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 / 3066
3065  |  3067
Subject: 
Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 31 Dec 1999 07:34:34 GMT
Reply-To: 
lpieniazek@noveraIHATESPAM.com
Viewed: 
1461 times
  
John Neal wrote:

James Brown wrote:

I tend to think that (by the above) most people are good, most of the time.
However, I also think most people are lazy, even when it is clearly in their
benefit not to be.  This is why I think a Libertarian system would be doomed to
failure - it requires too much effort from the individual.

You make an excellent point here!  I also would add that if people were as good,
respectful, and responsible as they would need to be to make Libertarianism work,
you would *already* have a utopia.  Whether it would be 8 wide remains to be
seen;-)

Stuff and Nonsense to the both of you, lazy thinkers!... I have 3 points
to make:

1. People aren't as lazy(1) as you think. Most people are industrious
and hard working, even in this screwed up society of today. It's only in
Legoland where the majority of buildings are police stations and rescue
bases. The vast majority of us real-figs work our tails off and look at
all we've produced! This has been a grand century, despite its problems.

2. People are lazy because they are *enabled* to be lazy. There weren't
very many lazy people on the american frontier 100 years ago. Set
society up to ensure people suffer the consequences of their actions and
you'll soon stop complaining about how lazy everyone is. It'll take time
to shake off 60+ years of bad habits but it's doable. We have to break
the "entitlement mentality". People aren't entitled to anything, really,
other than rights protection.

3. The level that naysayers feel is required of virtue X for libertopia
to work is way higher than what X is under our analysis, where X can be
"niceness", "honesty", "industriousness" or any of several other nice to
have virtues...

4. Finally, constructive laziness as a vice is way overrated. It's
actually a virtue. We have constructively lazy people to thank for just
about every labor saving device ever devised. Edison was one of the
laziest people to ever walk the face of the earth. Thank goodness. Each
and every productivity improvement is basically an instant creation of
wealth, because now we can spend less time doing what we have to and
more on what we want to... I remain boggled that I had to work only
about an hour to earn enough to buy 3 (!!) portable CD players.

(ok, so I was too lazy to go back and fix the intro from 3 to 4)

1 - As I've said before, insert "dishonest", "mean", "rude" or any of a
number of other so called problematic traits that prevent libertopia
into the assertion if you wish.

--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com  http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.

NOTE: Soon to be lpieniazek@tsisoft.com :-)



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Industrious in the area of work is something completely different from lazy in other areas. You know that. [move stuff around a bit] (...) Exactly. Now replace "feel" with "under their analysis", _or_ replace "under our analysis" with "we (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I disagree here, but I'm a cynical little punk. :) I think people in general are only as industrious as they have to be. I don't think the mean is quite as low as "lazy" tends to imply, but I do think the mean is too low for a system that (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I like a more objective definition because I hate the trend towards relativism I think we are experiencing these days. If a sociopath considers killing others good, is it? But if good is objective, from who's perspective? God, who is by (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

188 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