Subject:
|
Re: Libertarianism again.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 1 Sep 1999 15:12:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2117 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Disagree. Whether we do it at all is INDEED the question. For those who
> choose not to make provisions for their future, or choose not to decide,
> still have made a choice. THEIR choice, THEIR consequences.
And their children? Is it their choice as well? Are you happy for their
children to grow up in poverty?
> > I suspect I'm off the far left end of the USA scale. I think that the
> > government has an obligation to directly control natural monopolies
>
> Well, that's a relief! We're safe from that, there ARE no natural
> monopolies
Blimey - what planet do you live on??? Natural monopolies are a standard
recognised part of economic theory. They occur for all sorts of reasons
- such as owning access to a resource that only occurs rarely
or where
the entry costs into an industry are prohibitive. Or where the existing
companies in an industry have got together (which in the absence
of Government action they invariably will) to collaborate and keep
other companies out.
I think it's about time you started applying your libertarian economic
theories to the real world instead of continually pushing out these
simplistic ideas
that sound great but simply never work in practise. A pure free
market in almost all cases DOESN'T WORK. In countries where it
appears to work, the only reason is that Governments have come
in and regulated it sufficiently to make some
workable approximation to a free market .
btw Chris - nice to at last see someone else who actually understands
about how we depend on the communities in which we live.
> > I don't see that. But then I live in a country where the top 10% are
> > only 100x richer than the bottom 10%. The USA has it much worse.
>
> Better, you mean, right? If you can only get to be 100x richer than the
> poorest person you don't have much to shoot for, do you?
Depends how poor the poorest are. Besides, that's misreading
what Chris wrote. He referred to the top 10%. The top 0.5% are going to
be a lot richer than that.
Simon
http://www.SimonRobinson.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Libertarianism again.
|
| Ruthlessly snipped so I could snipe at a few points (...) Disagree. Whether we do it at all is INDEED the question. For those who choose not to make provisions for their future, or choose not to decide, still have made a choice. THEIR choice, THEIR (...) (25 years ago, 1-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
276 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
|
|
|
|
