### Apollo BBS Archive - April 9, 1990

    Public & Free Bulletin Board command:$C

    Message: 64608
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: War!
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 02:28:57

         WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

         Is the point that society sucks?  Is it that all us people are blind to
    the problems of the system?  Is it that religion and drug laws are bad?  Is
    it that communism is bad, but no worse than capitalism?  Are you saying
    anything at all?
         I think it's interesting to note that you call our government an "evil
    empire" which subverts our happiness, and all the while, you complain that
    there aren't enough *government* funds for welfare programs of the elderly
    and disabled?  Yo, Rod, have you paid to the United Fund lately?  Hmmm?  Do
    you make regular big contributions to the Salvation Army?  If so, why
    haven't you been promoting these on the BBS?  If not, please explain why
    your position is not hypocritical.
         AT LEAST you could enlighten us while you complain.  If we were all
    "equalized" in terms of property, would we *really* return to normal in 1-2
    years?  (A bogus claim to be sure:  the poor are not so stupid that they'd
    squander their wealth; the rich are not smart enough to take over
    that quickly - and probably not even malignant enough.  It takes money to
    make money, it takes time to build an empire.  Or are you preaching social
    Darwinism?)
         Meanwhile, you interject baseless claims about the Mafia being in
    control of much of the Empire.  I'm naive and don't see the evidence for it,
    sorry.  Somebody please enlighten me about the extent of the Mafia's power
    today.

    Message: 64609
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: War!
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 02:43:43

         I am also inclined to argue your assertion that "every organism is
    entitled to his share of space by right of birth."  Who grants this right?
    Not the government.  Not "God."  Not even Mother Nature.  Rod, there are no
    natural rights.  Being born with a human DNA pattern only grants you the
    rights of the society you are born into.
         I suppose this all stems back to every atom in the universe being
    equal, or as you would say, "every smallest unit."  The relevance of this
    "fact" is difficult to discern -- if you knew more about the chaotic nature
    of even the smallest particles, you might conclude that our society is
    already, in its chaotic way, quite perfect.
         There are no natural rights in a chaotic system, and in a system such
    as ours which tries and (by your own admission fails) to have order, there
    is a definite limit to the rights we are able to demand from society.  If
    we want the right to property - i.e. space, resources, food, clothing,
    shelter - then we have to work for that right.  You can't just lean back in
    your chair and say "I've got the right to property!" and then weep and
    complain; you've got to fight for it.  You've got to stand up and say I'M AS
    MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!, but above that, you've
    got to go out and do something intelligent about it.
         There are a number of ways of working toward one's own personal rights.
    The first way is to work.  This both ensures that you will receive property
    *and* contribute to society.  In a capitalist system, there is no need
    for the government to fit people to their abilities - this happens naturally
    and efficiently.  (Well, most of the time.)

    Message: 64610
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: War!
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 03:10:58

         What do you see as the source for all of mankind's misery?  Is it the
    evil fat cats in their high towers?  Can we really be expected to believe
    that they are the source of all our problems?  What was it that somebody was
    saying about focusing our discontent on objects and people instead of
    realizing the reality of the situation?  Could it not also be true that we
    are responsible for much of our own misery?  Sure, there are the Donald
    Trumps out there who we love to hate - and rightfully do.  But it's out of
    hand to blame those "evil people" for everything that goes wrong.  Can
    we quit with this nonproductive complaining about fat cats?  If you MUST
    complain, start suggesting things to do with these people.  (Kill them?)

         By the way, the media's coverage of Ron Paul sucked, but owing to the
    fact that newspapers' #1 goal *is* to make money, they cannot be wholly
    condemned.  You need to accept the fact that newspapers like the Republic
    mostly want to print the news it thinks the public would like to know about.
    A state full of Republicans and Democrats doesn't want to hear about the
    Libertarian candidate, and thus the media focuses on the Lowest Common
    Denominator.  (*Expect* this sort of behavior!)  The only thing to do is to
    continue preaching the gospel of reason by offering intelligent solutions to
    our society's problems.  If Libertarians make themselves look good by doing
    this, it's a matter of time before the public (followed by the media) will
    take notice.  Meanwhile, quit yer crying and enlighten with facts and good,
    solid arguments.

    Message: 64611
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: War!
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 03:21:03

         I have my own personal ideas about What the World Should Do to Fix
    Itself.

         BASICALLY, I feel that much of the world's problems stem from a growing
    population and a lack of natural resources.  I think that we, as a country,
    should make an effort *away* from big families (something of a tradition)
    and toward Zero Population Growth.  There is actually an organization out
    there that preaches this idea.
         Essentially, people should not have children they are not prepared to
    support!  "Support" means both financially and emotionally.  If a couple
    desires offspring, they would be smart to choose to have kids *only if they
    are prepared to give that kid or kids a good environment and aid toward an
    education which will secure the ability for survival in his/her adult life.*
         In other words, we are breeding more and more people who aren't
    prepared to deal with the ever-complex world.  If people have less children,
    they can focus more attention on the children who are there, and (hopefully)
    the education level of our society will rise as the population stabilizes.

         Naturally, many children are "accidents" - unplanned.  And naturally, I
    am for organizations such as Planned Parenthood, who try to educate people
    as to means of birth control and, as a last resort, offer an alternative to
    childbirth for the unprepared - abortion.

    Message: 64612
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: War!
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 03:39:47

         A big part of the population/resources problem is the poor.  Poor
    people, more than anybody, should not be bringing more children into the
    world and perpetuating the problem.  The poor are the least likely to have
    the ability to give a child a positive environment (though it *can* happen,
    it's simply financially unlikely.)
         I do not think that the government should tell us how many children we
    can have.  This is currently done in China (they're going for *negative*
    population growth) - I can't remember if they only allow 1 or 2 children per
    couple; I think it's just 1.  This is not a good solution because it borders
    on totalitarian and creates more problems than it solves:  how can you
    punish people for having too many babies?  Also, there are cases where
    people killed their child because he/she was not the desired sex.
         I do see a way of working toward a goal of less poverty-perpetuating
    children.  (Disclaimer: I have no problem with poor people having children
    they can support.)  My solution would start with the government telling its
    welfare recipients, straight-out:  "If you have more babies, we're *not*
    going to give you more money."  This would be, I think, a strong deterrent
    to having more kids in a state of poverty.  (This is assuming people
    consider government welfare increasing upon having more children, which I
    believe is currently the case.)
         This is one of many areas the government could stand to reduce
    spending.
         Anyway, I'm out of steam.

    Message: 64613
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff/F.F.
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 05:30:19

     I hope that you realize that the individual signing on as Freddie Freckles
    is an imposter using my clown name, and not me. I don't mind the exposure,
    as long as I am not held responsible for it's posts.
    ***The REAL Freddie***

    Message: 64614
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/Corinth
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 07:46:20

    I agree, that there are those out there who can quote you Scripture up one
    side and down the other, but seem to forget to take it to heart and live it.

    However, it seems as if that comment was directed at me because of the post
    I (humorously) directed to you. I am not trying to be defensive, but if this
    is the case, I would ask that you get to know me in person before you make
    any judgments concerning my walk. Thanks.

    Message: 64615
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/McCartney Ego
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 07:48:09

    You would think that he has been around long enough to prove his musical
    ability, and would not be so insecure of a no-name reporter for a PHOENIX
    newspaper. Poor baby.

    Message: 64616
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Beau Dog/64539
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 07:54:09

    Re: "Xtians...have all run away."

    You WISH! (big grin) Honestly though, I have your post and Zak's post
    printed out, and I am currently working on responses to both. It is taking
    me a bit longer than I though because I have not had the free time I am used
    to. If you are willing to wait just a little bit longer for a well-thought-
    out response, then I am willing to finish it as soon as I can.

    Message: 64618
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Paul on Beau
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 08:16:03

    But Paul, if someone shows a lack of knowledge of what God's word really
    says, don't you think that is reason enough for us to share what the Bible
    DOES says to him? The Spirit works faith into the heart of a person
    through the reading of God's word. If the person wishes to continue
    rejecting the Spirit after hearing the word of God, there is nothing we can
    do about that. But as much as we know the possibility that it might be
    bitten, we still need to extend out our hand to those who don't know Him. We
    can't simply shut them out and pray that the Spirit might help them. Without
    the seed, the plant cannot grow and produce fruit. Agreed? (grin)

    Message: 64619
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Rod on Joint
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 08:20:20

    Sounds like a good idea.

    After all, the one on the bathroom sink upstairs does need to be replaced.

    Message: 64620
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Peter on Misguided
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 08:21:39

    Would you help to pay for his therapy?

    Message: 64621
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/Lenten
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 08:29:45

    The Lenten services are mid-week services in which we ponder the events
    surrounding Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. I didn't "give up
    anything for Lent," tho. Well, let me see...I haven't been to Scottsdale for
    a while. Yeah...I...gave up SCOTTSDALE for Lent...YEAH, that's it!

    Message: 64622
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl/Corinth
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 08:36:54

    You are correct. You were not the target. I was speaking in generalities.
    The people to whom I am referring (how's that for convoluted correct
    grammar?) are very argumentative and priggish. You display none of these
    qualities.

    Message: 64623
    Author: $ Roger Mann
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: daryl/mccartney ego
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 08:39:16

    From what I know of musicians, I am not surprised. These folks have the
    most fragile egos of any group I know. Musicians are hateful, spiteful,
    and will go to any lengths to prove they are the best thing around since
    Mozart.

