CRACKED UP/QUOTE..<<>.I trust that you are aware that ALL messages/communications that flow over the Internet are channelled through the US Echelon Surveillance System?>>

ITS FUNNY/ONLY YESTERDAY..i was reading how all info is divided inTO 9
TOPICS/AND THE PROBLEM..IS OVERLOAD..HAS BLOCKED UP THE WHOLE SPY GRID

BUT IT WAS never towatch us all
just the deal makers to front run and control the reigns of power
to know who you now/think your facebook do you now messages/but by 7 degrees of desperation the 9 becomes 3..all aimed at health wealth/sex..once you know all the pedophiles/you can run the world..come with them/you got all your perversions met.

but there are big sins and not even sin
yet they think..its huge so the seat sniffers get exposed
look at who they upset/they donty care to watch us/unless your the best acces point into who they wanne control next

many hands make this scam work
but soon it goes bust..then we know who corrupted who
plus where they built their hideout.where they put the wealth

im glad they watching me
where do i get that living barcode/
that allows only the living to buy and sell?

its in my dna..[spit/or other/dna..on this stamp/
your dna signifies your you/sealed by your mark/...[seal it with your sig-nature]..your mark

sign here

ok your contracted/proof positive we contacted

Yes Paul, we know you are married to one, so can't expect any balance from you. Yes Kiwis are definitely some of the better immigrants, but we don't need them, or any migrants.

If they all went home, & NZ had to support the full result of their fornication the place just might sink. Even if it didn't actually physically sink, it's economy would founder completely.

I notice you didn't stick up for Tasmania. Could that be that even with that bastard electoral system, designed to give the balance of power to a minority of riff raff & rat bags, operating on the fringe of productive society, they kicked your ass in the last election. Perhaps they can overcome that disadvantage, & keep the spoilers out of their lives.

Comfort zone Producer, how could anyone be in their comfort zone when we have people like the harpies from the south, sitting in our parliaments, wasting our money, & with Julia's help, destroying our economy.

Back to topic. I think it is about time that those getting support from the taxpayers of Oz, [self included] shut the hell up with their demands for more, & said a big thanks to those youngsters struggling to buy homes & raise families, who have to keep, or partially keep us as well.

There is no way the western world can continue with it's socialist welfare society. When too many decide they can vote, rather than work for a living, & every year we gazette more restrictions on the shrinking productive sector, the end of the largess approaches at increasing speed.

NDIS, what a joke. We need to start to cut back on our welfare expenditure before we break our economy. Better a small slice of pie, rather than a big slice of nothing, or it is move over Greece, here we come.

Hasbeen – Still no mention of Germany. You know the country with the proportional voting system and no party with a majority. They support the economy of Europe which includes Greece, the country you say we are in danger of emulating. Maybe if we do end up in that mess the Kiwi’s we support us?

Note: We = Government = the collective us

I do agree that we need to get rid of welfare, the NDIS, charities and any other expenses of this type. This is not a sarcastic dig at you Hasbeen, I’m deadly serious.

We also need to tax income, all income including gambling, charities, religious organisation and the like. We need to stop subsidising non-essential activities like sport, religion, cultural activities and patriotic propaganda.

We need to remove the tax deductibility and tax free status of charities, charitable donations, religious organisations and the really big one advertising.

In a nut shell we should get out of anything that is a drain on the public purse, that is non-essential, non-productive and that individuals can do for themselves.

This might sound like an oxymoron:

We also need to have everyone self-supporting or employed meaningfully to the best of their ability, educated and their health and disability needs looked after.

What do you reckon? Without honing in on one or a couple of points and beating the living daylights out of it, do you have an issue the broad philosophy above

Producer, these are your words: "The basic principle that guides all my thinking is without production there is nothing, I therefore link everything back to that principle. If we all sat down and did nothing we would not survive. We must produce food, shelter and clothing to survive"

*You* are the one who "crudely" defined only bare survival as worthy production.

Art does not feed, house or clothe us.
It is a luxury, not a necessity.
You should follow your own reasoning and call the Beatles "parasites".

"but that is not to say they do not have a right to do what they do and at the same time receive a proportionate share of that wealth."

And, if its not the consumer, just who decides what the Beatles "proportionate share" should be?

You mentioned Apple Records. It is only because of their wealth that the Beatles could set up their own label, helping other artists get exposure.
If they'd received lower incomes, they may never have been able to do that.

"you insinuate I have said so that you can support your position is a big no no."

I was giving a *hypothetical* illustration.
Don't get your panties in a twist.

Shocka – You need to read my double page post on the 6th in this thread. It’s not the total concept but it does address many of your questions.

Nowhere did I say or define “only bare survival as worthy production”. Again this is verballing!

If you said you “I understand that you believe bare survival as worthy production” I would have no issue. It is the adding of the word “only” that changes the context that may be in your head not mine.

If you to make a hypothetical statement, say “hypothetically speaking” not “I here you say” and “that is your personal evaluation”. You must agree to a third party, the inference it completely different.

Rather than jump all over the place let’s focus on the Beatles.

The Beatles as entertainers I agree by my reasoning are parasites. To illustrate this let’s assume hypothetically before they made it big they used to busk on the street. To take out a lot of complexity hypothetically there is no monetary system.

In effect they would be gifted goods and services by the people in the street. A doctor, hair dresser and an instrument maker like their music and offer their services. The doctor got the best deal as they died of hunger and exposer before his services where required.

Let’s rewind: This time their appreciating audience included a farmer, builder and a tailor. In this scenario they survive and thrive. They have somewhere to live, something to eat, trendy cloths to wear, great haircuts, state of the art instruments and the doctor this time treated when they became ill.

I think this hypothetical example illustrates how important primary production is. Without it nothing else matters. This is not to say that non-productive activities aren’t desirable, on the contrary. It defines who we and in many cases advances us as a species.

Sorry Producer, I can't hack your idea of representation. In New Zealand it generated that dreadful Clarke woman, who like Gillard did so much damage it will take decades for them to recover.

Germany has survived so far, because they had a large chunk of the population who had experienced communism. However, they have made such a cock up in falling for the global warming fraud, & wasted so much money, they are themselves heading for a Greek future themselves. They did it to buy the support of a small party of ratbags, & will be paying for decades.

They are now trying to back away from their ridiculous power generation & other fuel policies, as is most of Europe, other than the fool Pom, just as quick as they can run. However they may have lost so much of their industry by the time they can, that it might be terminal damage. A lot of there industry is fleeing to, of all places, the US, where cheap gas is making such a difference.

I think you go perhaps too far with health. Even the Poms have realised that their free health system is going to bankrupt them. We are going to have to cap how much any individual can receive in a given period. We just can't afford to be sticking replacement parts in anyone who might like one.

The idea that the taxpayer can fork out for heart transplants for people who will be nothing but a drain thereafter is ridiculous. General health care we may be able to afford, but as capabilities increase, we are going to have to make much of it user pay. If, after 3 heart attacks, I require a transplant, that should be down to me. I & everyone else should have to prioritise. Is it to be a world cruise, or cash in bank for future medical costs. It should never be a world trip, & then young families later pay more tax to pay for my heart transplant.