agreed On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 2:59 PM, denstar <valliants...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yeah, seems like a weak definition, as then dictator governments where > the people have *no say whatsoever* (unlike here) in spending would > qualify as socialist too. > > It doesn't really seem to be about money, per se, to me. > > I just wish the same people who were not up in arms about spending > buttloads of money on war were the same people not up in arms about > spending buttloads of money on wellness. > > Or something like that. > > (in general. not directed towards any list denizens.) > > :den > > -- > A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely > rearranging their prejudices. > William James > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Dana wrote: >> >> since when? Perhaps you know something I don't but I have never heard >> that definiteion before. >> >> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Robert Munn wrote: >>> >>> It socialism as defined by government spending a certain percentage of >>> GDP. >> >> > >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:316591 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm