K-Mac

Speaking of more antics... http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayst...ory_id=13576151

And you feared for your life? Perhaps when you're afraid of being killed in your own home, it's different, because I don't feel that I acted oddly at all. Your reaction seems very strange.

The strip clubs are just sleazy, in my experience. I would like to see a burlesque show or something along the lines of what Dita Von Teese does. Something a with a bit more class.

Here's the condo we live in now... And here's the house I lived in before my divorce. It was new, so I still needed some window treatments, some walls painted, some art, etc., but I loved that place...

It's nice to see them stand up for themselves. A damn shame what the government will do to them. IRS audits for everyone!

I'm not saying you should/must freak out during an emergency. Frankly, I was very calm and quick-thinking while being robbed. After the guy left, I found myself shaking like a leaf, talking 90 mph, and crying uncontrollably. I think for someone to say they're completely calm before and after is unrealistic. If you value your life at all, you're at least going to be pissed. Your body produces adrenaline for a reason. I agree with you that people should think about how they plan to react to life threatening situations.

I'm not yet convinced photography isn't art. I think your examples and reasons are good ones.

Ah, okay. That's a huge IF that I must have missed. I've not given this a lot of thought. My initial thought is that it sounds like a "slippery slope" to give this function to government. It also reminds me of Rand's essay in PWNI, Establishing the Establishment (I think it was called.) Perhaps the private sector could diagnose and refer people to voluntarily quarantine themselves at a private facility (or in their own homes, if appropriate), then if the person refuses, the situation would be elevated to the government?? Hmm, something to think about...

How do you plan to determine who is an inherent threat? Are you going to trust the government to draw some arbitrary line? EDIT: No one can guarantee you that you won't be hurt or injured by a mentally ill person. Even if the government were to immorally kick in doors and force feed meds to some mentally ill person who has not threatened anyone, it wouldn't guarantee your safety.

I don't see any similarities, hence my confusion about your statements. Yes, thank you.

Awesome!

I agree. If you want to do charity work and actively seek out those that need help, what's wrong with that? As long as your not sacrificing your own happiness or skirting your responsibilities, who cares?

Broken record warning...this is still the best intellectual ammo around when arguing about health care.

I'm confused too. There is a HUGE difference between the sexual scenes in Rand's novels and strip club activities.

Because once the sick person has violated someone's rights, then the government has the right to use force. You can't just have the government kicking in doors and forcing pills down the throats of mentally ill people.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/polit...ed-1679127.html This is so funny on so many levels. First, it almost makes me want to listen to Michael Savage today so I can hear him rant and rave about this. He's such an irrational, hot-head. Second, "Coming to this country[the UK] is a privilege." ??? I guess Sharia law is more in line with England's "values and sorts of standards"? Ha ha ha!

For the record, I do not equate stripping with prostitution, less the detrimental psychological effect. Sure, but that is not why people go to strip clubs, at least not in my experience. They are there for a sexual experience. We're not talking about a topless Vegas show here, or are we? I have never met anyone that went to a strip club to admire the human body in an artistic manner. I have been to nice strip clubs (well, as nice as they seem to get) as one half of a married couple and it was VERY sexual in nature, not artistic. It was nothing like drawing the human form in my art class or viewing nude paintings or sculptures in museum, unless we were looking at erotic art. I have no problems, personally, with erotica. I do have a problem with insecure people who are willing to do anything for a buck.

I disagree it has to be widespread. It only takes a few people in the right places to get this crap rammed down our throats. They may be able to lie and cheat to get some people or groups to go along with it, but the majority of Americans are opposed to it. Then once it's in place, they can justify more and more because there's a precedence for it. And with the press on their side, it suddenly appears it's what the masses want. How convenient!

I understand why some people don't donate, on principle; however, I don't think it's immoral to donate voluntarily. That's like saying because I pay taxes, I sanction the current US government. How preposterous!

I think it's income taxes. It's the ultimate violation of property rights, in my opinion, to take away someone's earnings. Earnings that are the very fruits of their labor, their means of survival and the method by which they may pursue happiness. In addition, without the funding, government couldn't do all of the other immoral crap, such as the drug war. I think the bad philosophy that Randroid is speaking of has come about after years and years of having our rights eroded away. The very term "rights" has been distorted as well. You have a right to a home, right to health care, etc. No one would be saying you have a right to all those things if the tax money weren't there to pay for all those "rights."

I still say it wasn't a smart investment and they should've cut their losses long before now. Some new clients came to us last year with their GM bonds. We advised they sell as soon as possible. It was good advice.

A stripper is a producer in that he/she is providing a service for money. His/her entertainment services are a value to those who seek that type of entertainment and it provides the stripper with income he/she can use to purchase other products and services. Are you asking if being a stripper is moral? I think it can be, although I don't think most strippers live moral lives. Many of them have low self-esteem which leads to a multitude of other problems, including drugs, alcohol and prostitution. I think a psychologically healthy person would have a hard time taking on such a career. Same thing with prostitution.

You're talking to her! I did include the expenses from my broken leg in my bankruptcy when I got divorced. I had $5,000 in out of pocket expenses (that I knew I would have because I read my policy when I voluntarily signed up for it. Reading, shopping around, knowing what you're getting into...imagine that!) If I weren't losing more than half my income to taxation, I would've had the $5,000 for my out of pocket expenses, including enough to pay off everything else, thus I could've avoided bankruptcy...by a long shot! If 50 states and the feds weren't regulating insurance companies and if doctors weren't being sued by so many frivolous idiots, the costs of health care would be significantly lower and as I stated before, in a laissez faire capitalist society, most of us could afford it. Those who couldn't, could afford to be taken care of by charities or family/friends. Even if it does, so what? I don't want the government stealing my income and spending it for me. I know how to best spend my own income. I can take care of myself if left alone to do so, can't you? In addition, the Canadian health care system will go bankrupt. It's just a matter of time. (I bet it's running in the red already, whether they admit it or not!) "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

That is purty.