Let me see, given the orientation of most on this list, is not the case of being involuntarily unemployed not a sixth case? Do we not have people are none of 1-5 but who are unable to find someone willing to hire them to do anything? Barkley Rosser
--On Tuesday, June 11, 2002 1:05 PM -0500 Barry Brooks <barrybrooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I mean is...if an individual chooses not to work for money, while there is a shortage of food being produced by the nation, it is a sign the individual is either (1) mentally ill or (2) lazy.
Harry Veeder
One might add a very respectable case. (3) rich
I think 3 is just as respectable as 4. (4) on the dole
Or, what ever we may think of it 5 is common. (5) a crook
It is possible to be 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 at the same time.
What have I left out?
Barry Brooks
-- Rosser Jr, John Barkley rosserjb@xxxxxxx
- Micawberism, Schulte-baeuminghaus Sun 09 Jun 2002, 08:01 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, Henry Schappach Sun 09 Jun 2002, 01:55 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, Harry Veeder Sun 09 Jun 2002, 15:19 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, Barry Brooks Tue 11 Jun 2002, 18:01 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, rosserjb Wed 12 Jun 2002, 19:31 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, Harry Veeder Thu 13 Jun 2002, 02:21 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, larson Thu 13 Jun 2002, 18:25 GMT
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, Harry Veeder Thu 13 Jun 2002, 02:10 GMT
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Food: When is it a right or a handout?, Bruce McFarling Thu 13 Jun 2002, 06:21 GMT