To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 19996
19995  |  19997
Subject: 
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:19:32 GMT
Viewed: 
1320 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:

You seem to be confusing between choosing from what's available, with having
a right to choose from what's available, with somehow expecting that you
should be offered whatever happens to suit your fancy.
So, yes, I can argue it.

Sorry if I haven't been clear. I don't have any expectation that the market
will provide me whatever I fancy, in this market or any other. What my
expectation is, though, is that for it to be a free market, there cannot be
unreasonable coercive barriers to entry. I argue that the "market for
governments" has unreasonable coercive barriers to entry.

I'm still not getting where you are going with this, Larry.  Free market of
governments?  What in the world does that have to do with inheritable
contracts as a system of stable (or coercive) government?  Unreasonable
coercive barriers to entry into government?  That would seem to be arguing
the particulars of a system rather than a broad concept behind continuity
(or about getting into government).  I said this at the start: I don't see
how any of this relates - perhaps it would be better to start a new thread
and divorce this from the current one entirely and maybe I'll get it then?

This subthread got a start when someone said "if you don't like it (that you
inherited a contract), vote with your feet". Perfectly valid statement. What
I was trying to point out was that it is not a perfect solution. Life isn't
perfect, of course, but in this case it's not a free market, the existing
governments act in ways that prevent new governments from forming. All of
them do this.

So the "vote with your feet" argument isn't perfect.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
 
(...) News Flash--nothing is perfect. Not to bring religion into it, but we live in a fallen world. Beyond the religions scope, Democracy is the 'lesser of all evils". Heck, you and I don't even live in a pure democratic society, and basically used (...) (22 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
 
(...) I'm still not getting where you are going with this, Larry. Free market of governments? What in the world does that have to do with inheritable contracts as a system of stable (or coercive) government? Unreasonable coercive barriers to entry (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

164 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR