Subject:
|
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 May 2001 13:37:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
648 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
>
> > > If this is your assertion, then I say that its a fine idea, in theory, but
> > > suspect in practice. What is the Libertarian take on public institutions
> > > that benefit the public good?
> >
> > All public institutions claim to benefit the public. Many do more harm than
> > good. The one that do good do so in a wildly inefficient way. An independent
> > watchdog organization would spend your money better, and mostly help those who
> > wanted the help.
>
> Who would fund such an organization, and how can it make any credible
> claims of independence? I don't deny the value, in theory, of the
> organization, but I don't believe that we can trust it to be any more
> impartial than existing watchdog organizations. For that matter, to whom
> would such an organization be accountable? The watchmen?
All good questions that the court of public opinion would have to satisfy,
and thanks for reminding us of them, Dave! (1) Ask yourself them about the
UL or ANSI, though, under the current system. When I did, I got entirely
satisfactory answers...
Hope that helps.
1 - see how I worked your name in to the last word of the sentence position
again??
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
246 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
|
|
|
|
