Re: an excellent read from the ACLU

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mike Benveniste, Sep 14, 2011.

  1. On 9/13/2011 4:58 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

    > The objections to photographing the Eiffel tower are based on
    > copyright.


    The current FAQ for the Eiffel tower reads:

    The views from the Eiffel Tower are rights-free. Permission and rights
    must be obtained from the "Société d’Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel"
    (the Operating Company, or SETE) for the publication of photos of the
    illuminated Eiffel Tower.

    For newer buildings, monuments, and the like, further copyright
    restrictions can apply outside the U.S. While U.S. federal law
    explicitly permits pictorial representations of copyrighted
    Architectural works without permission or license from the copyright
    holder (17 USC 120(a)), there is no such exemption in the Berne
    Convention.

    As in many other countries, if the photograph also includes
    identifiable images of people, further restrictions and laws come
    into play. This falls into the "don't take legal advice from
    random internet posters" category.

    --
    Mike Benveniste -- (Clarification Required)
    Its name is Public opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles
    everything. Some think it is the voice of God. -- Mark Twain
     
    Mike Benveniste, Sep 14, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mike Benveniste

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, says...
    >
    > On 9/13/2011 4:58 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    >
    > > The objections to photographing the Eiffel tower are based on
    > > copyright.

    >
    > The current FAQ for the Eiffel tower reads:
    >
    > The views from the Eiffel Tower are rights-free. Permission and rights
    > must be obtained from the "Société d?Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel"
    > (the Operating Company, or SETE) for the publication of photos of the
    > illuminated Eiffel Tower.
    >
    > For newer buildings, monuments, and the like, further copyright
    > restrictions can apply outside the U.S. While U.S. federal law
    > explicitly permits pictorial representations of copyrighted
    > Architectural works without permission or license from the copyright
    > holder (17 USC 120(a)), there is no such exemption in the Berne
    > Convention.
    >
    > As in many other countries, if the photograph also includes
    > identifiable images of people, further restrictions and laws come
    > into play. This falls into the "don't take legal advice from
    > random internet posters" category.


    If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    incorporating the tower as a component.
     
    J. Clarke, Nov 26, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mike Benveniste

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    : In article <>, says...
    : >
    : > On 9/13/2011 4:58 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    : >
    : > > The objections to photographing the Eiffel tower are based on
    : > > copyright.
    : >
    : > The current FAQ for the Eiffel tower reads:
    : >
    : > The views from the Eiffel Tower are rights-free. Permission and rights
    : > must be obtained from the "Société d?Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel"
    : > (the Operating Company, or SETE) for the publication of photos of the
    : > illuminated Eiffel Tower.
    : >
    : > For newer buildings, monuments, and the like, further copyright
    : > restrictions can apply outside the U.S. While U.S. federal law
    : > explicitly permits pictorial representations of copyrighted
    : > Architectural works without permission or license from the copyright
    : > holder (17 USC 120(a)), there is no such exemption in the Berne
    : > Convention.
    : >
    : > As in many other countries, if the photograph also includes
    : > identifiable images of people, further restrictions and laws come
    : > into play. This falls into the "don't take legal advice from
    : > random internet posters" category.
    :
    : If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    : the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    : regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    : incorporating the tower as a component.

    That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's freedom to
    photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in the
    U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that could
    happen here.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Dec 4, 2011
    #3
  4. Mike Benveniste

    Irwell Guest

    On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:48:52 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

    > On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    >: In article <>, says...
    >:>
    >:> On 9/13/2011 4:58 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    >:>
    >:> > The objections to photographing the Eiffel tower are based on
    >:> > copyright.
    >:>
    >:> The current FAQ for the Eiffel tower reads:
    >:>
    >:> The views from the Eiffel Tower are rights-free. Permission and rights
    >:> must be obtained from the "Société d?Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel"
    >:> (the Operating Company, or SETE) for the publication of photos of the
    >:> illuminated Eiffel Tower.
    >:>
    >:> For newer buildings, monuments, and the like, further copyright
    >:> restrictions can apply outside the U.S. While U.S. federal law
    >:> explicitly permits pictorial representations of copyrighted
    >:> Architectural works without permission or license from the copyright
    >:> holder (17 USC 120(a)), there is no such exemption in the Berne
    >:> Convention.
    >:>
    >:> As in many other countries, if the photograph also includes
    >:> identifiable images of people, further restrictions and laws come
    >:> into play. This falls into the "don't take legal advice from
    >:> random internet posters" category.
    >:
    >: If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    >: the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    >: regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    >: incorporating the tower as a component.
    >
    > That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's freedom to
    > photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in the
    > U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that could
    > happen here.
    >
    > Bob


    What happens if one changes all the twinkly lights
    to a different colour?
     
    Irwell, Dec 5, 2011
    #4
  5. Mike Benveniste

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:48:52 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    >: In article <>, says...
    >: >
    >: > On 9/13/2011 4:58 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    >: >
    >: > > The objections to photographing the Eiffel tower are based on
    >: > > copyright.
    >: >
    >: > The current FAQ for the Eiffel tower reads:
    >: >
    >: > The views from the Eiffel Tower are rights-free. Permission and rights
    >: > must be obtained from the "Société d?Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel"
    >: > (the Operating Company, or SETE) for the publication of photos of the
    >: > illuminated Eiffel Tower.
    >: >
    >: > For newer buildings, monuments, and the like, further copyright
    >: > restrictions can apply outside the U.S. While U.S. federal law
    >: > explicitly permits pictorial representations of copyrighted
    >: > Architectural works without permission or license from the copyright
    >: > holder (17 USC 120(a)), there is no such exemption in the Berne
    >: > Convention.
    >: >
    >: > As in many other countries, if the photograph also includes
    >: > identifiable images of people, further restrictions and laws come
    >: > into play. This falls into the "don't take legal advice from
    >: > random internet posters" category.
    >:
    >: If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    >: the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    >: regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    >: incorporating the tower as a component.
    >
    >That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's freedom to
    >photograph the tower from a public space at night.


    No, it doesn't. Not at all. It restricts you from *publishing* your
    image of the Eiffel Tower at night without permission from the
    copyright owner, but not from photographing the thing.

    You can photograph anything that is copyrighted. It's reproducing
    your photograph that the copyright restricts.



    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Dec 5, 2011
    #5
  6. Mike Benveniste

    Trevor Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke" <>
    > wrote:
    > : If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    > : the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    > : regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    > : incorporating the tower as a component.
    >
    > That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's
    > freedom to
    > photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in
    > the
    > U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that
    > could
    > happen here.


    Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    me the US capitalists are far worse.

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Dec 5, 2011
    #6
  7. Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    > On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor" <> said:
    >> "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    >>> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke" <>


    >>> : If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    >>> : the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    >>> : regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    >>> : incorporating the tower as a component.


    >>> That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's
    >>> freedom to
    >>> photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in
    >>> the
    >>> U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that
    >>> could
    >>> happen here.


    >> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >> me the US capitalists are far worse.


    > Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    > <
    > http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html


    Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 8, 2011
    #7
  8. Mike Benveniste

    PeterN Guest

    On 12/8/2011 3:29 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >> On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor"<> said:
    >>> "Robert Coe"<> wrote in message
    >>>> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke"<>

    >
    >>>> : If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    >>>> : the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    >>>> : regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    >>>> : incorporating the tower as a component.

    >
    >>>> That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's
    >>>> freedom to
    >>>> photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in
    >>>> the
    >>>> U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that
    >>>> could
    >>>> happen here.

    >
    >>> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >>> me the US capitalists are far worse.

    >
    >> Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    >> <
    >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html

    >
    > Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    > imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    > end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.
    >


    Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
    is the fault of the US banking system.


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Dec 9, 2011
    #8
  9. Mike Benveniste

    PeterN Guest

    On 12/9/2011 4:34 AM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    > On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 22:54:07 -0500, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 12/8/2011 3:29 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>> Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>> On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor"<> said:
    >>>>> "Robert Coe"<> wrote in message
    >>>>>> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke"<>
    >>>
    >>>>>> : If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    >>>>>> : the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    >>>>>> : regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    >>>>>> : incorporating the tower as a component.
    >>>
    >>>>>> That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's
    >>>>>> freedom to
    >>>>>> photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in
    >>>>>> the
    >>>>>> U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that
    >>>>>> could
    >>>>>> happen here.
    >>>
    >>>>> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >>>>> me the US capitalists are far worse.
    >>>
    >>>> Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    >>>> <
    >>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html
    >>>
    >>> Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    >>> imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    >>> end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
    >> is the fault of the US banking system.

    >
    > Please engage sense of humour.
    >


    With him it is hard to tell when he is being sarcastic. Perhaps some of
    us should resort to the use of "sarcastic tags."


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Dec 9, 2011
    #9
  10. PeterN <> wrote:
    > On 12/8/2011 3:29 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >> Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>> On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor"<> said:


    >>>> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >>>> me the US capitalists are far worse.


    >>> Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    >>> <
    >>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html


    >> Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    >> imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    >> end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.


    > Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
    > is the fault of the US banking system.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_financial_crisis
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession_in_Europe#Greece
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_European_sovereign_debt_crisis#Speculators

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 10, 2011
    #10
  11. George Kerby <> wrote:
    > "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote:
    >> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>> On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor" <> said:
    >>>> "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 09:00:57 -0500, "J. Clarke" <>


    >>>>> : If you investigate I believe you will find that the copyright issue with
    >>>>> : the Eiffel Tower is not with regard to the "architectural work" but with
    >>>>> : regard to the lighting, which is regarded as a separate artistic work
    >>>>> : incorporating the tower as a component.


    >>>>> That's a distinction without a difference. It still restricts one's
    >>>>> freedom to
    >>>>> photograph the tower from a public space at night. Bad as things are in
    >>>>> the
    >>>>> U.S., with the capitalists in almost total control, I don't think that
    >>>>> could
    >>>>> happen here.


    >>>> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >>>> me the US capitalists are far worse.


    >>> Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    >>> <
    >>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/merkel-faces-growing-criticism-for
    >>> -euro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html


    >> Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    >> imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    >> end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.


    > It's all Bush's Fault®...


    And most people didn't even have the chance to vote against
    him. So we need to tear down the U.S.A. for being not
    democratic enough.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 10, 2011
    #11
  12. Mike Benveniste

    Trevor Guest

    "Eric Stevens" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
    > world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
    > within their own economies.


    It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless junk bonds
    though. Stupid of the Europeans to think US banks were motivated by anything
    other than outright greed though, which of course is what the Eurpopeans
    were also doing when they bought them!
    As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
    government to rob him instead :-(

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Dec 12, 2011
    #12
  13. "Trevor" <> wrote in message
    news:jc4d56$rt7$...
    >
    > "Eric Stevens" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
    >> world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
    >> within their own economies.

    >
    > It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless junk bonds though.
    > Stupid of the Europeans to think US banks were motivated by anything other
    > than outright greed though, which of course is what the Eurpopeans were also
    > doing when they bought them!
    > As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
    > government to rob him instead :-(
    >
    > Trevor.


    Greece is in the state it's in because of government spending, overly generous
    government benefits, lack of adequate tax collection, and a "gimme, gimme,
    gimme" mindset of its citizens.
     
    Pete Stavrakoglou, Dec 12, 2011
    #13
  14. Mike Benveniste

    PeterN Guest

    On 12/10/2011 1:56 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    > PeterN<> wrote:
    >> On 12/8/2011 3:29 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>> Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>> On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor"<> said:

    >
    >>>>> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >>>>> me the US capitalists are far worse.

    >
    >>>> Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    >>>> <
    >>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html

    >
    >>> Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    >>> imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    >>> end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.

    >
    >> Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
    >> is the fault of the US banking system.

    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_financial_crisis
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession_in_Europe#Greece
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_European_sovereign_debt_crisis#Speculators
    >


    You have supplied links to the thoughts of others. YOUR interpretation
    and thoughts are conspicuous by their absence.
    No! I am not going to wade through unexplained links.
    this paper gets an "F"



    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Dec 12, 2011
    #14
  15. Mike Benveniste

    PeterN Guest

    On 12/11/2011 10:34 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
    > On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:56:37 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> PeterN<> wrote:
    >>> On 12/8/2011 3:29 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
    >>>> Savageduck<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>>> On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, "Trevor"<> said:

    >>
    >>>>>> Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
    >>>>>> me the US capitalists are far worse.

    >>
    >>>>> Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.
    >>>>> <
    >>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uro-approach/2011/12/04/gIQAZebwTO_story.html

    >>
    >>>> Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
    >>>> imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
    >>>> end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.

    >>
    >>> Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
    >>> is the fault of the US banking system.

    >>
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_financial_crisis
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession_in_Europe#Greece
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_European_sovereign_debt_crisis#Speculators
    >>

    > It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
    > world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
    > within their own economies.
    >


    I guess he was not being sarcastic.


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Dec 12, 2011
    #15
  16. Mike Benveniste

    PeterN Guest

    On 12/12/2011 3:15 AM, Trevor wrote:
    > "Eric Stevens"<> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
    >> world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
    >> within their own economies.

    >
    > It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless junk bonds
    > though. Stupid of the Europeans to think US banks were motivated by anything
    > other than outright greed though, which of course is what the Eurpopeans
    > were also doing when they bought them!
    > As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
    > government to rob him instead :-(
    >


    Were they forced to buy?
    Was there coercion?


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Dec 12, 2011
    #16
  17. Mike Benveniste

    PeterN Guest

    On 12/12/2011 8:14 AM, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
    > "Trevor"<> wrote in message
    > news:jc4d56$rt7$...
    >>
    >> "Eric Stevens"<> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
    >>> world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
    >>> within their own economies.

    >>
    >> It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless junk bonds though.
    >> Stupid of the Europeans to think US banks were motivated by anything other
    >> than outright greed though, which of course is what the Eurpopeans were also
    >> doing when they bought them!
    >> As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
    >> government to rob him instead :-(
    >>
    >> Trevor.

    >
    > Greece is in the state it's in because of government spending, overly generous
    > government benefits, lack of adequate tax collection, and a "gimme, gimme,
    > gimme" mindset of its citizens.
    >
    >


    sadly, Italy and Spain are not far behind. Hopefully, they both have the
    political to pull themselves out of it.


    --
    Peter
     
    PeterN, Dec 12, 2011
    #17
  18. Mike Benveniste

    Trevor Guest

    "Eric Stevens" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >>> It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
    >>> world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
    >>> within their own economies.

    >>
    >>It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless junk bonds
    >>though.

    >
    > No doubt some junk bonds from the USA were sold in Europe but far more
    > junk bonds from Europe were sold in Europe.
    > Look who is holding Greek, italian and Spanish bonds.


    They haven't defaulted yet, unlike MANY of the US companies that simply
    declared themselves bankrupt, and even home owners that simply walked away
    due to your lousy laws. Wasn't it the USA credit agencies that gave so many
    of those worthless bonds high ratings just to make money, knowing they were
    worthless all along?
    (since that was precicley the purpose the highly contrived schemes were set
    up for in the first place!)
    Now of the course those who made the most money are living it up while poor
    taxpayers of MANY countries are left to fix up the mess :-(
    At least the European countries deficits were public knowledge to anybody
    buying their bonds, and the risk was known, not so for the US junk bond
    market.

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Dec 13, 2011
    #18
  19. Mike Benveniste

    Trevor Guest

    "Pete Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
    news:jc4unk$koj$...
    >
    > Greece is in the state it's in because of government spending, overly
    > generous government benefits, lack of adequate tax collection,


    Dead right there, just as the US would be OK *IF* they actually collected
    taxes from the rich and big corporations.
    It's certainly not the poor where most of the money went in either country!

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Dec 13, 2011
    #19
  20. Mike Benveniste

    Trevor Guest

    "PeterN" <> wrote in message
    news:4ee67a66$0$22982$-secrets.com...
    >> As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
    >> government to rob him instead :-(
    >>

    >
    > Were they forced to buy?


    Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
    say in it.

    > Was there coercion?


    Governments control the police force, armies, national guard, security
    agencies etc. How much more coercion do you need! :)

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Dec 13, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Biz
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    846
  2. tony cooper
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    616
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Feb 12, 2010
  3. Mike

    ACLU: Know Your Rights: Photographers

    Mike, Sep 9, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    316
    PeterN
    Sep 21, 2011
  4. Robert Coe

    Re: an excellent read from the ACLU

    Robert Coe, Sep 10, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    262
    ASCII
    Sep 11, 2011
  5. Robert Coe

    Re: an excellent read from the ACLU

    Robert Coe, Sep 15, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    298
    Robert Coe
    Sep 30, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page