Jesus Was A Capitalist

[IM2]

Look what just appeared, pretty much the thesis of this thread....


"Socialism 'kills' and is 'incompatible' with Christianity
Monday, March 2, 2020


... the failed system proves fatal to those who are subjugated under it, and that it is utterly incompatible with Christianity.

“[Socialism is] an economy that actually kills,” explained Catholic Answers Press in a news release issued Tuesday. “[There is] total incompatibility between socialist dogma and Christian truth.”

the basic tenets behind socialism must be rejected by all Christians and anyone else seeking prosperity and economic justice.

"Lots of people have no idea what socialism really is," Pakaluk points out. "They think it's about making everything fair and equal or having general concern for the poor, but they're not aware of its horrific consequences throughout history."

“Instead of abandoning private property and handing over the market to a collectivist state, Catholic Social Teaching calls for an economy that truly improves the lives of the poor through markets ‘enriched with virtue.’ while also properly subordinating wealth and material progress to the higher goods of faith, community and family,” the press release impresses."
Socialism 'kills' and is 'incompatible' with Christianity

Onenewsnow is a fake news site that has no credibility.

Since I effortlessly destroyed each of your posts, it appears you have no credibility....

True?

Seems like I'm the one effortlessly destroying things around here.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Atheism is the natural and inseparable component of socialism. - Vladimir Lenin

Let's Examine Claims of Atheists

 

[IM2]

You do understand the difference between political and economic systems don't you? Totalitarianism is not an economic system.

You might want to try actually studying the bible.

Would you care to explain that to the hundred million plus that socialism/communism slaughtered, you dunce.

Capitalism has slaughtered just as many. And that's just in the Congo. We won't talk about the Raj in India.

You're lying again.


"On the other hand, let’s take a look at secularism’s rich history of mass murder, and we need not go back a thousand years to make the point. Here are the 800 pound gorilla death totals from some notable secular leaders from the recent past (from the book Death by Government by R.J. Rummel):

Stalin....42,672,000

Mao.....37,828,000

Hitler....20,946,000

Lenin....4,017,000

Pol Pot...2,397,000

Chiang Kaishek...10,214,000

Tojo.....3,990,000

Total......122,064,000


It is Militant Secularism that kills and oppresses......

Only capitalism regards man as a sovereign individual with an inalienable right to his own life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Government recognition and protection of individual rights is the hallmark of a moral, peaceful, productive society.
Sipsey Street Irregulars: The lie before the crime. "Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz" ("The community comes before the individual")



You're pretty stupid, huh?

Over 100 million Africans died as a result of King Leopold. Over 1 billion in India were killed as a result of the British Raj. You know better than this child. I will embarrass you. I always do.

8 million Africans

Under the reign of terror instituted by King Leopold II of Belgium (who ran the Congo Free State as his personal fief from 1885 to 1908), the population of the Congo was reduced by half -- as many as 8 million Africans (perhaps even 10 million, in Hochschild's opinion) lost their lives.Sep 1, 1998



It's like talking to a child who just makes stuff up.....

...please get lost.

Well, I'll take the facts given to me by Africans I know from that country over a white mans story thank you. Now how about the British Raj, got another British estimate of the numbers they killed that will be lower than what Indian scholars have stated? Now if we look at all the capitalist colonizing and wars, the number grows way into the billions. So you really need to drop the right wing madness kiddo.

Don't make me get the switch. Just take the spanking and be quiet.

 

[edthecynic]

"So you're a government school grad?"

Ivy League grad.

And you?

That put a cork in his pie-hole.....

Hey dumbass homeschool dropout you cited YOURSELF!!!!!!

Go play with the other children....stop wasting the time of the adults.

You want me to go away because I made a FOOL of you with your OWN words yet again!

Go away.

grow up, child!

 

[luchitociencia]

Let's check:

“How about Jesus's Parable of the Talents (talents were a form of money in Jesus's day)? A man entrusted three of his workers with his wealth. The two who invested the money and made a profit were praised and the one who buried his share so he wouldn't lose any of it was reprimanded. Sounds a lot more like an endorsement for capitalism than socialism, doesn't it?

