| |
Hello Chris,
> If roads were
> private, I am sure that most road owners would require much more stringent
> proof of competence to operate on their roads than the state requires.
Why should they? They will probably make sure that whoever drives on them
will be held liable for what he does to the road. But why should the road
company care for other drivers?
> This is an example of the general case assertion "regulations do not make
> you safer than a free market system, they make you less safe than a free
> market system"
Unless companies are shielded from their liabilities, or go bancrupt before
they have paid them all. And I firmly believe that, in a free market system,
companies will find ways to do one or the other ...
Greetings
Horst
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
| (...) You don't have to say hello each time, especially when you're saying hello to someone else than the post author. :-) (I wrote this one) (...) If you had a choice are you going to use the road that cares or the one that doesn't? You forget the (...) (23 years ago, 8-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.pt)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
| (...) No, this is a kind of fraud. But the fact that something is illegal is not a justification for every possible sort of remedy that any law enforcement officer can dream up. So while showing up for someone else's test IS fraud, it does not, in (...) (23 years ago, 6-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.pt)
|
173 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
