Subject:
|
Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Oct 2001 10:49:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1310 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Horst Lehner writes:
> Hello Larry, hello everybody,
>
> > These are all freedom of action rights and freedom from oppression rights.
> > They are not rights to goods earned and paid for by others and forcibly
> > transferred to me.
>
> How can an abandoned kid live and pursue its happiness, when this is all
> that is to freedom, liberty and civil rights? And how exactly does it hurt
> your liberty, or pursuit of happiness, when some of your tax dollars are
> used for that purpose? I have actually seen tax dollars spent for less
> useful and less just purposes.
I think the issue here is the fact that the state collects taxes, and uses them
as *it* sees fit. In a free market, everyone would still have the right to help
the abandoned child as they see fit, without the state "forcing" them to. Where
this breaks down is if noone chooses to help. Of course, this problem also
arrises with state help - the governmeny often chooses to spend the money
elsewhere, usually because of "red tape" or to attract votes. I think a
(totally) free market is great in theory, but impossible in practice (for any
significant period, anyway) - the human factors (power, greed) will always
cause it to break down.
> Also, since you value your freedom to earn money, and use it the way you
> decide, so highly, isn't it also true that you earn it from an environment
> that does not grant everybody the same chance to do the same? And if so, are
> you advocating the survival of only those people who happen to be more
> intelligent and more lucky than others? In the light of these arguments, do
> you really believe that a 100% free market society will be just to everyone?
I think a free market society *would* be just to everyone who participated
willingly & fairly. It would break down because of those who don't, those who
can't, and those who abuse it, and there will *always* be such people, no
matter how much you try to educate them.
> I hope you don't find those questions annoying. I am learning a lot about
> you as my friend, and the US in general by reading the answers. Of course, I
> also welcome comments from others on the issue. If this turns out to be
> something exclusively between Larry and me, we should probably move it to
> email ...
On the contrary, I find these questions very thought-provoking, and would also
be disappointed if you were to go to email.
ROSCO
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare
|
| (...) This is probably the best statement I have read here on the topic ... Thanks for it, Ross, and greetings Horst (who is a bit behind in reading news ...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Freedom vs. Wellfare
|
| Hello Larry, hello everybody, (...) So the goods you need to be kept alive (in a decent way, I would add) are not rights? What value does the right to live have, then, if it is OK for others to just let me starve, without any fault on my side (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
177 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
|
|
|
|
