Re: WalMart customer service dept.

[Guest guest]

I need to clarify two things about my previous message.

> > Would we have a bake

> > sale to pay the president's salary or a car wash to buy new computers for

> > the FBI?

>

> If people wanted to, sure. Recall the children doing bake sales.

That should read " Recall the children doing bake sales to help with the deficit

during Clinton's first term. "

> > Maybe firefighters would only fight fires at houses of people who

> > contribute to the firefighters fund. I guess you'd like that.

>

> It would be completely fair.

That does not mean that people would necessarily have to pay into a fund in

advance. I was answering the question in the manner in which it was asked.

Currently, most ambulances are privately-owned, not taxpayer-funded. You don't

have to pay for them in advance, in an " ambulance fund. " If you don't use them,

you don't pay anything for them. If you DO use one, then you pay for that

specific ride, not into a generic fund for future purposes.

Ambulances used to belong to the fire department. Some of them still do. If it

can work for one kind of fire department vehicle (and the trained people that go

with it), why not firefighters? Paying for fire protection would be a natural

kind of thing to incorporate into homeowner's insurance, just as ambulance rides

are covered by most medical insurance now. There's no need for taxes to support

this service.

[Guest guest]

wrote:

>>Right-- which should show you that I don't have a personal axe to grind

>>here. I (presuming I am " you " here) am shocking you by not yielding to

>>normally-predictable self-interest-- I am a poor person, supported

>>entirely by tax dollars, who has been exploited, overworked, and underpaid

>>by abusive employers, who is against unions, and against all taxes. I am

>>writing what I write based on right and wrong, not based on what would get

>>more of someone else's money for myself.<<

We disagree on what's right and wrong.

You say you don't have a personal axe to grind, but you insist on grinding

someone else's axe. And you chose to help the very people who don't need

your help. By doing so, the collective " you " allows other workers to be

" exploited, overworked and underpaid by abusive employers, " with various

negative consequences.

And a personal aside, : If you were dependent on private charity, you

had learn pretty quickly to say " please " and " thank you, " or you'd be

begging on the street.

- Debra

[Guest guest]

> We disagree on what's right and wrong.

Apparently so. I think it is wrong for anyone to decide they are more

entitled to someone else's money than the actual owner of that money

is. That is what thieves think when they steal from you. They

justify it by saying that they need it to survive, that it doesn't

hurt the entity from which they are stealing, et cetera-- but the

bottom line is that it is stealing.

I don't see it as being any different because people have gotten the

government to collect this money (by means of extortion). No one owns

a person's money but that person, and no one else can have that money

without that person's consent unless they steal it. I don't care if

it is the mafia collecting " protection " money, or a street gang, or

the government. If the person that owns the money has not agreed to

give the money (not under duress), then it is theft.

> You say you don't have a personal axe to grind, but you insist on

grinding

> someone else's axe. And you chose to help the very people who don't

need

> your help.

It looks like they do, because there are a whole bunch of people that

think that they are entitled to a portion of a well-to-do person's

income, just because they think they need it more than the owner of

that money.

> By doing so, the collective " you " allows other workers to be

> " exploited, overworked and underpaid by abusive employers, " with

various

> negative consequences.

Yeah, well, I've been there, and I had the right to quit and go

elsewhere if I didn't like that job.

> And a personal aside, : If you were dependent on private

charity, you

> had learn pretty quickly to say " please " and " thank you, " or you'd be

> begging on the street.

Naah. I've dealt with private entities before, and it hasn't been a

problem.