Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- From: "Paul Thomas, CPA" <paulthomascpapc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:28:07 -0400
"Mark M." <markm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
?? You claim it is not realistic to say that slaves
would generally rather be slave owners?
The facts don't prove that out. They chose many other things to be. Out
of the millions of opportunities available to them, the vast majority
chose something other than being a slave owner.
LOL.
Yup. No serious discussions from you.
Seriously. Honestly. Realistically (unless the "sci" in sci.econ means
science-fiction). How many of the slaves ~would~ chose to be a slave owner?
The facts show something entirely different from what roy is attempting to
get people to believe. He wants you to believe that "very very few" of them
would opt NOT to be more evil, and therefore many of them (millions he
claimed) not only wanted to - but became slave owners.
If you had a serious bone in your body you would provide a serious reply.
Or you could just laugh your asses off thinking you have snookered the world
by bullying those who question your antics.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- From: royls
- Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- From: royls
- Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- References:
- Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- From: Paul Thomas, CPA
- Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- From: Mark M.
- Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- Prev by Date: Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- Next by Date: Re: 1911 Reference Book Defines Georgism
- Previous by thread: Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- Next by thread: Re: Are the Filthy Rich Necessary?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|