You are confused in this part.

Jesus used the parable as an analogy.

In other words, if you become a religious person and you keep it to yourself and make no other people to become followers of God, then you have buried the treasure of the word of God and make it non worthy.

The one who received the same word of God and he spread it on others, then he has increased it like profit.

Remember that parables are not to be understood literally.

….Jesus offers his Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. In it, a landowner hires some laborers to pick grapes. Near the end of the day, he realizes he needs more workers to get the job done.

To recruit them, he agrees to pay a full day's wage for just one hour of work. When one of the laborers who had worked an entire day complains, the landowner answers, "I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money?" That's a testament to the principles of supply and demand, of private property, and of voluntary contracts, not socialism.” Was Jesus a Socialist?

Can I get an "AMEN!!!"

You still can't understand what parables mean.

In this case, the Hews were mad at Jesus, they hated this parable.

This parable is about Jews always keeping the law since birth or age of reasoning, and will receive their reward. But it happens that the gentile, after being a depraved man, idolater, eating pork and rats and roaches, he changed and started to obey the word of God same as the Jews. And this gentile will receive the same reward.

Oh, this was reaching the limit, the Jews didn't agree with that.

But this is what the parable was about, and the mention of the salary and workers is just the analogy, not the literal interpretation.

 

[irosie91]

being on welfare is WORK too-------stand in line and make the application -----PURE HELL

What a stupid post.

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

 

[irosie91]

18. So.....is socialism endorsed in the Bible????

Not hardly.

An accurate understanding of the Bible requires the distinction between 'redistribution' and 'generosity.'…the Bible advocates generosity.



These are two very different concepts.
Generosity springs from free will....not force, coercion, or threats.

With socialism, it is the opposite.
Redistribution of wealth is always by force of government. The government simply uses its overwhelming power to take what it thinks is “fair” from the “givers.”

Generosity is based on choice....on free will....the cornerstone of Judeo-Christian tradition.
Not so with any of these six: Socialism, Liberalism, Communism, Liberalism, Progressivism, or Nazism.





And this is the face of government coercion.....

Under the Bolsheviks, the dynasty with which Franklin Roosevelt felt comradeship, slaughter was so omnipresent that corpse-disposal actually became a problem.

There was resistance to the Lefts mandate of collectivism, especially in the Ukraine.
September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933, all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated."


Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained, starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly.
NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.



Yet the same political view is embraced by the major political party, the same political party that once put American citizens in concentration camps.

You do understand the difference between political and economic systems don't you? Totalitarianism is not an economic system.

You might want to try actually studying the bible.

Would you care to explain that to the hundred million plus that socialism/communism slaughtered, you dunce.

Capitalism has slaughtered just as many. And that's just in the Congo. We won't talk about the Raj in India.

So you admit you were lying when you said "Because you have butchered the words of Jesus ...."

....and every quote I provided was correct and accurate?


Excellent.

ROFLMAO "correct and accurate"..quotations of the words of Jesus-----written
by men who never met him and, in some cases, did not even speak Aramaic or Hebrew

 

[irosie91]

the adage makes no sense. -----unless you DEFINE work---------can I steal
potatoes and claim "WORK" if I peel them?

There is definitely something wrong with you.

English is my second language....you appear not to have a first one.

It takes an immense lack of comprehension to be unable to understand this:

Ungleaned fields are left for the poor (Leviticus 19:10).


Again....?

Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor ...

where did I describe the situation any differently------I just left out your idiot
claim "work was demanded of them"---------like the work of opening the
door of the fridge? The work of picking up the stuff left in the field-----
ok-------we all "work" when we get into the car----DRIVE TO THE GROCERY
STORE-------and get the potatoes-----TWICE----earn the money---and the PICK
UP THE POTATOES. When I eat a sandwich -------I CHEW----work?

How would they pick up the fruits sans 'work'?

Are claiming not to understand the word work, you dunce?

