the fundamental basis for civil law is the Corpus Juris Civicus, or the Body of Civil Law, which was set down by the Emperor Justinian.
It turn out that the Emperor Justinian don't invented nothing, but tried to wrote down the laws that the "giureconsulti" developed in the previous centuries. Bruno Leoni wrote about this.
Other cultures than anglo-saxons (read: the rest of Mankind) do not harbour such a distrust of the State and, you know what? their States are efficient and work towards the benefit of their nations.
What state run efficiently so better than the USA? Name them, if you dare!!! Italy? France? Russia? China? Zimbabwe? Japan?
I'm from Italy, and I must tell you than "efficient" and "work towards the benefit of the nation" are not the main adjectives the people would use. "Inefficient" and "work for the benefit of 'the caste'" are more probable.
'The caste' ( http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_casta La Casta ) is a recent italian book about the privileges of the governing elite and their cronies.
You are both wrong, in a free market monopolies could exist, but they would be fair, because they have not the power of the government to prevent others to enter in the same market or in other competing markets.
About the racists comment about Somalia, the very ignorant commenter could be surprised to learn that Somalia have laws but have not a real government:
http://home.arcor.de/danneskjoeld/X/Som/
The Law of the Somalis
A Stable Foundation for Economic Development In the Horn of Africa
Michael van Notten
And its people is way better off now than 15 years ago with a dictator.
And they have investors like Coca Cola: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3865595.stm
Their cellphone rates are the lowest of Africa (so running the businneses must not be so dangerous and costly). And more could be said. Google is your friend.
http://emuslim.com/IslamAgainstVoilence.asp
Al- Quran 5:32
"...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy
Kill whoever changes his religion. Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57
You missed the obvious:
Islam versus Christian, Jews, Hindus,... anyone else.
Last time I checked they had an Allah dictated order to kill them all if they change their religion or spread mischief on the land.
Here a description of the School in Italy (in English):
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=983707
Caveat. That was wrote in 2001. The prescribed years went from 9 to 12 and the courses were reformed and re-reformed. And nothing changed really.
I buy locally whenever I can. The WTO and NAFTA are trade agreements that by law, prevent us from buying locally. INDIVIDUAL PROFIT is not a consideration int he analysis at all- because it's just a straw man, a fake.
Excuses. Or are you forced, at gunpoint or armtwisted, to buy chinese stuff? If your arguments are true, you buy local always, and what you are not able to buy you produce yourself. Doing otherwise is hypocrisy. And don't tell it cost too much money for you to buy local stuff or doing it yourself it is too difficult, too time wasting and so on. It is your point that local is always better. Not mine.
The good of the community is a strawman. Because I know what is my individual interests, but I don't know what is the community interest. I say the community interest it is to commerce with all, you say different.
<blockquote>The Kalapuya [wikipedia.org] considered themselves to be extremely wealthy.<blockquote> What they consider themselves is their businesses, and how I consider myself is my businesses. But it is interesting how you use as example an extinct people. Try again with something living and I could be more impressed.
You have wrote that spending your money you enhance the local economy more than spending it in foreign goods at lower prices. If it is so, you have no excuses to not buy local. Whatever was or is the price.
If the goods you need are not available, under your theory, you will have a greater profit producing them locally than buying them from abroad.
This is the normal behavior of Marxists, they like talk the talk but they refrain to walk the walk.
They prefer to someone else to walk the walk.
Foreign trade is bad because other countries are not covered by the same set of Federal Laws, giving them an absolute advantage, and you don't know how stable their government is, opening yourself up to potential consumer deaths when the supply is poisoned or cut off altogether.
Nonsense. Clear and simple nonsense. This is the same arguments protectionist all over the world use to protect their commerce against concurrents. I, an Italian, could say the same of the good produced in the USA and sold in Italy or in the EU.
Then the 8 cents and 8$ is purely made up statistic. Historically protectionism went against economic growth in the [not so] long run everywhere and always.
If I buy good or services at lower prices I am able to buy the same good or services and be able to spend the saved money in different ways (saving, investing, buy more of the same). I'm richer if I'm able to buy the same goods at lower prices. Protectionism, in the long run, make all poorer. This because in a world where commerce is possible, specialization of the production is possible and with specialization come a huge growth in productivity. The commerce is historically the source of the wellness and wealth of the nations.
If it is not, please name a country rich that don't commerce.
There are not "too many workers". And there were not. Never. Just now the Chinese workers are too few. This is because their wage continue to grow like their economy. They could have an excess of unskilled labor, but they have too few skilled, trained workers able to do any needed work. There are not enough skilled engineers, lawyers, physicians, etc. to cover all the growing need of the Chinese populations and staffing the industries to compete in the international market.
Maybe you don't know, but the new riches and the new middle class people in China, Taiwan and so on are spending their money building new homes, buying cars, etc. When the EU politicians cried about the [textile] trade deficits with China the Chinese officials remarked that to buy a single Airbus they need to manufacture and sell an helluva of T-shirts.
Chinese are bigger customers of Russia for military tech because they lack the high tech and the trained workforce to build the high tech weapon systems themselves. So many $$$ go to Russia to buy military stuff. Then the Russians will spend the money to buy food and other stuff from US and EU or to finance the modernization of oil infrastructures and so on. Or they will spend money traveling like the Chinese middle class and new riches are doing now in increasing number.
Chinese, Russians and so on are humans too; they work to be able to consume more.
US have not a trade deficit, only a surplus of cash they are ridding themselves off exchanging with stuff and services imported from abroad.
If foreign trade is bad, so must be trading with strangers not from your state or county or city.
Better you only buy from your neighbors or from your family.
Or better, don't buy anything from anyone and do it all by yourself.
In this way you could maximize your worker protections and the preservation of your environment.
What "good" Muslims need to do to foster trust with other not Muslim people is: 1) Be against in words and deeds (mainly deeds) the Muslims that want spread Islam with any means (violence included). This include al-Qaeda, the Islamic Republic of Iran and many others. 2) Let Muslims to change publicly their religion if they want believe or disbelieve in whatever they like and never attack them and defend them against violence from other Muslims. 3) Admit and recognize that any other human being have the same rights as them.
Usually Muslim have an hard time to recognize these points.
The EO say "seize" not "confiscate". There is a not so subtle difference.
The first is a temporary measure, the second is permanent.
They will keep the money and the assets until the owner show himself and ask them back.
The proposal of the parent is good, but miss a point:
To be sure that "all property must have a 'reasonable' selling point" you need to tax them. The owner of the property set a price for it, then pay 1% of this price every year. If he fail to pay for two years the property go in Public Domain. He will be able to lower or rise the price every year before to pay the tax for it. The owner will set the price low to pay low taxes, but high enough to prevent someone else to buy it. And it will need to reaffirm his interest in the property every year. Hoarding copyrights will be a financial loss, because they will need to set a sell value and pay a tax on it. This will encourage people to put their unproductive properties in PD and retain only the productive ones.
We were writing about the problems within Islam, why are you citing the faults of the Bible?
I take this as a sign that the interpretation of Islam as an aggressive religion is correct.
Moderates Christians have no simpaty for their fundamentalists; and ACT against them if they try to act over their believes (like killing, menacing or damaging properties). This usually imply landing them in jail or, at least, dissociating themselves from the fundamentalists in clear ways.
I don't see many Muslims do the same with the violent fundamentalists in theirs.
Who do it is isolated, intimidated, and not protected or helped by other "moderate Muslims".
The moderates don't expel and denounce the extremists; not before they act nor after.
They let the salafist or the wahabbi to preach their hate in their mosques because they "take out the trash".
I act in this way because the fundamentalist are able to cite Islamic texts to support their actions much better than the "moderate Muslims(TM)".
Islam is mainly interested in "permitted" and "forbidden" actions and not in "right" or "erroneous" action.
For Muslims what Mohammad did is always right and so it is permitted and encouraged, what he forbid or punished it is forbidden and punished.
Marry a six year old? He did. It is permitted.
Massacre prisoners war? He did. It is permitted.
Attack infidels, enslave them, sell them as slaves or kill them? He did. It is permitted.
The examples he set are a long list.
The problem is you can not have a wicked character as the founder of a religion without having a wicked religion. As Muslims are not permitted to criticize Mohammad, they can not reform their religion. If you eject Mohammad there is no Islam left.
I will start to believe Islam is not so bad when I will read about Muslims that will combat and kill islamists to protect Christians or Hindus or Polytheists from them and not only to protect themselves. It is time they do an houseclean before we do an houseclean. Because they are able to differ a good Muslim from a bad Muslim and we have problem to differ a Muslim from a Sikh.
I don't know how things are really there in the US but in Europe the pressure is growing. If / When TSHTF (aka the terrorist are able to do an European 9/11 with 1000+ deads in a single attack) the Muslims will be booted out (the lucky ones) and if some government will start scream, they will be voted out.
If you are not interested in what I write, so be.
I'm only interested in counter you takkyia and kitman.
Slashdotters could be interested in searching for the meaning of Takkyia or Kitman and because they are unique Islamic concepts. And because you can not trust real muslims.
Another hadit, attributed to Aisha herself, tell the same. And tell that she was playing with dolls and have is nose cleaned from her mother.
Is this normal with 13 or 19 years old girls?
It is not a single hadit, there are many hadits and from the better sources like Bukari. And if you say Bukari is unreliable, you can throw away Islam altogether because the Quran is not enough to sustain the religion.
Muslim today tell people that Mohammad is an example to follow in all it did during his life. Sex with Aisha when 9 year old included. And many Muslim experts say that age six is enough to marry and have sex (but only with the father permission) because Mohammad set the precedent. They also say enslavement is permissible because Mohammad did it. Killing and torture prisoners is permissible because Mohammad did it, raping captured girls is permissible because Mohammad did it and permitted it.
If Mohammad was a prophet I will associate him with Cthulhu not Yah've.
I feel no guilty for the actions of my forefathers and foremothers?
Do you advocate that the sins of the fathers and mother must fall on their children?
I feel no guilty because I live better than others and I feel not envy because someone else live better then me.
I feel no guilty if, to live free, I need to combat a war and win it.
People like you are arguing this nonsense by a couple of centuries.
In the meanwhile the capitalistic societies gave and give to their people the best standard of living of the world. And more thay are capitalistic more their standard of living grow faster (ask estonians).
I suggest you to read the "A PETITION From the Manufacturers of Candles, Tapers, Lanterns, sticks, Street Lamps, Snuffers, and Extinguishers, and from Producers of Tallow, Oil, Resin, Alcohol, and Generally of Everything Connected with Lighting."
Welcome to the world of socialized health care.
I remember the fMRI was proposed to convicted people that want show they are telling the truth.
They are well interested in pay the service.
Slashdot Mirror
You are both wrong, in a free market monopolies could exist, but they would be fair, because they have not the power of the government to prevent others to enter in the same market or in other competing markets. About the racists comment about Somalia, the very ignorant commenter could be surprised to learn that Somalia have laws but have not a real government: http://home.arcor.de/danneskjoeld/X/Som/ The Law of the Somalis A Stable Foundation for Economic Development In the Horn of Africa Michael van Notten And its people is way better off now than 15 years ago with a dictator. And they have investors like Coca Cola: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3865595.stm Their cellphone rates are the lowest of Africa (so running the businneses must not be so dangerous and costly). And more could be said. Google is your friend.
http://emuslim.com/IslamAgainstVoilence.asp Al- Quran 5:32 "...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy Kill whoever changes his religion. Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57
You missed the obvious: Islam versus Christian, Jews, Hindus,... anyone else. Last time I checked they had an Allah dictated order to kill them all if they change their religion or spread mischief on the land.
Here a description of the School in Italy (in English): http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=983707
Caveat. That was wrote in 2001. The prescribed years went from 9 to 12 and the courses were reformed and re-reformed. And nothing changed really.
