but you just stole tools from some dude, who needed the tools to maintain his basic needs. and if everyone steals from the tool company, they won't be able to keep their lights on. though if you go to certain jurisdictions like san fransisco you can steal as much as you want and the cops won't pursue you and the stores will get reimbursed by WEF insurance companies in the program to destabilize the west, so you'll get what you needed.
Suggested relativism (not absolute or existing by itself) tempts one to ignore apartheid (living) within wholeness (process of dying) aka existing differentiation (partial ones) within preexisting sameness (whole oneness).
If all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power", then is each internal/inherent partial related to each other, or does the whole imply no relation to anything else? What is energy related to outside of what's inside energy?
SQUATTER, noun - "one that settles on new land without a title"
TI'TLE, noun (Latin titulus) - "an inscription put over any thing as a name by which it is known"
KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists"
Suggested words represent the inscription (title) put over perceivable (known) sound by ones consent to use them. Consenting to suggested words (want) over perceivable sound (need) already implies ones ignorance of basic needs.
society
Nature sets apart...from perceivable whole (process of dying) into each perceiving partial (living). Others suggest togetherness (society) as the inversion of being apartheid within wholeness.
theft
The living (partial) cannot OWN, adjective - "in expressed exclusion of others" anything within the process of dying (whole). Wanting to hold onto tempts others to not want one to hold onto, hence shaping the cops vs robbers conflict aka suggested laws vs suggested crime.
Meanwhile...the natural order (inception towards death) takes everything away from everyone (life) within, because it represents an ongoing process (flow), no matter how hard those within try to hold onto temporary (form).
It won't work because there's no practical limit to the phrase "basic needs". We are prone to avarice and this would simply legalize the survival of the fittest. Long term it would turn into anarchism and local communities would emerge with property rights as statutes.
The reality is the elites and already have will pay people to squat on the land they want to own. Then they will build larger and larger “dwellings” on said land. Not to mention when land is set aside for you to grow food on, but looks vacant cause it is not season to grow yet and some one squats on it. As well when you have livestock you are raising and some decides to squat in between you and them and they disappear.
Borders are boundaries that define civility. The removal of such things falls to chaos and anarchy, which does Not exist long.
The best system IMHO is the system of land ownership where land is returned every 50 years or so to a governing group and then parceled out in its entirety to the members of the group through even distribution and the individual can rent it or use it or whatever.
Can I squat in your back guest bedroom? While you're at work I might steal some moments with your wife, but don't worry, I'm not depriving you--you can also use her when you get home.
Exactly. Free stuff doesn't work. You pass the inconvenience down the line, but it eventually reaches someone who's not getting a good deal and isn't having it.
... unless you've enslaved a person to receive the bad deal and not be able to refuse.
Sounds like commie bullshit
Total collapse and degeneracy.
but you just stole tools from some dude, who needed the tools to maintain his basic needs. and if everyone steals from the tool company, they won't be able to keep their lights on. though if you go to certain jurisdictions like san fransisco you can steal as much as you want and the cops won't pursue you and the stores will get reimbursed by WEF insurance companies in the program to destabilize the west, so you'll get what you needed.
STILL THEFT !
Expand your diet ... how about some shit ?!
Suggested relativism (not absolute or existing by itself) tempts one to ignore apartheid (living) within wholeness (process of dying) aka existing differentiation (partial ones) within preexisting sameness (whole oneness).
If all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power", then is each internal/inherent partial related to each other, or does the whole imply no relation to anything else? What is energy related to outside of what's inside energy?
Suggested words represent the inscription (title) put over perceivable (known) sound by ones consent to use them. Consenting to suggested words (want) over perceivable sound (need) already implies ones ignorance of basic needs.
Nature sets apart...from perceivable whole (process of dying) into each perceiving partial (living). Others suggest togetherness (society) as the inversion of being apartheid within wholeness.
The living (partial) cannot OWN, adjective - "in expressed exclusion of others" anything within the process of dying (whole). Wanting to hold onto tempts others to not want one to hold onto, hence shaping the cops vs robbers conflict aka suggested laws vs suggested crime.
Meanwhile...the natural order (inception towards death) takes everything away from everyone (life) within, because it represents an ongoing process (flow), no matter how hard those within try to hold onto temporary (form).
Chaos
Temporary chaos (living) can only exist within ongoing order (process of dying).
It won't work because there's no practical limit to the phrase "basic needs". We are prone to avarice and this would simply legalize the survival of the fittest. Long term it would turn into anarchism and local communities would emerge with property rights as statutes.
The reality is the elites and already have will pay people to squat on the land they want to own. Then they will build larger and larger “dwellings” on said land. Not to mention when land is set aside for you to grow food on, but looks vacant cause it is not season to grow yet and some one squats on it. As well when you have livestock you are raising and some decides to squat in between you and them and they disappear.
Borders are boundaries that define civility. The removal of such things falls to chaos and anarchy, which does Not exist long.
The best system IMHO is the system of land ownership where land is returned every 50 years or so to a governing group and then parceled out in its entirety to the members of the group through even distribution and the individual can rent it or use it or whatever.
That's just a bad solution, a system overhaul would be better.
But sticking to this premise, how would burglary and mugging of the rich be treated? What about breaking and entering?
What about upkeep while squatting? I travel for two weeks for work and come back to people shitting my place up? What then?
Can I squat in your back guest bedroom? While you're at work I might steal some moments with your wife, but don't worry, I'm not depriving you--you can also use her when you get home.
Go work for me, cuck.
Exactly. Free stuff doesn't work. You pass the inconvenience down the line, but it eventually reaches someone who's not getting a good deal and isn't having it.
... unless you've enslaved a person to receive the bad deal and not be able to refuse.
The steal part is where you went wrong. Every UBI fantasy involves taking from someone else, which is precisely why the globalists push it.
Or you could just eat your own shit !