1

Topic: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? Or, generally speaking, it not so?

2

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? In general yes, but there are nuances it is possible to Steal for example or the inheritance to receive.

3

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? Well it looking that you understand as operation. "Gop-stop" too some kind of operation. And unsafe, in the street and with people...

4

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> Or, generally speaking, it not so? Yes is not present, something as you could think? God heard a saying "gave , gives and on a lawn". It is necessary to cease to work and at you all will be.

5

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> Or, generally speaking, it not so? 1. You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence? 2. You will work - there will be no means of subsistence? 3. You will not work - there will be means of subsistence? 4. You will work - there will be means of subsistence? 1. To work 2. Existence

6

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? RF> or, generally speaking, it not so? Not truly.  really works percent of 20 people. The great bulk is occupied or idleness (including pensioners, jobless, temporarily not working and so forth) or occupied by visibility of operation only not to go mad. Women often "work" as housewives. In the country of the first world it is possible to be on the grant on unemployment. The certain category of people lives on the inheritance. And you do not represent what wars relatives among themselves for the right arrange to possess inheritance Basically received 1 apartment in a big city - and can not work all life since for the average person the apartment costs most expensively his life.

7

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: Basically received 1 apartment in a big city - and you can not work all life since for the average person the apartment costs most expensively his life. Unless in very big city in very good region and in very good state...

8

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? At first it is necessary to be defined with value of the term "existence" If as it to understand simply biological life, it is not necessary for this purpose to work. Vagabonds full, live somehow. That  compassionate people help. Well and further on the country depends. Manuals Somewhere pay, somewhere are not present.

9

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

> Women often "work" as housewives. And why so-called?

10

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, s_aa, you wrote: _> And why so-called? Because do not receive the income directly, and  through the husband. I so understand that speech not about expenses physical and moral, and about the status operating/not working from the point of view of the state.

11

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? RF> or, generally speaking, it not so? All you search for justifications of the laziness? It is possible on a neck at parents-pensioners to sit. Such answer would be pleasant to you?

12

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Qt-Coder, you wrote: QC> Yes is not present, something as you could think? God heard a saying "gave , gives and on a lawn". Esteemed history of this expression - ! Only correctly sounds so: "God gave , gives also a lawn!"

13

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, s_aa, you wrote: RF>> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? _> in general yes, but there are nuances it is possible to Steal for example or the inheritance to receive. To steal too operation.

14

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Amon_RA, you wrote: A_R> It is possible on a neck at parents-pensioners to sit. Such answer would be pleasant to you? As a variant - yes. It is possible to live for the account of parents or other relatives.

15

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> As a variant - yes. It is possible to live for the account of parents or other relatives.

16

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? Yes, a subject interesting. Many theories invented the different. The more questions, the it is less on them than answers. 1) as that stupidly the mankind invented civilization development. It turns out that as I only was born it is necessary to work? Slavery after all since a birth? Or it is the nature so "took care"? 2) Why I am obliged to work? On mine here  it is not valid. The monkey after all does not work. 3) Shjm the rights that is real  produce and does the useful operation - 20 % of the population. Remaining -  either pretend, or do  the unnecessary. And it is correct on the one hand, it is better to do   than to go on a criminal way? 4) it was pleasant to me in the USSR that there was an earnings scale of charges. This certain approach to valid allocation  means. The person making the most useful operation (for the state? Or?) receives most, accordingly the person doing useless on this planet receives a banana.

17

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: A_R>> It is possible on a neck at parents-pensioners to sit. Such answer would be pleasant to you? RF> as a variant - yes. It is possible to live for the account of parents or other relatives. And what to do, if they die before you? In 50 years will find operation more heavily.

18

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Evgeniy Skvortsov, you wrote: ES> Because do not receive the income directly, and  through the husband. And? All the same operation do.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

19

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? It can be broken on two parts: 1. You will not work => there will be no means 2. Will be means => there will be Results: 1. No, there are cases: the inheritance, a scoring, good luck. 2. No, there are cases: prison, physical inability.

20

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Dead Down, you wrote: > 1) As that stupidly the mankind invented civilization development. It turns out that as I only was born it is necessary to work? Slavery after all since a birth? Or it is the nature so "took care"? The mankind invented nothing. Simply earlier those who did not work, died. > 2) Why I am obliged to work? On mine here  it is not valid. It is not obliged.

21

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, RussianFellow, you wrote: RF> it is interesting, dear colleagues, whether the statement is true, what if will not work, there will be no means of subsistence? RF> or, generally speaking, it not so? Depends in many respects on the country. In Europe the animal grin of a socialism at which the idle exist is everywhere watched is not worse nearly than the working.

22

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Dimonka, you wrote: D> Depends in many respects on the country. In Europe the animal grin of a socialism at which the idle exist is everywhere watched is not worse nearly than the working. At what here a socialism? Well and on the average and in Europe the operating exist nevertheless better the idle.

23

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, pagid, you wrote: D>> Depends in many respects on the country. In Europe the animal grin of a socialism at which the idle exist is everywhere watched is not worse nearly than the working. P> at what here a socialism? Thus that at a socialism the operating work that the idle could not work. P> well and on the average and in Europe the operating exist nevertheless better the idle. Probably and so. But the statement "if you will not work, there will be no means of subsistence" becomes incorrect.

24

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, CreatorCray, you wrote: CC> And? All the same operation do. Well on such logic, in the world of the unemployed does not exist, all  operation do.

25

Re: You will not work - there will be no means of subsistence?

Hello, Dead Down, you wrote:  live in a warm climate where it is possible to do nothing (not to build the house not to bring heating), to sow to plow and it is stupid  bananas from a palm tree. Live at level  the person can easily. But the person therefore was settled worldwide that  by ability to think and work. And generally the idea of communism was correct - from everyone on the ability, everyone on need. Simply the communism was strangled by capitalists, but it for a short while.