And you claimed that picking up the fruit specifically left for the poor is for the landowner.....you're simply lying.

Your limited English is showing-----it was YOU who claimed that foraging on a
planted field is "work" -----not me. There was no benefit to the landowner----
it was IMPOSED CHARITY------something like a tax on land ownership as a
BENEFIT for the poor. --------a variety of socialism------sidewalks upon which
all can WALK -----is also a benefit for the poor

That is a massive leap of logic. To claim that "hey if you drop some grain, don't pick it up. Leave it for the poor", is equal to a tax, and a variety of socialism?

A tax is when you earn all you are going to earn, and the government confiscates part of it. That's a huge difference from leave some for the poor.

That's more like charity, because how much you leave is totally at the discretion of the land owner. The land owner could have a Billion dollars worth of grain, and leave $50 worth on the field, and that would meet that requirement.

Now in the New Testament, which is where Christian doctrine comes from, again we are supposed to help the poor, and we do. Christians are universally more charitable than non-religious people.

But it is still a choice. It's not imposed by government.

By the way, even the old testament law, wasn't really socialized. You didn't have government collecting the grain (from each according to their ability), and they were not doling it out to everyone who had need (to each according to their need). That never happened.

And there was no "wealth redistribution". The land owner was always, and remained the land owner. The poor, if they didn't find a way to earn a living, remained poor.

utterly idiotic sophistry-----the law and custom was --------charity by---LAW AND
CUSTOM-------very much socially coerced. Any landowner who did not ---DO
IT RIGHT would be consigned to the worst of fates ----to wit "CHEREM"
THE WORST FATE for adherent jews----------NO ONE WOULD SOCIALIZE OR
PRAY WITH HIM. -----------you have no idea

 

[irosie91]

Let's check:

“How about Jesus's Parable of the Talents (talents were a form of money in Jesus's day)? A man entrusted three of his workers with his wealth. The two who invested the money and made a profit were praised and the one who buried his share so he wouldn't lose any of it was reprimanded. Sounds a lot more like an endorsement for capitalism than socialism, doesn't it?

You are confused in this part.

Jesus used the parable as an analogy.

In other words, if you become a religious person and you keep it to yourself and make no other people to become followers of God, then you have buried the treasure of the word of God and make it non worthy.

The one who received the same word of God and he spread it on others, then he has increased it like profit.

Remember that parables are not to be understood literally.

….Jesus offers his Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. In it, a landowner hires some laborers to pick grapes. Near the end of the day, he realizes he needs more workers to get the job done.

To recruit them, he agrees to pay a full day's wage for just one hour of work. When one of the laborers who had worked an entire day complains, the landowner answers, "I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money?" That's a testament to the principles of supply and demand, of private property, and of voluntary contracts, not socialism.” Was Jesus a Socialist?

Can I get an "AMEN!!!"

You still can't understand what parables mean.

In this case, the Hews were mad at Jesus, they hated this parable.

This parable is about Jews always keeping the law since birth or age of reasoning, and will receive their reward. But it happens that the gentile, after being a depraved man, idolater, eating pork and rats and roaches, he changed and started to obey the word of God same as the Jews. And this gentile will receive the same reward.

Oh, this was reaching the limit, the Jews didn't agree with that.

But this is what the parable was about, and the mention of the salary and workers is just the analogy, not the literal interpretation.

your sunday school teacher perverted your mind. ------uhm....with what did
DO JOOOOOS not agree?

 

[Andylusion]

There is definitely something wrong with you.

English is my second language....you appear not to have a first one.

It takes an immense lack of comprehension to be unable to understand this:

Ungleaned fields are left for the poor (Leviticus 19:10).


Again....?

Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor ...

where did I describe the situation any differently------I just left out your idiot
claim "work was demanded of them"---------like the work of opening the
door of the fridge? The work of picking up the stuff left in the field-----
ok-------we all "work" when we get into the car----DRIVE TO THE GROCERY
STORE-------and get the potatoes-----TWICE----earn the money---and the PICK
UP THE POTATOES. When I eat a sandwich -------I CHEW----work?

