Re: Aid to children

Michael S. Lorrey (
Mon, 06 Sep 1999 20:18:47 -0400

phil osborn wrote:
> >
> >So now you guys are advocating not only an inbred fealty to the state
> >welfare apparatus, but teach them to not honor their contracts either. I
> >now know at least two people IMNSHO should NOT be parents.
> >
> >Mike Lorrey
> It would save a lot time and embarrassment if you would READ what you reply
> to more carefully. Where you got the above???, especially wrt my comments
> ??? Totally mystified. Maybe some hydergine would help..

Quoting Bryan Moss:
> Parents are the weak link in our chain; we need to remove them as early as
> possible and replace them with someone who has a genuine (economic) interest
> in the child. To begin with the best we can do is offer good money for
> children, soon after we might contract women to give birth to wholely owned
> children, and eventually we would grow them in labs (or farm them if you're
> looking for an appropriate visual image). I want child welfare to be an
> systematic process of our economy without interference by parents who expect
> more than dividends.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ If thats not advocacy for 'inbred fealty to
the state welfare apparatus', then I don't know what is... furthermore: You said:
> > The local data and expertise is fairly crucial, as the micro-loans program
> > suggests, as is collective responsibility. The kid could not be forced to
> > honor the contract later on, but it would probably be very much in his
> > interest to do so, as his share value would be a bankable asset in getting
> > loans or future investments. He would no more be likely in most cases to
> > disallow the original contract than any corporation would be to basically
> > commit suicide and let the share prices go to zero.
And Bryan said:
> I would suggest that the child can be forced but it would, in most
> circumstances, not be in the best interest of the share holders.

^^^^^^^^ This is advocating that children be taught to not honor their

Mike Lorrey