Empty mind is a form of intelligence. Problem is that my "empty freedom" is not empty for me. And if it was, it is not your business.
You have wrote that spending your money you enhance the local economy more than spending it in foreign goods at lower prices. If it is so, you have no excuses to not buy local. Whatever was or is the price. If the goods you need are not available, under your theory, you will have a greater profit producing them locally than buying them from abroad. This is the normal behavior of Marxists, they like talk the talk but they refrain to walk the walk. They prefer to someone else to walk the walk.
Nonsense. Clear and simple nonsense.
This is the same arguments protectionist all over the world use to protect their commerce against concurrents. I, an Italian, could say the same of the good produced in the USA and sold in Italy or in the EU.
Then the 8 cents and 8$ is purely made up statistic. Historically protectionism went against economic growth in the [not so] long run everywhere and always.
If I buy good or services at lower prices I am able to buy the same good or services and be able to spend the saved money in different ways (saving, investing, buy more of the same). I'm richer if I'm able to buy the same goods at lower prices. Protectionism, in the long run, make all poorer.
This because in a world where commerce is possible, specialization of the production is possible and with specialization come a huge growth in productivity. The commerce is historically the source of the wellness and wealth of the nations.
If it is not, please name a country rich that don't commerce.
There are not "too many workers". And there were not. Never.
Just now the Chinese workers are too few. This is because their wage continue to grow like their economy. They could have an excess of unskilled labor, but they have too few skilled, trained workers able to do any needed work.
There are not enough skilled engineers, lawyers, physicians, etc. to cover all the growing need of the Chinese populations and staffing the industries to compete in the international market.
Maybe you don't know, but the new riches and the new middle class people in China, Taiwan and so on are spending their money building new homes, buying cars, etc. When the EU politicians cried about the [textile] trade deficits with China the Chinese officials remarked that to buy a single Airbus they need to manufacture and sell an helluva of T-shirts. Chinese are bigger customers of Russia for military tech because they lack the high tech and the trained workforce to build the high tech weapon systems themselves. So many $$$ go to Russia to buy military stuff. Then the Russians will spend the money to buy food and other stuff from US and EU or to finance the modernization of oil infrastructures and so on. Or they will spend money traveling like the Chinese middle class and new riches are doing now in increasing number. Chinese, Russians and so on are humans too; they work to be able to consume more. US have not a trade deficit, only a surplus of cash they are ridding themselves off exchanging with stuff and services imported from abroad.
If foreign trade is bad, so must be trading with strangers not from your state or county or city. Better you only buy from your neighbors or from your family. Or better, don't buy anything from anyone and do it all by yourself. In this way you could maximize your worker protections and the preservation of your environment.
What "good" Muslims need to do to foster trust with other not Muslim people is:
1) Be against in words and deeds (mainly deeds) the Muslims that want spread Islam with any means (violence included). This include al-Qaeda, the Islamic Republic of Iran and many others.
2) Let Muslims to change publicly their religion if they want believe or disbelieve in whatever they like and never attack them and defend them against violence from other Muslims.
3) Admit and recognize that any other human being have the same rights as them.
Usually Muslim have an hard time to recognize these points.
The EO say "seize" not "confiscate". There is a not so subtle difference. The first is a temporary measure, the second is permanent. They will keep the money and the assets until the owner show himself and ask them back.
The proposal of the parent is good, but miss a point:
To be sure that "all property must have a 'reasonable' selling point" you need to tax them.
The owner of the property set a price for it, then pay 1% of this price every year. If he fail to pay for two years the property go in Public Domain. He will be able to lower or rise the price every year before to pay the tax for it.
The owner will set the price low to pay low taxes, but high enough to prevent someone else to buy it.
And it will need to reaffirm his interest in the property every year.
Hoarding copyrights will be a financial loss, because they will need to set a sell value and pay a tax on it. This will encourage people to put their unproductive properties in PD and retain only the productive ones.
