Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!image.soe.clarkson.edu!news From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) Newsgroups: alt.activism Subject: Re: Akwesasne Notes -- Basic Call to Consciousness 1977 Message-ID: Date: 20 Jan 90 06:43:34 GMT References: <9001192158.AA24502@milton.u.washington.edu> <9001200342.AA28594@sun.soe.clarkson.edu.> <1488@milton.acs.washington.edu> Sender: news@sun.soe.clarkson.edu Reply-To: nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY Lines: 30 In-reply-to: aesop@milton.acs.washington.edu's message of 20 Jan 90 06:04:49 GMT In article <1488@milton.acs.washington.edu> aesop@milton.acs.washington.edu (Jeff Boscole) writes: In article <9001200342.AA28594@sun.soe.clarkson.edu.> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu writes: > >I refuse to let you change the subject of discussion to "who owns money?". What the f--k is this discussion all about, then, Mr. Snidely Whiplash ? It's about greed. I asked if a person should expropriate seemingly lost property. I used the example of a ten dollar bill. You objected to that, saying that the government owned the money. You said, exactly: We might recognize that people don't "own" money anyway. What they lease is the privilege of stewardship over some promissary notes. Then you said: (1) the money was issued by the US Government (2) what happens to an estate when no will is left? (a) to descendants or next of kin (b) reverts back to the state if no descendants or next of kin which is tangential to the point. The point is not the object, the point is the disposition of the object. -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667 Violence never solves problems, it just changes them into more subtle problems