Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
So in AC people voluntarily give money to some organization to protect them. This is somehow just completely different and ensures no coercion whatsoever

[/ QUOTE ]
First off, stop making strawmen. No one said it "ensures no coercion whatsoever". We see it as minimalization.
[ QUOTE ]
Fill in the blank please.

[/ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it. Try not paying your taxes.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you will still need protection, so its not really voluntary is it. In fact it's not unlike a tax.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you will still need protection, so its not really voluntary is it. In fact it's not unlike a tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

Men with guns show up at your house if you don't pay your tax. Sounds like mafia 'protection' to me.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you will still need protection, so its not really voluntary is it. In fact it's not unlike a tax.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah and you need to eat. So using the services of food providers are not voluntary. In fact they are not unlike a tax.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]

Well I think libertarians in general horribly misunderstand how one can "harm others or themselves


[/ QUOTE ]

Translation: they have a different view than me.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you will still need protection, so its not really voluntary is it. In fact it's not unlike a tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

FARMERS are TAXING me by TAKING ADVANTAGE of my NEED to EAT!!!!

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah and you need to eat. So using the services of food providers are not voluntary. In fact they are not unlike a tax

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. Sustinence is a tax your body charges to keep functioning. Would you be able to suspend this too in AC Land.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Well I think libertarians in general horribly misunderstand how one can "harm others or themselves


[/ QUOTE ]

Translation: they have a different view than me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's definitely a reasonable defense.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Well I think libertarians in general horribly misunderstand how one can "harm others or themselves


[/ QUOTE ]

Translation: they have a different view than me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's definitely a reasonable defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, you 'understand' how one can harm others and themselves and these libertarians are stupid because they 'horribly' misunderstand what is clear to you. No, you can't be wrong. It's the other people. And you are willing to teach them at the barrel of a gun...

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Stop being a jackass. You started *your* hypothetical with a given (that everyone agrees they don't need government anymore) and then act like people who don't act in a certain way *when that given is not actually in place* are somehow being inconsistent or somehow revealing some weakness in their arguments. Are you really claiming that you can't understand how it would be much easier to "defend yourself from the goverment" if everyone agreed with you that the government was illegitimate? Come on.


[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? I said people want to move to AC. I:

a) Did not say everyone, although I see how this is implied. I just meant "we" as in "collectively we generally move in this direction".

b) Did not say everyone wants to get rid of coercion all together. I guess if we are allowed to create a fairy tale world in which that is the case all problems are solved.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does (b) have to do with (a)? In fact, what does (b) have to do with anything anybody said?

Thread synopsis: You make a hypothetical, people respond based on YOUR hypothetical, you call them retarded for stating things that depend on YOUR hypothetical because they don't act that way in the real world where YOUR hypothetical doesn't hold.

Grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you seem to imply that a move towards AC is automatically a move towards no coercion. I can desire a move towards AC and still have in mind a means to coerce people into giving me money.

I am asking, and have been asking, how it is that we are supposed to prevent large concentrations of power and the coercion that inevitably follows. Let's dispense with the useless sidetalk, it's not like I've invented some sort of extraordinarily stylized hypothetical scenario. This is a basic question.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]

Oh, you 'understand' how one can harm others and themselves and these libertarians are stupid because they 'horribly' misunderstand what is clear to you. No, you can't be wrong. It's the other people. And you are willing to teach them at the barrel of a gun...


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, I definitely said barrel of a gun.

agfdjkaghadflg

I have no idea what I even bother. You guys just see what you want to see.

Re: AC and power
 

It's like in your world, nothing exists but monies, guns and exogenously given "desires". Let's ignore everything we possibly can about humanity until this stuff works out!

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Oh, you 'understand' how one can harm others and themselves and these libertarians are stupid because they 'horribly' misunderstand what is clear to you. No, you can't be wrong. It's the other people. And you are willing to teach them at the barrel of a gun...


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, I definitely said barrel of a gun.

agfdjkaghadflg

I have no idea what I even bother. You guys just see what you want to see.

[/ QUOTE ]

the 'barrel of a gun' is a reference to the way government cooerces people into 'voluntarilly' paying taxes, ect.

YOu want to force people to go along with your morality even if they are not harming others or themselves because you invent cute definitions of what is harming others.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's like in your world, nothing exists but monies, guns and exogenously given "desires". Let's ignore everything we possibly can about humanity until this stuff works out!

[/ QUOTE ]

And you propose that we discuss every single hypothetical social situation and conflict that could possibly arise and tell you how they will all get resolved.

Is this what you do when a few friends invite you out for dinner? You start saying yeah but what about ABCDEFG..... and say it's a bad idea until these friends can convince you the dinner will be utopia in the face of your never ending objections and what ifs?