We were writing about the problems within Islam, why are you citing the faults of the Bible? I take this as a sign that the interpretation of Islam as an aggressive religion is correct. Moderates Christians have no simpaty for their fundamentalists; and ACT against them if they try to act over their believes (like killing, menacing or damaging properties). This usually imply landing them in jail or, at least, dissociating themselves from the fundamentalists in clear ways. I don't see many Muslims do the same with the violent fundamentalists in theirs. Who do it is isolated, intimidated, and not protected or helped by other "moderate Muslims". The moderates don't expel and denounce the extremists; not before they act nor after. They let the salafist or the wahabbi to preach their hate in their mosques because they "take out the trash".
I act in this way because the fundamentalist are able to cite Islamic texts to support their actions much better than the "moderate Muslims(TM)". Islam is mainly interested in "permitted" and "forbidden" actions and not in "right" or "erroneous" action. For Muslims what Mohammad did is always right and so it is permitted and encouraged, what he forbid or punished it is forbidden and punished. Marry a six year old? He did. It is permitted. Massacre prisoners war? He did. It is permitted. Attack infidels, enslave them, sell them as slaves or kill them? He did. It is permitted. The examples he set are a long list. The problem is you can not have a wicked character as the founder of a religion without having a wicked religion. As Muslims are not permitted to criticize Mohammad, they can not reform their religion. If you eject Mohammad there is no Islam left. I will start to believe Islam is not so bad when I will read about Muslims that will combat and kill islamists to protect Christians or Hindus or Polytheists from them and not only to protect themselves. It is time they do an houseclean before we do an houseclean. Because they are able to differ a good Muslim from a bad Muslim and we have problem to differ a Muslim from a Sikh. I don't know how things are really there in the US but in Europe the pressure is growing. If / When TSHTF (aka the terrorist are able to do an European 9/11 with 1000+ deads in a single attack) the Muslims will be booted out (the lucky ones) and if some government will start scream, they will be voted out. If you are not interested in what I write, so be. I'm only interested in counter you takkyia and kitman. Slashdotters could be interested in searching for the meaning of Takkyia or Kitman and because they are unique Islamic concepts. And because you can not trust real muslims.
Another hadit, attributed to Aisha herself, tell the same. And tell that she was playing with dolls and have is nose cleaned from her mother. Is this normal with 13 or 19 years old girls? It is not a single hadit, there are many hadits and from the better sources like Bukari. And if you say Bukari is unreliable, you can throw away Islam altogether because the Quran is not enough to sustain the religion. Muslim today tell people that Mohammad is an example to follow in all it did during his life. Sex with Aisha when 9 year old included. And many Muslim experts say that age six is enough to marry and have sex (but only with the father permission) because Mohammad set the precedent. They also say enslavement is permissible because Mohammad did it. Killing and torture prisoners is permissible because Mohammad did it, raping captured girls is permissible because Mohammad did it and permitted it. If Mohammad was a prophet I will associate him with Cthulhu not Yah've.
http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/06/sicko-and-hail -mary-medicine.html
This is an example, in Sicko, that Michael Moore play loose with facts.
I feel no guilty for the actions of my forefathers and foremothers? Do you advocate that the sins of the fathers and mother must fall on their children? I feel no guilty because I live better than others and I feel not envy because someone else live better then me. I feel no guilty if, to live free, I need to combat a war and win it.
People like you are arguing this nonsense by a couple of centuries. In the meanwhile the capitalistic societies gave and give to their people the best standard of living of the world. And more thay are capitalistic more their standard of living grow faster (ask estonians).
I suggest you to read the "A PETITION From the Manufacturers of Candles, Tapers, Lanterns, sticks, Street Lamps, Snuffers, and Extinguishers, and from Producers of Tallow, Oil, Resin, Alcohol, and Generally of Everything Connected with Lighting."
http://bastiat.org/en/petition.html
Funny as the same old superstitions continue to take hold in the mind of uninformed people.
USSR broken itself.
It was not broken from whining cowards.
I'm old enought to have supported the Reagan politics against USSR; and I'm from Italy.
Welcome to the world of socialized health care. I remember the fMRI was proposed to convicted people that want show they are telling the truth. They are well interested in pay the service.