More to follow, but just a quick snippet, to address your stranger-than-strange definition of "benefit", as somehow equating with "free", or "profit" (NET or otherwise), or precluding payment of any kind. Under your definition of benefit, as deduced from the context of your usage, from your argument:
Thus, I don't derive any NET "benefit" from restaurant food because I had to pay the restaurant owners full market value for the food I ate. Do you see how positively loopy and mentally retarded that sounds, Roy?STEVEN: "I derive benefit from food I consume in a restaurant"
ROY: Nope. [You] don't get any benefit at all, because [you] have to pay [the restaurant owners] full market value for any such benefit. [You] don't get any NET benefit, only [restaurant owners] do.
I benefit from things that I pay for all the time, Roy, just as I can derive benefit from things (like air) that I would never pay anyone for. So do you. Get your definitions straight, you're clearly off the deep end here.
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us