How would they pick up the fruits sans 'work'?

Are claiming not to understand the word work, you dunce?

And you claimed that picking up the fruit specifically left for the poor is for the landowner.....you're simply lying.

Your limited English is showing-----it was YOU who claimed that foraging on a
planted field is "work" -----not me. There was no benefit to the landowner----
it was IMPOSED CHARITY------something like a tax on land ownership as a
BENEFIT for the poor. --------a variety of socialism------sidewalks upon which
all can WALK -----is also a benefit for the poor

That is a massive leap of logic. To claim that "hey if you drop some grain, don't pick it up. Leave it for the poor", is equal to a tax, and a variety of socialism?

A tax is when you earn all you are going to earn, and the government confiscates part of it. That's a huge difference from leave some for the poor.

That's more like charity, because how much you leave is totally at the discretion of the land owner. The land owner could have a Billion dollars worth of grain, and leave $50 worth on the field, and that would meet that requirement.

Now in the New Testament, which is where Christian doctrine comes from, again we are supposed to help the poor, and we do. Christians are universally more charitable than non-religious people.

But it is still a choice. It's not imposed by government.

By the way, even the old testament law, wasn't really socialized. You didn't have government collecting the grain (from each according to their ability), and they were not doling it out to everyone who had need (to each according to their need). That never happened.

And there was no "wealth redistribution". The land owner was always, and remained the land owner. The poor, if they didn't find a way to earn a living, remained poor.

utterly idiotic sophistry-----the law and custom was --------charity by---LAW AND
CUSTOM-------very much socially coerced. Any landowner who did not ---DO
IT RIGHT would be consigned to the worst of fates ----to wit "CHEREM"
THE WORST FATE for adherent jews----------NO ONE WOULD SOCIALIZE OR
PRAY WITH HIM. -----------you have no idea

Thanks for replying. But I have said what I said. Nothing you say contradicts what I said, you just disagree with my conclusion. That's fine. But I have no need to defend my position to you.

 

[luchitociencia]

your sunday school teacher perverted your mind. ------uhm....with what did
DO JOOOOOS not agree?

They didn't agree that others who lived their lives in fornication, far away from the Law of God, later on in their lives they "just repented" and started to live according to the Law of God, and receive the same benefits as if they were God's obedient people all their life.

You see, the parable shows that analogy.

Workers who cleaned the building at pure elbow grease the entire working day, now watching how new hired employees coming before closing and doing the same work for only two hours and receiving the same salary.

Of course the Jews were piss off when they heard such a "justice from God".

 

[irosie91]

your sunday school teacher perverted your mind. ------uhm....with what did
DO JOOOOOS not agree?

They didn't agree that others who lived their lives in fornication, far away from the Law of God, later on in their lives they "just repented" and started to live according to the Law of God, and receive the same benefits as if they were God's obedient people all their life.

You see, the parable shows that analogy.

Workers who cleaned the building at pure elbow grease the entire working day, now watching how new hired employees coming before closing and doing the same work for only two hours and receiving the same salary.

Of course the Jews were piss off when they heard such a "justice from God".

oh-----I got it------you learned all about Judaism in Sunday school. In fact the
silly spinster knew nothing about the religion which is Judaism. Interestingly, I
attended Sunday School as a child-----several times. I understand why you
are confused. There is probably no hope for you-------since you are so
intensely inculcated from childhood A good book for you to read is
"Childhood and Society" by Erik Erikson

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's check:

“How about Jesus's Parable of the Talents (talents were a form of money in Jesus's day)? A man entrusted three of his workers with his wealth. The two who invested the money and made a profit were praised and the one who buried his share so he wouldn't lose any of it was reprimanded. Sounds a lot more like an endorsement for capitalism than socialism, doesn't it?

You are confused in this part.

Jesus used the parable as an analogy.

In other words, if you become a religious person and you keep it to yourself and make no other people to become followers of God, then you have buried the treasure of the word of God and make it non worthy.

The one who received the same word of God and he spread it on others, then he has increased it like profit.

