What is our obligation to the poor?

[ding]

The law is, employment at the will of either party

No. Not at the will of either party. At the will of both parties.

 

[danielpalos]

promoting the general welfare, may mean just that.

Promoting the general welfare means giving people the tools and opportunity to WORK.
The general welfare is helped by enabling people to help themselves.....

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not forced labor for lucre.

You don't have to work, but, those that do should not be forced to support those that choose not to.
That's really is not the intent .. but yes, that is how it is unfortunately.

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

 

[danielpalos]

doesn't seem like it. the right seems to prefer situational ethics or capital morals for a price.

Market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, yes, yes, yes, yes. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. Thy must pay for it.

"punished by lucre"?

Yes, socialists do not have market friendly pricing or market friendly morals and will never will never be good enough to have social morals for free and are punished by lucre.

Jesus the Christ is alleged to have, "paid" for that.

Only for the next life.... not this one. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. They must pay for it.

that is why lucre, was invented.

No, the root cause of lucre is there is no such thing as social morals for free.

that is not what Religion claims. you cannot "buy a stairway to Heaven".

 

[danielpalos]

The law is, employment at the will of either party

No. Not at the will of either party. At the will of both parties.

nope; at the will of either party.

 

[ding]

Promoting the general welfare means giving people the tools and opportunity to WORK.
The general welfare is helped by enabling people to help themselves.....

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not forced labor for lucre.

You don't have to work, but, those that do should not be forced to support those that choose not to.
That's really is not the intent .. but yes, that is how it is unfortunately.

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Only with market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, lol. Now if we could only get back to free enterprise, the good would be passed down to the people and they could have social morals for free.

 

[ding]

Market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, yes, yes, yes, yes. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. Thy must pay for it.

Yes, socialists do not have market friendly pricing or market friendly morals and will never will never be good enough to have social morals for free and are punished by lucre.

Jesus the Christ is alleged to have, "paid" for that.

Only for the next life.... not this one. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. They must pay for it.

that is why lucre, was invented.

No, the root cause of lucre is there is no such thing as social morals for free.

that is not what Religion claims. you cannot "buy a stairway to Heaven".

But you can buy a stairway to hell. Which is why the root cause of lucre is that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Religion claims that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Someone must pay for them.

 

[ding]

The law is, employment at the will of either party

No. Not at the will of either party. At the will of both parties.

nope; at the will of either party.

Nope. I do not consent my will. To make me would be to force me thus proving that you do not have social morals for free.

 

[ding]

Promoting the general welfare means giving people the tools and opportunity to WORK.
The general welfare is helped by enabling people to help themselves.....

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not forced labor for lucre.

You don't have to work, but, those that do should not be forced to support those that choose not to.
That's really is not the intent .. but yes, that is how it is unfortunately.

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Capitalism or as I like to call it, free enterprise, only works when it is not managed. Just like Nature. Socialists abhor Nature. That's because they do not have social morals for free.

 

[danielpalos]

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not forced labor for lucre.

You don't have to work, but, those that do should not be forced to support those that choose not to.
That's really is not the intent .. but yes, that is how it is unfortunately.

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Only with market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, lol. Now if we could only get back to free enterprise, the good would be passed down to the people and they could have social morals for free.

under Any form of Capitalism? you must not be paying attention to the arguments.

 

[danielpalos]

The law is, employment at the will of either party

No. Not at the will of either party. At the will of both parties.

nope; at the will of either party.

Nope. I do not consent my will. To make me would be to force me thus proving that you do not have social morals for free.

it is at the will of either party, to continue the relationship. you merely don't understand the legal concept.

 

[danielpalos]

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not forced labor for lucre.

You don't have to work, but, those that do should not be forced to support those that choose not to.
That's really is not the intent .. but yes, that is how it is unfortunately.

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Capitalism or as I like to call it, free enterprise, only works when it is not managed. Just like Nature. Socialists abhor Nature. That's because they do not have social morals for free.

Why do you believe that? Not having a Capital plan usually means to capitally fail.

 

[danielpalos]

Jesus the Christ is alleged to have, "paid" for that.

Only for the next life.... not this one. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. They must pay for it.

that is why lucre, was invented.

No, the root cause of lucre is there is no such thing as social morals for free.

that is not what Religion claims. you cannot "buy a stairway to Heaven".

But you can buy a stairway to hell. Which is why the root cause of lucre is that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Religion claims that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Someone must pay for them.

with or without, lucre?

Jesus the Christ had to do it, without lucre. Just bad timing? Should He have been born in modern times with access to an EBT card.