    Message: 64624
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 09:17:52

      Your 'every entity is entitled to land by right of birth', and Marx's
    'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need', are
    both recipes for a decaying civilization. Nothing exists without cause. Land
    is either claimed from its natural state by someone and improved, or it is
    somehow aquired from others. Everything else in the world must be created
    before it can be given away. Nothing will be created, or improved, if it
    will only be seized from the one who does the work and given to someone
    else.
       More important than these proceedural problems is the fact that nobody
    has the moral right to dictate such things to the individual, even if the
    resulting system could work.
       Real freedom, not the constricted mess we have now, in which you confuse
    government harrassment and government-aided abuses of the market by
    corporations with capitalism, would allow everyone to live as they chose.
    Wealth under those conditions is achieved by benefitting others for a
    profit. It is the ideal system. All it requires is that government be
    restricted to deterring agression from within and without, and let the free
    market system take care of everything else. Those few who would still not
    prosper would depend on private charity, and that charity would be more
    likey to come when government no longer confiscated the wealth of working
    people in the name of the poor.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 64625
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/64622
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 20:25:51

    That was very kind of you, thanks! (It's not too often that I get a
    compliment nowadays!)

    Message: 64626
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last twenty
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 20:39:23

    People aren't wearing enough hats

    Message: 64627
    Author: John Cummings
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: politics
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 21:16:56

    Lets suppose that to learn about the world and economics, we must consider
    the nature of mankind. (Probably true). Assume communism doesn't work (and
    it definitely doesn't) because it is based upon a false kind, socialistic
    idea that people will work hard for the good of the common community.
    People don't wortk hard that way--they see nothing coming to them as fruits
    of labor, so they don't work. Assume capitalism does works (and it does)
    because it is "fair"--it gives the hard worker a bigger share of what he
    produces, because he produces more than the slacker. The entrepreneur has a
    chance to succeed in the U.S. Now we evaluate mankind as a basically selfish
    animal--one whose greed is the motivating factor. And we're right--that is
    the correct way to evaluate mankind, IN THE CONTEXT OF ECONOMICS. So Zak is
    right to define the world. And Rod is wrong to bemoan our system. It is
    mankind which requires this system. The evils of too much socialism and the
    necessity for a little of it come later.--John.

    Message: 64628
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/Mafia
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 22:41:38

    I've been watching a very interesting and somewhat believable series on
    cable channel 21 called "Crime, Inc."  It details, in suceeding order, the
    mafia from the time of prohibition up to the present.  Fascinating to be
    sure.  It showed how Capone left an empire worth mega-bucks and told of the
    men who took over from there....named all the names, showed all the pictures
    and documented all the files.

    Their claim is that the mafia was the largest and most powerful corporation
    in America after alcohol was made legal.

    I guess making something that the people want makes a lot of a few people
    very wealthy.  It may be happening again with the drug issue and this may be
    one reason that it is being kept illegal.

    Perhaps, just perhaps not only the moral majority types as well as the
    powerful dealer/mafia types are lobbying to keep it illegal.  You know, when
    an organization stands to lose billions of dollars it may be worth greasing
    the palm of some government types with millions of dollars to keep it
    illegal.

    You ask a lot of question and I will answer what I can but perhaps not all
    of them on this log in.  Okay, dude?

    Message: 64629
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 22:46:20

    Neither and I crying or complaining.  I am simply stating ideas as I
    understand them.  Where you got this I haven't the foggiest.

    And yes, there is a main media conspiracy to keep certain candidates out of
    the news lest they become popular and win.  Rethink your position on Ron
    Paul.
    And it is good to see you back on the main board.

    Message: 64630
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/birth control
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 22:48:33

    What manner of birth control do you favor?

    And what manner of birth control do you consider medically safe?

    Message: 64631
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Poor
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 22:51:31

    Well then let's pass a law that makes it illegal for poor, under a certain
    yearly income to have children.  We could have mandatory sterilazation.
    Only the rich then would be allowed by law to have children.  Good point.

    I can see it coming already, a bill proposed by Jerry Falwell, hmmmm.

    Besides, there is quite a lot of open, inhabitable spaces in this world,
    including the good ole USA.

    Message: 64632
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 23:01:16

    Good posts.  In the early seventies, Jasmine and I worked for Geroge and
    Madelyn Babbitt in Oak Creek Canyon.  We ran Troutdale Ranch.  I learned a
    little of their (Babbitt) history during conversations with George.

    Around the turn of the century the seven (?) Babbitt brothers trekked to
    Flagstaff with their mule guns.  Once there they claimed a whole heap of
    land by claiming it.  Part of this land was in Oak Creek.  It was not theirs
    to claim but claim they did.

    Many a families fortune started out in such a manner.  In fact a lot of land
    is owned by mafia and their families.  A lot of wealth is owned by same.

    Yet, people who do not band together and try to rip off others seem to be
    the people who are paying the most.  Maybe my Apollo BBS members banding
    together wasn't such a joke afterall.

    Message: 64633
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last 20
    Date: 04/09/90  Time: 23:05:08

    EEK!