I didn’t criticize your grammar or your spelling, I noted your lack of Constitutional basis for any of your commentary. I read your posts on this thread and a variety of others. I viewed the exchanges others had with you, on this very topic, and the way you responded to them, and then opted out of the “but, but, but ‘you don’t understand’” argument. Not taking the bite. Not worth my time! See ya around!
Nobody was baiting you in any way. But what do you want to hear in response to someone suggesting that it is possible to opt out of a public good, when by the very definition of such good it is impossible to do so?
Considering that this, like electricity or gravitation, has nothing whatever to do with the Constitution, what can you possibly hear in response?
You completely right about one thing: it has become accptable on FR to just throw big words around, blame all sorts of entities --- Wall Street, the Fed, CEOs, oil companies, etc. --- without any understanding of what they do, and then to get upset when someone points that out. By all means, get upset with the messenger.
Thank you for your reply.