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]

the 'barrel of a gun' is a reference to the way government cooerces people into 'voluntarilly' paying taxes, ect.

YOu want to force people to go along with your morality even if they are not harming others or themselves because you invent cute definitions of what is harming others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, your "reference" is pointless until you accept that you can "coerce" people into doing things without using any physical force whatsoever. Then we can try to have a discussion about something that bears resemblance to reality.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's like in your world, nothing exists but monies, guns and exogenously given "desires". Let's ignore everything we possibly can about humanity until this stuff works out!

[/ QUOTE ]

And you propose that we discuss every single hypothetical social situation and conflict that could possibly arise and tell you how they will all get resolved.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, because having huge mobs that function like the government in having a lot of money and forcing you to pay for their protection is just some unimportant hypothetical.

LOL.

I'm not the one starting threads like "how can we deal with excess pony poop in AC????", although those questions are important.

This is sort of like, kinda central, ya know?

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
Again, you seem to imply that a move towards AC is automatically a move towards no coercion. I can desire a move towards AC and still have in mind a means to coerce people into giving me money.

I am asking, and have been asking, how it is that we are supposed to prevent large concentrations of power and the coercion that inevitably follows. Let's dispense with the useless sidetalk, it's not like I've invented some sort of extraordinarily stylized hypothetical scenario. This is a basic question.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, why is this "large concentration" inevitable?

Second, how large is a large concentration?

Third (and for the third time) why do you think this population, who was able to successfully deal with a large-scale, highly organized coercive force like the government will be unable to deal with whatever force it is you're claiming is inevitable? Once they get rid of government, do they suddenly become dumb and not realize what's going on?

Is it possible for a government to reform? Yes.

Is it possible for some huge force to conquer the population? Yes.

Now,

Is it possible for one state to displace another state? Yes.

Is it possible for some force to conquer the state? Yes.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
So in AC people voluntarily give money to some organization to protect them. This is somehow just completely different and ensures no coercion whatsoever because ________. Fill in the blank please.


[/ QUOTE ]

When people actually have to fund their wars of aggression they are quickly going to realise that there are better things to spend their money on. To say that there is going to be 1 company take over the role of the state in AC means that all of those people want to spend money on supporting that company murdering people and forcefully taking over territory. Even assuming that there are enough amoral people to support something like this, once they realise that their company is making no headway vs defensive companies they are going to start spending their money on TVs and ipods instead.

People that claim that some organization is just going to replace the state in AC dont get the economics that are going on within the state. Imagine that the war in Iraq was completely volutary. Every year when you did taxes you got to check a box that said 'I support the war'. If you didnt check the box you got $5000 back (or whatever rediculous number it is now). So immediately Bush loses half the money from people that dont support the war on moral grounds. Then there are going to be those that support the war but dont support it for $5000 much, so bush loses another 25-40%. Considering how inneffective the strongest military the world has ever seen is as this point, I cant imagine it would be able to do anything with 10-25% of its current strength. The war in Iraq ends.

When violence is subsidized by taxpayers people engage in increasing amounts of violence, when people actually have to bear the costs of their aggression violent state like actions will cease to exist. The problem with todays society is that people dont understand that the state is violence. They dont understand just how much money they are losing because it is coming out of some abstract pool of money called the government. But your hypothetical starts with the assumption that people understand the costs of this violence. Therefore its hard to understand how another state like entity is going to arise.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
Again, you seem to imply that a move towards AC is automatically a move towards no coercion. I can desire a move towards AC and still have in mind a means to coerce people into giving me money.

I am asking, and have been asking, how it is that we are supposed to prevent large concentrations of power and the coercion that inevitably follows. Let's dispense with the useless sidetalk, it's not like I've invented some sort of extraordinarily stylized hypothetical scenario. This is a basic question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where are large concentrations of power more likely to develop--in a highly decentralized anarchist society, or in a highly centralized statist one?

I don't think anything can 'guarantee' that a stateless society won't fall prey to other forms of coercion--but it certainly seems like it has the best chance of avoiding coercion.

Especially since I'm not sure what alternative could possibly have less coercion. Once you start asking for a centralized government to 'stop' coercion, you have already provided society with most efficient instrument of coercion and cartelization that there is.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Oh, you 'understand' how one can harm others and themselves and these libertarians are stupid because they 'horribly' misunderstand what is clear to you. No, you can't be wrong. It's the other people. And you are willing to teach them at the barrel of a gun...


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, I definitely said barrel of a gun.

agfdjkaghadflg

I have no idea what I even bother. You guys just see what you want to see.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you seem to be ignoring our central points. Instead of responding to 'barrel of the gun' taxation, or simple monopoly arguements, I think it would be more productive if you addressed the central economic arguements that have been said several times already.