 

[ding]

You don't have to work, but, those that do should not be forced to support those that choose not to.
That's really is not the intent .. but yes, that is how it is unfortunately.

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Only with market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, lol. Now if we could only get back to free enterprise, the good would be passed down to the people and they could have social morals for free.

under Any form of Capitalism? you must not be paying attention to the arguments.

I did not realize you were making an argument. What argument are you making? I am using your own language. Are you arguing against yourself? Free enterprise without constraints is how we arrive at market friendly morals and market friendly pricing. Socialism will never work because it requires social morals for free.

 

[ding]

The law is, employment at the will of either party

No. Not at the will of either party. At the will of both parties.

nope; at the will of either party.

Nope. I do not consent my will. To make me would be to force me thus proving that you do not have social morals for free.

it is at the will of either party, to continue the relationship. you merely don't understand the legal concept.

I understand the legal concept. I stated the legal concept. Employment requires consent or agreement from both parties; the employer and the employee. Your wording was flawed. I even explained why it was flawed.

 

[ding]

doesn't seem like it. the right seems to prefer situational ethics or capital morals for a price.

Market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, yes, yes, yes, yes. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. Thy must pay for it.

"punished by lucre"?

Yes, socialists do not have market friendly pricing or market friendly morals and will never will never be good enough to have social morals for free and are punished by lucre.

Jesus the Christ is alleged to have, "paid" for that.

Only for the next life.... not this one. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. They must pay for it.

that is why lucre, was invented.

Yes, because socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free.

 

[ding]

Only for the next life.... not this one. Socialists will never be good enough to have social morals for free. They must pay for it.

that is why lucre, was invented.

No, the root cause of lucre is there is no such thing as social morals for free.

that is not what Religion claims. you cannot "buy a stairway to Heaven".

But you can buy a stairway to hell. Which is why the root cause of lucre is that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Religion claims that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Someone must pay for them.

with or without, lucre?

Jesus the Christ had to do it, without lucre. Just bad timing? Should He have been born in modern times with access to an EBT card.

With AND without.

His timing was perfect.

 

[Mudda]

that is why lucre, was invented.

No, the root cause of lucre is there is no such thing as social morals for free.

that is not what Religion claims. you cannot "buy a stairway to Heaven".

But you can buy a stairway to hell. Which is why the root cause of lucre is that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Religion claims that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Someone must pay for them.

with or without, lucre?

Jesus the Christ had to do it, without lucre. Just bad timing? Should He have been born in modern times with access to an EBT card.

With AND without.

His timing was perfect.

dingbat, I bet that your obligation to the poor was to vote Republican.

 

[danielpalos]

Why do you believe what you do? Have you ever had children and applied it to them? No, why not? Socialism versus capitalism.

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Only with market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, lol. Now if we could only get back to free enterprise, the good would be passed down to the people and they could have social morals for free.

under Any form of Capitalism? you must not be paying attention to the arguments.

I did not realize you were making an argument. What argument are you making? I am using your own language. Are you arguing against yourself? Free enterprise without constraints is how we arrive at market friendly morals and market friendly pricing. Socialism will never work because it requires social morals for free.

what do you mean by, "free constraints"? do you Only mean, free from Government intervention, or some other form of "free"?

 

[ding]

Because having market friendly morals and market friendly pricing has a higher probability than social morals for free.

capitalism works, what a concept. it is why the left should merely learn how to use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern times.

Only with market friendly morals and market friendly pricing, lol. Now if we could only get back to free enterprise, the good would be passed down to the people and they could have social morals for free.

under Any form of Capitalism? you must not be paying attention to the arguments.

I did not realize you were making an argument. What argument are you making? I am using your own language. Are you arguing against yourself? Free enterprise without constraints is how we arrive at market friendly morals and market friendly pricing. Socialism will never work because it requires social morals for free.

what do you mean by, "free constraints"? do you Only mean, free from Government intervention, or some other form of "free"?

Free enterprise can never be free because social morals for free are not free.

 

[ding]

No, the root cause of lucre is there is no such thing as social morals for free.

that is not what Religion claims. you cannot "buy a stairway to Heaven".

But you can buy a stairway to hell. Which is why the root cause of lucre is that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Religion claims that there is no such thing as social morals for free. Someone must pay for them.

with or without, lucre?

Jesus the Christ had to do it, without lucre. Just bad timing? Should He have been born in modern times with access to an EBT card.

With AND without.

His timing was perfect.

dingbat, I bet that your obligation to the poor was to vote Republican.