English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

First of all, let me add the word "liberterian" didn't even exist back then.

NOW TO THE QUOTE

PRIVATE CHARITIES ALONE ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS POVERTY
"There are, in every country, some magnificent charities established by individuals. It is, however, but little that any individual can do, when the whole extent of the misery to be relieved is considered. He may satisfy his conscience, but not his heart. He may give all that he has, and that all will relieve but little. It is only by organizing civilization upon such principles as to act like a system of pulleys, that the whole weight of misery can be removed... The plan here proposed will reach the whole. It will immediately relieve and take out of view three classes of wretchedness-the blind, the lame, and the aged poor; and it will furnish the rising generation with means to prevent their becoming poor; and it will do this without deranging or interfering with any national measures."

2007-07-13 04:40:34 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

"It is the practice of what has unjustly obtained the name of civilization (and the practice merits not to be called either charity or policy) to make some provision for persons becoming poor and wretched only at the time they become so. Would it not, even as a matter of economy, be far better to adopt means to prevent their becoming poor? This can best be done by making every person when arrived at the age of twenty-one years an inheritor of something to begin with... The rugged face of society, checkered with the extremes of affluence and want, proves that some extraordinary violence has been committed upon it, and calls on justice for redress. The great mass of the poor in countries are become an hereditary race, and it is next to impossible them to get out of that state of themselves. It ought also to be observed that this mass increases in all countries that are called civilized. re persons fall annually into it than get out of it."
- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice

2007-07-13 04:40:59 · update #1

THOMAS PAINE, AGRARIAN JUSTICE, 1795
http://www.constitution.org/tp/agjustice.htm

2007-07-13 04:41:05 · update #2

TOO LONG?

THIS ONE CUTS STRAIGHT TO THE POINT

SUPPORT FOR A PENSION SYSTEM FOR THE ELDERLY
"Having thus in a few words, opened the merits of the case, I shall now proceed to the plan I have to propose, which is... To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property: And also, the sum of ten pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age."
- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice

2007-07-13 04:47:21 · update #3

27 answers

sounds like someone wasn't thinking clearly at the time. I like a lot of Thomas Paine's thoughts, but this isn't one of them.
It's totalitarian, it's elitist and it's socialist.

It's not American

2007-07-13 04:44:24 · answer #1 · answered by gorgeous george III 3 · 1 2

Well he is definitely against Land Ownership without paying the people regularly for it, for depriving all men of being able to enjoy it as one of the natural properties, provided by God to all men.

he also saw the inherent problems with religion being allowed to influence government.

But also realized the problems with great minds having to share their innovations with the entire population.

so he wasn't a socialist, as extreme right-wingers claim, but he also was not a right-winger himself.

He was either a moderate conservative, or a moderate liberal, two types of people who have more in common with each other than they do with their extremist counterparts, and they don't even realize it.

Some of his beliefs supported moderate conservative ideology, and some of them support moderate liberal ideology, so if i had to choose where he lies, i would say centrist, which are also denounced as liberals by extreme right-wingers and as conservatives by extreme left.

Centrist is usually what happens when you make decisions based on logic and reason, rather than faith or emotion, and I am sure our founding fathers figured modern man would be educated enough to be more centristic than the type of silly nonsense we have now.

our founding fathers wherein a class of their own. They had their own beliefs, they had their own faiths, but they didn't feel that the government should impose them on all other men, as many extrmists today do.

It is impossible to guage our founding fathers by the modern day ideologies of conservative/liberal labels, when our founding fathers, would have probably shot them both.

2007-07-13 04:55:56 · answer #2 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 0 0

Get tips from weight loss community

2016-07-05 04:51:22 · answer #3 · answered by Kathryn 5 · 0 0

Make sure your breakfast is a balanced one and includes at least eight grams of fiber

2016-05-23 11:16:00 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

ride a bike built for two for 12

2016-07-07 09:44:58 · answer #5 · answered by Rasheeda 5 · 0 0

walk with hiking poles for 22 minutes youll burn 20 percent more calories

2015-12-20 16:59:45 · answer #6 · answered by Fred 3 · 0 0

cut your lawn with a push mower for 17 minutes

2016-03-19 04:08:16 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

silken tofu makes a wonderful replacement for cream in some recipes

2015-12-28 15:31:18 · answer #8 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

forget the dried cranberries which have added sugar and add a half cup of fresh berries to top off your salad

2016-05-28 14:05:57 · answer #9 · answered by Joyce 4 · 0 0

buy standing room only tickets for sporting events youll save cash too

2016-03-18 06:18:40 · answer #10 · answered by Simone 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers