[Vision2020] Re: Robin Hood

Fri Feb 11 11:35:53 PST 2005

Was any of this covered in "Robin Hood, Men in Tights"?                      

                      Carl Westberg Jr.

>From: "David M. Budge" <dave at davebudge.com>
>To: Joan Opyr <auntiestablishment at hotmail.com>
>CC: Vision2020 Moscow <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: Robin Hood
>Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:01:56 +0000
>
>Joan,
>
>Thanks for refreshing my memory on the plot and character development. 
>There's just some major problems with your analogy i.e. "(involuntary) 
>corporate profit-sharing scheme".
>
>A) There were no "corporations" in 12th century England or private property 
>for that matter.  All land was owned by the King and franchised, if you 
>will, to members of the realm (Dukes, Barons, Lords, etc.), who "owned" no 
>real property (real estate) either. The land's productive proceeds, minus 
>an allowance for a piggishly lavish lifestyle, were ultimately due to the 
>monarch.  Accordingly, all business was owned buy the state. We actually 
>have some holdover to that construct in  Common Law called "escheatability" 
>where one's estate is remanded to the government if one has no heirs upon 
>taking the "big dirt nap."
>
>B) Historically, it was not just Prince John who placed an unfair burden of 
>taxation on the working stiffs, but King Richard as well.  In fact, the war 
>in Normandy put such a financial burden on the crown that a general protest 
>by the nobility and serfdom alike caused the birth of the Magna Carta, 
>which provided for private property and then some,  in thirteen short years 
>after the death of King Richard.  This, the first major step towards 
>liberal democracy in England.
>
>C) If, in fact, we make allowances for your assertion that money was 
>returned to "ownership of the company by those who built the company", in 
>contemporary terms, you entirely discount for ownership's risk of capital - 
>which is no inconsequential building block of any enterprise.  Today, 
>stealing from "Archer Daniels Midlands, McDonalds, and Dell Computer 
>moguls" would be stealing from the likes of the millions of citizens who 
>have a vested interest in things like the California Public Employees 
>Retirement System, etc.  That is not to say that modern corporate chiefs 
>earn their egregious salaries, but that is primarily caused by a lack of 
>accountability created, in large part, by tax incentives (now there's an 
>oxymoron for ya) that drive money to institutional money managers thereby 
>removing voting privileges of the actual "owners."  But I've not the time 
>nor the inclination to begin that discussion in this writing.
>
>So, in fact, Robin was repatriating taxes, not ownership, as stealing from 
>any nobility was actually taking from the government.  Taxes, I might add, 
>that stuffed the ruling class to obese proportions like the retirement 
>benefits that congress has voted for themselves in the current era.  (John 
>Kerry wants to give us congress's health care system, I'm hoping he'll give 
>us his retirement plan - well except for the ketchup loot from his 
>beaudacious sugar mama of course.)
>
>Thinking about my little dear one.  I will remain ever vigilant Joan, but I 
>worry much more about really hard "street literature", full of impurities 
>and historical reconstruction, like Katrina Vanden Houvel at The Nation,  
>Cornell West, and the really scary ghost of Stalin; Noam Chomsky (hey, 
>anybody who ever endorsed Pol Pot qualifies as "really scary.")
>
>I too have little use for the modern GOP, but I've equally "little use" for 
>Democrats.  Their party platform (with notable dessenters like Barney 
>Frank) has an official position against gay marriage ironically via 
>federalism and civil unions - endorses drug interdiction programs that 
>continue to fail ($20 Billion alone to Columbia plus another $30 billion 
>hidden in the Defense budget - we can buy a sh_t load of ketchup with that 
>dough) - the insanity of not coming to grips that Social Security will 
>ultimately have to be means tested at a minimum, lest we hand to our heirs 
>a stinking pile of rotting economic fecal matter that they won't even be 
>able to grow mushrooms in - the insane changes at the FDA made by Clinton 
>that allows big pahrama to extend patents ad nausium with minor changes in 
>drug formulary thereby nullifying an otherwise reasonable system of patent 
>protection -  the ridiculous entitlement of Medicare that sets price 
>controls thereby forcing higher prices  and screwing the boots off the 
>uninsured, the working poor and the self-employed - the whole damn notion 
>of "hate crimes" legislation where the arbiters of thought control will be 
>determined by a tyranny of the majority - the obnoxious push for 
>federalizing the payroll of incompetent cretins who perform proctological 
>exams in search of box cutters every time someone gets on an airplane (but 
>I have a serious problem with that entire bi-partisan body of law) - the 
>continuous insufferable conclusion that the law is not just for protecting 
>me from getting screwed but from being stupid as well (I contend that being 
>stupid is a constitutional right and is the underlayment of the entire Bill 