When everyone is aware and must fund their own aggression how is it possible for large concentrations of power to develop. Try going around your neighbourhood and coercively force them to pay you taxes. Not gonna work out so well.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am asking, and have been asking, how it is that we are supposed to prevent large concentrations of power and the coercion that inevitably follows. Let's dispense with the useless sidetalk, it's not like I've invented some sort of extraordinarily stylized hypothetical scenario. This is a basic question.


[/ QUOTE ]

Another problem with your arguement is that you fail to realise that the majority of American power is not concentrated within America. As much as Libertarians love to bitch about taxes and the police, for the most part they still lead free and prosperous lives.

But how about you talk to the people suffering under states supported by America? How much are they going to love the large concentration of American power. The only reason you can talk about 'concentrations of power' in AC and not get laughed off this forum is because the full force of American funded violence is hidden to American taxpayers. Even someone like me, who has vague ideas of the brutality that America is waging over seas, has no idea the full amount of aggression that is being caused. Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?

Going back to the OP, Hannah Arendt proposes an interesting definition of power as opposed to force. In "On Violence," she says that "Power corresponds to the human ability not just to act but to act in concert. Power is never the property of an individual; it belongs to a group and remains in existence only so long as the group keeps together." Force, on the other hand, corresponds with sheer might, strength or the ability to coerce.

Totalitarian regimes rule by pure force. Arendt argues that force and violence are the opposite of politics - that politics, as derived from the 'polis' whose goal is a state of isonomy (literally 'no-rule,' or the rule of man over himself alone) is the practice of gathering and wielding power as opposed to force. In this sense, a totalitarian state is an apolitical entity.

I think Arendt's treatment of power and force - firmly rooted in classical as well as modern political concepts - would be pretty appealing to some of the more libertarian folks on this board.

On one extreme, totalitarianism is the rule of the many by the few, where force is the only organizing principle. On the other end of the spectrum, I suppose, would be a state of isonomy, where power is distributed amongst all participants and force is virtually discarded in matters of the polity.

So to answer the OPs question, a stateless society could potentially exist if force was widely and overwhelmingly perceived as an illegitimate and apolitical tool. One major obstacle to the emergence of this condition is that the widespread availability of force - indeed, of overwhelming, mindboggling force - tends to produce a growing propensity towards its use. Or, as the saying goes, when all you've got is a hammer, all problems start to look like nails.

I do not hope for or envision a stateless America.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was going to make this a very long and well thought out post but basically I'm lazy.

Given: We have guns and money in our society.

Given: We want to move to AC society, but we theoretically still have guns and money (or wealth, if we decide to abandon the dollar... we still have things worth something to people).

How exactly are we to stop some group from having the same control over people that governments tend to now? The problem, as I see it, is that the government does NOT have a monopoly on coercion. It has a legal monopoly, but that means little without the power to enforce those laws, which by definition is the power necessary to coerce in the first place. Laws by themselves are meaningless. In some parts of the country/world, violent mobs have more power and more ability to coerce and "tax" citizens than the governments which theoretically rule over them. What is to stop this from happening in AC?

Just in the interest of intellectual honesty, I should say up front that I believe that strong culturally reinforced rules are necessary to some extent. I don't think AC people disagree, but I take issue with some of their cultural norms (i.e. libertarian morality).

[/ QUOTE ]


The economics of aggressive power depends on ideological support.

This is evidence for example by the amount of energy that's spent on getting ideological support. People are filled with statist myths during their entire lives (parenting, 3 types of school, the media, movies, books, and so on).


So what you do is you stop believing in the virtue of the cult.

Similar things happened with the seperation of state and church, or the belief in the virtue of slavery. People stopped believing in it, they saw the evils of it, and in a relatively short time the institutions collapsed.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
But how about you talk to the people suffering under states supported by America? How much are they going to love the large concentration of American power. The only reason you can talk about 'concentrations of power' in AC and not get laughed off this forum is because the full force of American funded violence is hidden to American taxpayers. Even someone like me, who has vague ideas of the brutality that America is waging over seas, has no idea the full amount of aggression that is being caused. Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

Great post. This is what fuels my hatred of the state. I'm doing fine in statist America, as are the vast majority of my friends and family. But American foreign policy literally crushes the world's poor economically, if it doesn't kill them outright. I can't stomach this happening at all, much less being forced to contribute to it financially. Frankly, I don't understand how anyone could once they realize what's really going on.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

the 'barrel of a gun' is a reference to the way government cooerces people into 'voluntarilly' paying taxes, ect.

YOu want to force people to go along with your morality even if they are not harming others or themselves because you invent cute definitions of what is harming others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, your "reference" is pointless until you accept that you can "coerce" people into doing things without using any physical force whatsoever. Then we can try to have a discussion about something that bears resemblance to reality.

