Subject:
|
Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:48:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
377 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > I prefer "Would Libertopia cause the needy to get less?"
> >
> > Libertopia infers that it is accomplishable - that man is willing to
> > re-distribute his wealth. The fact that man, today, is willing to have kids
> > working in sweat shops in the developing world to ensure he can have cheap
> > trainers suggests to me that is not yet ready to re-distribute his wealth.
>
> Sweat shops in this country are primarily inhabited by illegal immigrants -
> since their actions are predicated on being "illegal", what protections do
> they have?
In a Libertopia, just as much as you.
> As for third world country sweat shops - a people as a whole
> allow themselves to be treated as they do by not rising up and demanding
> anything different.
They operate in very desperate circumstances. Supply and demand in an
unregulated labour market means that they must work at the "market rate" and
at the market conditions - just like in Libertopia.
Scott A
> I do not believe that the people of Iraq, Cuba, etc. are
> incapable of overthrowing the evil men which perpetuate these types of human
> rights violations. We did it here, they can do it there. Overly simplistic?
> Yes, but true none the less.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > Back to your question, my first question is less what? Everyone will have
> > less money in Libertopia, as it will not exist in its current form (my
> > understanding). As for Wealth, even respected libertarian economists accept
> > that there is no guarantee that the market can provide everything to
> > everyone. Indeed, even Larry's economic guru accepted that some tax will be
> > required for areas of welfare (I am not sure which) as the market will not
> > be able to provide it. Libertopia can not exist with welfare tax. So in
> > terms of wealth, I think the needy would get less.
> >
> > It then follows that less personal wealth means less health, less education,
> > etc.
> >
> > Finally, if you are tempted to overhaul your system of government, the test
> > should not be "Would the needy get less?". It should be "Would the needy get
> > more?".
> >
> > Scott A
>
>
> The fundamental flaw in this entire argument is that the government has the
> right to determine what anybody should get. Keep the government out of my
> business. If I break the law, then get into my business. Until then I'm
> innocent until proven guilty. I believe the LP has this premise as it's
> goal, although I admit a boat load of ignorance on the LP. I prefer any
> system which allows individuals to be what they may. This is the heart of
> the matter. Some people have no desire, why should we be coerced to
> subsidize such lack of will. Those who are truly needy and helpless are a
> different story, yet a relatively small part of what we call poor. Most
> people are poor at their own hand. Government should NOT force benevolence.
> It must be an individual choice to be effective. Besides, the government is
> like Frankenstien's Monster, once you put it together, it won't let you kill it.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
| (...) Sweat shops in this country are primarily inhabited by illegal immigrants - since their actions are predicated on being "illegal", what protections do they have? As for third world country sweat shops - a people as a whole allow themselves to (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
231 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
|
|
|
|
