Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian stuff
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:42:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1691 times
|
| |
|
|
Jasper Janssen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 16:36:53 GMT, Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
> > If individuals and corporations are incapable of charity and community
> > duty, then why do we have it currently? As far as I know, PEOPLE created
> > our government. You don't seem to be preaching the "god" factor.
>
> Stop thinking in absolutes. Incapable isn't the problem, it's that
> there's not enough of it.
But in Libertopia, everyone who chose to work would have more money due
to wildly less government waste. If we all have more money it will be
easier to donate more. So maybe there would then be 'enough' charity. right?
> > Also, I see "deliberate, calculated, and organized neglect" of the needy
> > in current society. Show me a system which will not have that, and I'll
> > listen.
>
> Absolutes again. Show me that Libertopia is better, and I'll convert.
> Make it a practical example.
Does Libertopia have to be better than the status quo in every way?
What if it's worse in three ways, better in seventeen and about the same
in thirty? Assuming that they all have the same weight it's a net
improvement, but you'll always be able to point to those three ways in
which things get worse and say 'nya nya, your system stinks because
one-legged aboriginies are getting the shaft.'
And I believe it is impossible to convinve you that Libertopia is better
because you've already decided. I don't even particularly want to
convince you. I just want to go live there. You can do whatever you
want. Why do you have to make me do what you want? (I'm not really
meaning you, here, but everyone who disagrees.)
> Why don't all ya libertarians move to one state and get that state to
> go libertarian in law. We'll use that as a testcase.
In a second! I'm there! Where is this possible? Oh. I see. It's
not? Oh well. But if it were, I'd be there.
> > And our current system doesn't? In some ways, our current system may be
> > worse, because big money plays such a big part in selecting the people
> > who run the charities (since the government is currently by far the
> > largest charity). In fact, those charities spend lots of money PAYING
> > for companies to locate in their area, PAYING for excess goods, etc.
>
> And libertopia would be better? HOW?!
Because the large charity organisation (hell, it could still be called
the US government for all I care) wouldn't be the hellish power source
or money sink that it currently is. If I were unhappy with the way the
charity were being administered, they would have less money to
administer. Some other charity competing in a market economy would get
some of my money instead.
> How would libertopia make the big money less likely to control the
> charities?
If I failed to account for something that you see as obvious, please
spell it out and I'll work on it.
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Libertarian stuff
|
| (...) Stop thinking in absolutes. Incapable isn't the problem, it's that there's not enough of it. (...) Absolutes again. Show me that Libertopia is better, and I'll convert. Make it a practical example. Why don't all ya libertarians move to one (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
209 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
|
|
|
|