[/ QUOTE ]

I 'accept' that you CAN do a lot of things. Accepting people CAN do anything is not what is at issue here.

You are either talking about your wishes, your preferences, that you intend to be suggestions... or you are talking about force. Which is it?

Are you talking about your own individual preferences that you intend to suggest others follow, or are you talking about using threats of punnsihment from a position of power?

I am the one in reality sir, you are the one playing games. Be clear on what you are actually talking about and stop playing games, you are not a 5 year old.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]


as though anyone who's stronger than another doesn't have "a monopoly on force"

[/ QUOTE ]

Wtf are you talking about? You might want to brush up on the definition of "monopoly".

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?



[/ QUOTE ]

When you add it sales tax, propterty tax, ect taxes and fees ad nauseam the 'tax' % continues to rise. Of course government doesn't like to collect all the 'tax' under one line item, they spread out taxes and use hidden taxes (fees) to make people beleive they pay less than they actually do.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's like in your world, nothing exists but monies, guns and exogenously given "desires". Let's ignore everything we possibly can about humanity until this stuff works out!

[/ QUOTE ]

And you propose that we discuss every single hypothetical social situation and conflict that could possibly arise and tell you how they will all get resolved.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, because having huge mobs that function like the government in having a lot of money and forcing you to pay for their protection is just some unimportant hypothetical.



[/ QUOTE ]

We have a huge mob that functions like government, it's THE GOVERNMENT. WE ARE talking about it. Your the one DEFENDING IT!

lol at denial

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?



[/ QUOTE ]

When you add it sales tax, propterty tax, ect taxes and fees ad nauseam the 'tax' % continues to rise. Of course government doesn't like to collect all the 'tax' under one line item, they spread out taxes and use hidden taxes (INFLATION) to make people beleive they pay less than they actually do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?



[/ QUOTE ]

When you add it sales tax, propterty tax, ect taxes and fees ad nauseam the 'tax' % continues to rise. Of course government doesn't like to collect all the 'tax' under one line item, they spread out taxes and use hidden taxes (INFLATION) to make people beleive they pay less than they actually do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?



[/ QUOTE ]

When you add it sales tax, propterty tax, ect taxes and fees ad nauseam the 'tax' % continues to rise. Of course government doesn't like to collect all the 'tax' under one line item, they spread out taxes and use hidden taxes (INFLATION) to make people beleive they pay less than they actually do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who the hell said that?

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is federal income tax the only tax you pay? If so, please let me in on your secret.


[ QUOTE ]
I do not hope for or envision a stateless America.

[/ QUOTE ]

In other words, you have your hammer.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?



[/ QUOTE ]

When you add it sales tax, propterty tax, ect taxes and fees ad nauseam the 'tax' % continues to rise. Of course government doesn't like to collect all the 'tax' under one line item, they spread out taxes and use hidden taxes (INFLATION) to make people beleive they pay less than they actually do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm all ears.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you will still need protection, so its not really voluntary is it. In fact it's not unlike a tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it really is voluntary. And even if you personally feel like you just have to buy protection, you still have a voluntary choice between different providers.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.


[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK AC is the only system where everyone has the bear the costs of their economic decisions. This is all we're saying: make people accountable. The only way I know to make people accountable is take away their ability to tax unknowledgable tax payers. This would pretty much end all government corruption, freeing up resources for more productive endeavors.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Umm, it's voluntary, you can stop doing service with some protection agency if you don't like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you will still need protection, so its not really voluntary is it. In fact it's not unlike a tax.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it really is voluntary. And even if you personally feel like you just have to buy protection, you still have a voluntary choice between different providers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But using a protection service itself is not voluntary, unless the person is a complete idiot or has lots of guns.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.


[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK AC is the only system where everyone has the bear the costs of their economic decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, because that could NEVER EVER happen under terrible, evil government.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its these people in the third world that most desperately need America to become AC not some libertarian who has to pay 50% tax on his extravagant lifestyle.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the top marginal bracket was 35% in this country?



[/ QUOTE ]

When you add it sales tax, propterty tax, ect taxes and fees ad nauseam the 'tax' % continues to rise. Of course government doesn't like to collect all the 'tax' under one line item, they spread out taxes and use hidden taxes (INFLATION) to make people beleive they pay less than they actually do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who the hell said that?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't act like I'm misconstruing your position.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]

Don't act like I'm misconstruing your position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? After all, you are.

Re: AC and power
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And of course the only possible solution to this problem is anarchy.


[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK AC is the only system where everyone has the bear the costs of their economic decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, because that could NEVER EVER happen under terrible, evil government.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much is Bush paying out of his own pocket for the war in Iraq? Or the members of congress who voted for it? Who's paying for the bridges to nowhere?