Remember that parables are not to be understood literally.

….Jesus offers his Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. In it, a landowner hires some laborers to pick grapes. Near the end of the day, he realizes he needs more workers to get the job done.

To recruit them, he agrees to pay a full day's wage for just one hour of work. When one of the laborers who had worked an entire day complains, the landowner answers, "I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money?" That's a testament to the principles of supply and demand, of private property, and of voluntary contracts, not socialism.” Was Jesus a Socialist?

Can I get an "AMEN!!!"

You still can't understand what parables mean.

In this case, the Hews were mad at Jesus, they hated this parable.

This parable is about Jews always keeping the law since birth or age of reasoning, and will receive their reward. But it happens that the gentile, after being a depraved man, idolater, eating pork and rats and roaches, he changed and started to obey the word of God same as the Jews. And this gentile will receive the same reward.

Oh, this was reaching the limit, the Jews didn't agree with that.

But this is what the parable was about, and the mention of the salary and workers is just the analogy, not the literal interpretation.

Milton Friedman - Your Greed or Their Greed?

 

[irosie91]

your sunday school teacher perverted your mind. ------uhm....with what did
DO JOOOOOS not agree?

They didn't agree that others who lived their lives in fornication, far away from the Law of God, later on in their lives they "just repented" and started to live according to the Law of God, and receive the same benefits as if they were God's obedient people all their life.

You see, the parable shows that analogy.

Workers who cleaned the building at pure elbow grease the entire working day, now watching how new hired employees coming before closing and doing the same work for only two hours and receiving the same salary.

Of course the Jews were piss off when they heard such a "justice from God".

the only way to understand the parables of Jesus would be to have a working knowledge of the language that he spoke and to know the poetic
symbolism employed in that language. Jesus spoke Talmudic Aramaic which
is a Hebraic form of Mesopotamian Aramaic. Any attempt to interpret
parables from that time and place without a knowledge of the
Babylonian Talmud and its language is a hopeless task.

 

[irosie91]

the adage makes no sense. -----unless you DEFINE work---------can I steal
potatoes and claim "WORK" if I peel them?

There is definitely something wrong with you.

English is my second language....you appear not to have a first one.

It takes an immense lack of comprehension to be unable to understand this:

Ungleaned fields are left for the poor (Leviticus 19:10).


Again....?

Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor ...

where did I describe the situation any differently------I just left out your idiot
claim "work was demanded of them"---------like the work of opening the
door of the fridge? The work of picking up the stuff left in the field-----
ok-------we all "work" when we get into the car----DRIVE TO THE GROCERY
STORE-------and get the potatoes-----TWICE----earn the money---and the PICK
UP THE POTATOES. When I eat a sandwich -------I CHEW----work?

How would they pick up the fruits sans 'work'?

Are claiming not to understand the word work, you dunce?

And you claimed that picking up the fruit specifically left for the poor is for the landowner.....you're simply lying.

Your limited English is showing-----it was YOU who claimed that foraging on a
planted field is "work" -----not me. There was no benefit to the landowner----
it was IMPOSED CHARITY------something like a tax on land ownership as a
BENEFIT for the poor. --------a variety of socialism------sidewalks upon which
all can WALK -----is also a benefit for the poor

OK, moron....here's the definition of the term:


View attachment 310110
View attachment 310114
View attachment 310112
View attachment 310111

View attachment 310113
View all
Work, in physics, measure of energy transfer that occurs when an object is moved over a distance by an external force at least part of which is applied in the direction of the displacement.Feb 3, 2020

Work | physics | Britannica - Encyclopedia Britannica



work
/wərk/
noun

1. 1.
   activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.

Did I just prove which of us has a facility in the English language?

you proved that you are SO INTELLIGENT that you know how to copy and paste

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is definitely something wrong with you.

English is my second language....you appear not to have a first one.

It takes an immense lack of comprehension to be unable to understand this:

Ungleaned fields are left for the poor (Leviticus 19:10).


Again....?

Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor ...

where did I describe the situation any differently------I just left out your idiot
claim "work was demanded of them"---------like the work of opening the
door of the fridge? The work of picking up the stuff left in the field-----
ok-------we all "work" when we get into the car----DRIVE TO THE GROCERY
STORE-------and get the potatoes-----TWICE----earn the money---and the PICK
UP THE POTATOES. When I eat a sandwich -------I CHEW----work?

How would they pick up the fruits sans 'work'?

Are claiming not to understand the word work, you dunce?

And you claimed that picking up the fruit specifically left for the poor is for the landowner.....you're simply lying.

Your limited English is showing-----it was YOU who claimed that foraging on a
planted field is "work" -----not me. There was no benefit to the landowner----
it was IMPOSED CHARITY------something like a tax on land ownership as a
BENEFIT for the poor. --------a variety of socialism------sidewalks upon which
all can WALK -----is also a benefit for the poor

OK, moron....here's the definition of the term:


View attachment 310110
View attachment 310114
View attachment 310112
View attachment 310111

View attachment 310113
View all
Work, in physics, measure of energy transfer that occurs when an object is moved over a distance by an external force at least part of which is applied in the direction of the displacement.Feb 3, 2020

Work | physics | Britannica - Encyclopedia Britannica



work
/wərk/
noun

1. 1.
   activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.

Did I just prove which of us has a facility in the English language?

you proved that you are SO INTELLIGENT that you know how to copy and paste

Nah....I proved that you're a jerk.
Neither quoting accurately nor providing the truth, are your strong suits.

 

[irosie91]

where did I describe the situation any differently------I just left out your idiot
claim "work was demanded of them"---------like the work of opening the
door of the fridge? The work of picking up the stuff left in the field-----
ok-------we all "work" when we get into the car----DRIVE TO THE GROCERY
STORE-------and get the potatoes-----TWICE----earn the money---and the PICK
UP THE POTATOES. When I eat a sandwich -------I CHEW----work?

How would they pick up the fruits sans 'work'?

Are claiming not to understand the word work, you dunce?

And you claimed that picking up the fruit specifically left for the poor is for the landowner.....you're simply lying.

Your limited English is showing-----it was YOU who claimed that foraging on a
planted field is "work" -----not me. There was no benefit to the landowner----
it was IMPOSED CHARITY------something like a tax on land ownership as a
BENEFIT for the poor. --------a variety of socialism------sidewalks upon which
all can WALK -----is also a benefit for the poor

OK, moron....here's the definition of the term:


View attachment 310110
View attachment 310114
View attachment 310112
View attachment 310111

View attachment 310113
View all
Work, in physics, measure of energy transfer that occurs when an object is moved over a distance by an external force at least part of which is applied in the direction of the displacement.Feb 3, 2020

Work | physics | Britannica - Encyclopedia Britannica



work
/wərk/
noun

1. 1.
   activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.

Did I just prove which of us has a facility in the English language?

you proved that you are SO INTELLIGENT that you know how to copy and paste

Nah....I proved that you're a jerk.
Neither quoting accurately nor providing the truth, are your strong suits.

I don't see your proof------I see a page from a high school intro to baby physics.
There was a time in my life that I taught that subject (it was a very temporary thing-----I am not a teacher-----it was a private school which my son attended and
I did it when the regular teacher had his nervous breakdown) I also taught neighborhood kids as a private tutor --------while I was in college. Did you pass
high school plane geometry?

 

[edthecynic]

Neither quoting accurately nor providing the truth, are your strong suits.

Talk about PROJECTION!!!!!

 

[IM2]

I don't see where Jesus advocated for any particular type of economic system and I damn sure don't think he would advocate for a system that requires you covet what's not yours in order to own it.

 

[edthecynic]

I don't see where Jesus advocated for any particular type of economic system and I damn sure don't think he would advocate for a system that requires you covet what's not yours in order to own it.

as Uncle Dirty (Robert Altman) describes Capitalism: "you have to buy what you can't get, with money you haven't got, and then turn around and sell what you never had, for more than it was ever worth!"