In article <6f68c247-3d43-41b9-94bb-
7ad4b50f8651@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, fyfpoon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>
>
>On Mar 31, 2:21爌m, Jim Walsh <jimNOwalsSPA...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:53:21 +0800, fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
>> (in article
>> <93769840-77f7-4eb6-92c7-0322c8442...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 3月31日, 下午1时48分, Jim Walsh <jimNOwalsSPA...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:47:15 +0800, fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
>> >> (in article
>> >>
<0fc85860-3b62-4e57-8553-b01a9aa53...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>>
>> >>> On Mar 30, 8:42 pm, Jim Walsh <jimNOwalsSPA...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >>>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:45:17 +0800, fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
>> >>>> (in article
>> >>>>
<2694175c-7991-41e1-b1ca-ce93dd592...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>> >>>>> Then who pays for the overheads incurred in that monumental
>> >>>>> structure? 燳Ou are not talking about freedom in vacuum. 燱hat
>> >>>>> freedom? 燜reedom to starve to death? 燱ho feeds the monks?
>>
>> >>>> None of my business who feeds the monks. None of yours either.
Freedom
of
>> >>>>
>> >>>> religion does not imply or suggest taxpayers paying for churches,
>> >>>> shrines,
>> >>>> etc.
>>
>> >>>> Let Tibetan be free (let all Chinese be free (let all people be
free))
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> they will decide (individually and collectively) to build or not
to
>> >>>> build,
>> >>>> to feed or not to feed.
>> >>> Jim, this is the first time you withdraw from debating using
slogans
>> >>> or rallying cry, due to the fact that you did not study economics
well
>> >>> while in college.
>>
>> >> Sorry, Mr. Fyfpoon, I don't understand the above.
>>
>> >> 1. I don't understand why you said I withdrew from debating.
>>
>> >> 2. I didn't major in economics. My undergraduate major was history,
but
I
>> >> studied some economics. My graduate degree is in law. A law school
>> >> education
>> >> involves some study of economics, too.
>> > You seem to be ignoring the concept of scarcity which is essential to
>> > any form of economics learning.
>>
>> I still don't see what you are getting at here. Sorry.
>>
>> > I don't doubt that CCP is a dictator but the other side is not
necessarily
>>
>> that democratic.
>>
>> I don't sup****t any side or party in Tibet or in China. The officials
in
both
>> cases should elected by the people.
>
>How is that going to be brought about?
How about free and open elections?
|