>of Rights) - and all the rest of the twaddle that implies that  I don't 
>know whether to sh_t or go blind.  And this is just the beginning.
>
>In fairness, I have an equally long list for the GOP, but I'm thinking 
>you're probably  willing to wait for that.  I say, as did the the Queen of 
>Hearts, "off with their heads!"  I'm ecumenical that way.
>
>Oops, I got a little screedy there.  Must be the I.V. bee venom.
>
>Sorry, I'll return to my warm (but smarmy) self after the venom wears off.  
>Didn't mean to offend.  Better call my psychiatrist, I've forgotten my 
>mantra...
>
>Dave Budge
>
>
>Joan Opyr wrote:
>
>>Dave writes:
>>  "As for Robin Hood, the way I recall the story, Robin was compelled to 
>>retrieve money that had been taken by the tyrannical King through an 
>>unfair scheme of taxing the peasants.    Fair Hood was not 'stealing from 
>>the rich and giving to the poor' but providing a significant tax rebate.  
>>Seems pretty  libertarian to me."
>>  This is almost the plot, Dave.  In fact, Prince John (would-be usurper 
>>of King Richard the Lionheart's throne) was collecting taxes from the poor 
>>to pay for an unpopular foreign war.  He was not -- as he should have been 
>>-- mugging the rich, i.e., the land-grabbing Norman barons, the Sheriff of 
>>Nottingham, and Sir Hally Burton, war-monger to the stars.  No -- Prince 
>>John was screwing the poor serfs in order to foster popularity among the 
>>barons so that he could hang onto Richard's throne when the true king 
>>returned (if he returned) from the Crusades.  He was obliged to do this 
>>because he didn't have a Republican-packed Supreme Court on which to rely.
>>  Rather than providing "a significant tax rebate" to the serfs (who, 
>>today, might be called the working class), Robin Hood took the Pretty Boy 
>>Floyd route.  He "reclaimed" and "redistributed" wealth from the Archer 
>>Daniels Midlands, McDonalds, and Dell Computer moguls of his day, and gave 
>>it to the workers.  You might say that Robin Hood introduced the first 
>>(involuntary) corporate profit-sharing scheme: ownership of the company by 
>>those who built the company.  There is, perhaps, something libertarian 
>>with a small "l" about that, but there is nothing conservative with a big 
>>"GOP" about it.
>>  [BTW, as my partner-in-crime Brother Carl will attest, I have a 
>>libertarian streak myself.  It manifests itself not in aversion to taxes 
>>-- except for those used to pay for hopeless foreign excursions, so-called 
>>faith-based initiatives, and to foster the Bush definition of marriage -- 
>>but in a deep and abiding desire to be left the hell alone.  That's why I 
>>moved to Idaho.  I can live with small "l" libertarians; it's nosy Baptist 
>>hypocrite right-wing bedroom police self-righteous puritanical 
>>fundamentalist conservatives who get on my t-ts.  But then you probably 
>>already knew that.]
>>  Dave continues:
>>
>>"I am fascinated by your notion of 'gateway literature' though.  This 
>>might lead to really dodgy stuff like Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, 
>>or perhaps even (gasp!) Ayn Rand. What's next?  I can see it now, having 
>>to put my poor dear into a twelve-step program to address her adrenaline 
>>addiction from reading post-modern economic philosophy.  As my jewish 
>>friends would say 'Oy, what a shandre!'"
>>  Listen, Dave, I know your daughter is young, but you must sit her down 
>>immediately and have a serious talk with her about the dangers of sniffing 
>>Ayn Rand.  One hit on the Fountainhead bong is all it takes for a good kid 
>>to go Natural Law.  Soon, she'll be shooting up Atlas Shrugged, and then 
>>what?  Milton Friedman tracks all up and down her arms.  The Wall Street 
>>Journal's editorial page, injected between her toes.  And then . . . The 
>>National Review.  That one goes up in the eyelids.  Don't be meshuggeneh, 
>>Dave -- just say no.
>>  Parents: the anti-drug.  Except that, in fact, we are like Halcion.
>>  Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
>>  PS: I do hope you're not reading that child The Miller's Tale.  Or, 
>>worse yet, The Prioress's.  For heaven's sake, start her out with 
>>something uplifting like The Pearl or John Bunyon's Pilgrim's Progress.  
>>Yes, of course, she'll be bored to tears, but isn't the idea of bed-time 
>>reading to put the child to sleep?  BTW, she's not going to give a hoot 
>>about the cuckolding in the Miller's Tale -- she's going to be mesmerized 
>>by Nicolas' letting "flee a fart."  God knows I was, and I was sixteen 
>>when I first read it.  Old enough not to be laughing at farts.  Then 
>>again, I'm 38 now and still laughing, so . . .
>>  PPS: Is it possible that you're confusing Robin Hood with Monty Python's 
>>Dennis Moore?
>>  "He robs from the poor,
>>And gives to the rich.
>>Dennis Moore,
>>Dennis Moore,
>>Stupid b-tch."
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : 
>>http://explorer.msn.com
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_____________________________________________________
>>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>>communities of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net  
>>                               mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>>
>>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