confiscating people's gold "fixing a mess"
Oil is priced in US Dollars. Google, i mean Yahoo "petrodollar".... come back later.
i see effigies of a man hanging on a cross all the time,
nobody does anything about that.
But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.
The US banks only have around $300 trillion in derivatives, plus they have that bail-in thing now, so no worries,
Frederic Bastiat would be glad to hear he deserved an A. That is from The Law, first published 1850.
An experienced diagnosis grows around the board
Every lunatic listens with secret courtesy
Each paperback dream dies a permissible death
Will the wallet protest a regret?
Have you heard about the new chicken dinner at KFC called the "Hillary"?
You get two small breast, two large thighs, and two left wings.
1 Corinthians 9:14
In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel.
Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole — with their common aim of legal plunder — constitute socialism.
Now, since under this definition socialism is a body of doctrine, what attack can be made against it other than a war of doctrine? If you find this socialistic doctrine to be false, absurd, and evil, then refute it. And the more false, the more absurd, and the more evil it is, the easier it will be to refute. Above all, if you wish to be strong, begin by rooting out every particle of socialism that may have crept into your legislation.
Man can live and satisfy his wants only by ceaseless labor; by the ceaseless application of his faculties to natural resources. This process is the origin of property.
But it is also true that a man may live and satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others. This process is the origin of plunder.
Now since man is naturally inclined to avoid pain — and since labor is pain in itself — it follows that men will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly. And under these conditions, neither religion nor morality can stop it.
When, then, does plunder stop? It stops when it becomes more painful and more dangerous than labor.
It is evident, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of to work. All the measures of the law should protect property and punish plunder.
But, generally, the law is made by one man or one class of men. And since law cannot operate without the sanction and support of a dominating force, this force must be entrusted to those who make the laws.
This fact, combined with the fatal tendency that exists in the heart of man to satisfy his wants with the least possible effort, explains the almost universal perversion of the law. Thus it is easy to understand how law, instead of checking injustice, becomes the invincible weapon of injustice. It is easy to understand why the law is used by the legislator to destroy in varying degrees among the rest of the people, their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppression, and their property by plunder. This is done for the benefit of the person who makes the law, and in proportion to the power that he holds.
How might The Board of Proportionality decide on retribution for the rape of a prostitute? What if this offender left the going rate on the bed before he left. What was this victim really out of? Would a night off with treble pay suffice? 7 years hard time instead of 25? Should the board devise a schedule of monetary retribution with varying fines for the act of rape based upon the damage inflicted upon each victim? Would these fines then be proportional to the wealth of the perpetrator? What about time spent incarcerated? What if the rapist is 65 years old and has experienced his life and gets 25 years in prison, while another rapist is 21 years old and gets the same time but will spend his best years behind bars. Is this proportional mete? Is this to be taken into consideration as well?
You offered that rehabilitation is a waste of taxpayer money, but is there a percentage of success that you could say would tip this in the favor of our present system?
Pragmatically, logically, economically, realistically there is a fair price. My schedule of retribution for this offense would consist of one line: You do this, we fast track your inevitable death.