 
> the whole thing.   Apologies for my ineptitudes at 
> it,                 ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­                    ­   
> Rus  
>From: Mark R. Orel 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 06,[masked]:28 PM
> To: [address removed] 
> Subject: Re: [humanism-174] Who?
>   Randy:  
> It's funny your argument is 
> the same one I use to 
> explain why religion will always remain with us.  
> It would seem that we are both 'Tilting at windmills'.  
> Change 
> has to begin somewhere otherwise it is 
> not change.    
> Mr. Campbell:  
> In an earlier post you said "I am NOT a 
> slave to Corporate 
> America."   You also say that there is an 
> enormous gulf 
> between the two candidates, Obama and Romney regarding 
> economics, foreign policy and social issues.  From the 
> debate 
> which was dedicated to foreign policy, there was a 
> lot of agreement.  
> Regarding economics and social issues 
> the Presidency is mostly 
> impotent.  These are under the 
> purview the Federal Reserve and Congress 
> respectfully.  
> The Federal Reserve is a closed door.  And Congress 
> is a 
> revolving door open to lobbyists.  This is the system 
> of party.  Did you know that the R.N.C. and the D.N.C. 
> private 
> organizations?  And yet they receive public funds, 
> our tax dollars, as 
> well as corporate donations.    
> A two party America is a 
> Corporate America.  And the party 
> faithful follow, faithfully.  
> I'll take Quixotic.  
> M. Orel 
> We always get the 
> government we deserve
> On[masked]:16, Tim Campbell wrote:
> In a message dated 11/6/2012 1:04:15 P.M. Eastern 
>Standard Time, [address removed] writes:
>>Obviously, I agree with Randy here.  In voting this 
>> afternoon, I noted a number of third-party/independ­ents 
>>running for  President.  They seemed to represent pretty 
>>much single-issue  candidacies.  Both the Libertarian and 
>>the socialist are out to radically  change the TYPE of 
>>government here in the U.S. ALL of them are Quixotic in 
>> nature and NONE of them in stand a chance of winning in 
>>the real world.   And quite frankly, I did not see a 
>>single one who attracted me enough to even  consider 
>>being "brave and bold" enough to vote for him or her.
>>Regardless, I see voting to them as equal to betting on 
>>the  Cleveland Browns to win the Super Bowl, when the New 
>>York Giants and the New  England Patriots are the ACTUAL 
>>teams playing in the Super Bowl!  "Brave  and Bold" 
>>perhaps, but a nice monetary gift to the bookie 
>>Tim Campbell
>>Recall that I said the libertarian economic  view is 
>>utopian and this why it won't work. Utopian solutions 
>>don't work and  can't work given the nature of the human 
>>species. What makes libertarianism  utopian? The view 
>>that individuals will work and behave rationally in their 
>> own self-interest. This is a fantasy. Humans are not 
>>inherently rational.  Rationalism is not the default 
>>position of the human brain. Libertarian  economics 
>>assumes the rational-person theory of markets. But the 
>>markets and  capitalism are not inherently rational 
>>enterprises because humans are not  inherently rational 
>>beings. Any ideology - economic, political or other - 
>> that does not acknowledge this simply won't work in the 
>>long run. As Tim  pointed out you may and can have some 
>>short-term successes with it. I am  convinced, however, 
>>that it will only greatly magnify the already morally 
>> offensive wealth and income inequality that already 
>>exists, and ultimately  fail.  Why
> will libertarian economics fail?  I am convinced it 
> would do so for essentially the same reason that 
>communism failed. Both are  utopian views of human 
>behavior and how to organize human society. Both  hold, I 
>am convinced, false assumptions about human behavior, 
>human  psychology and human society. 
>>> From: Tim Campbell mailto:[address removed]
>>>To: [address removed] 
>>>Sent: Tuesday, November 6, [masked]:26 AM
>>>Subject:­ Re:  [humanism-174] Who?
>>>I think you have answered your own question here and 
>>>shown WHY  libertarianism has not worked and will not 
>>>work in a complex industrial  urbanized society for a 
>>>species that is NOT devoid of greed, opportunism,  and 
>>>dishones­ty. At least not for more than about ten minutes!
>>>Simply put, open henhouses result in fewer chickens, not 
>>>The post-Civil War industrialization of the U.S. was in 
>>>fact very much  a libertarian effort, and the result was 
>>>expansio­n of the nation and the  nation's economy on one 
>>>hand, and great misery and inequality on the  other.  
>>>It is difficult to eliminate the "people with 
>>>other-th­an-libertarian  principles".
>>>Playing a game without a ref may work on a small local 
>>>non-prof­essional  level, but imagine the NFL--with all 
>>>its millions of dollars at stake,  trying to play their 
>>>season without refs--with the players calling their own 
>>> penalties and placements!  
>>>Tim Campbell
>>>In a message dated 11/6/2012 8:32:30 A.M. Eastern 
>>>Standard­ Time, [address removed] writes:
>>>How could anyone know that what ails our economy couldn’t 
>>>be  fixed by libertarian solutions?    Libertarian 
>>>solution­s  have never been used for more than ten minutes 
>>>before they were corrupted  by people with  
>>> principles.         ­                    ­             
> --
> Please 
> Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to 
>everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
> This 
> message was sent by Mark R. Orel 
>([address removed]) from The Cleveland 
> To learn more about Mark R. Orel, visit his/her member 
> profile
> Set my mailing list to email me As they 
> are sent | In one 
> daily email | Don't send 
> me mailing list messages 
> Meetup, PO 
> Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] | 
>[address removed]  
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be 
>sent to everyone on this mailing list 
>([address removed])
> This message was sent by Russell Stanton 
>([address removed]) from The Cleveland 
> To learn more about Russell Stanton, visit his/her 
>member profile
> Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In 
>one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages 
> Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] 
>| [address removed]

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy