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 / 7908
7907  |  7909
Subject: 
Re: IP ( was Re: LP POINT 1
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 5 Dec 2000 16:44:03 GMT
Viewed: 
6470 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In my sytem I have the right to free education.
> > In my sytem I have the right to free healthcare.
> > In my sytem I have the right the right to social provision.
> > In my system a starving man has the right to food.
> > 
> > Is that not utopia?
> 
> Assuming those are true (that things are "free"), Dunno. Are there any
> downsides or hidden costs? I of course hold there are no utopias per se.
> 
> But suppose, readdressing my question if we could, that I could give you a
> system that delivered everything yours did, but didn't require the
> government intrusion. Would you take it as "better" or reject it because you
> preferred the intrusion?

If by "intrusion", you mean things like my doctor making sure I'm not
abusing my kids  - no.

Scott A

> 
> That's the question I was getting at when I said this:
> 
> > > Remember, this is purely hypothetical, so no objections of practicality can
> > > be raised (whether this system can be created is not the question at hand).
> > > 
> > > I think if you answer "I reject" we have gotten to a fundamental (and
> > > perhaps irreconcilable) difference between us, because I in turn reject the
> > > notion that it's OK for the majority to impose its will on everyone. That
> > > is, I personally reject an unbounded, unfettered, unrestrained democracy in
> > > favor of one that is tightly constrained in terms of what force can be used
> > > to accomplish and in terms of what rights can be usurped by majority vote.
> 
> Restating, more fundamentally, is it OK for a majority to impose whatever
> whim it's latched onto on the populace as a whole? If not, what limits are
> appropriate, and how do you reconcile that with unlimited democracy?
> 
> I don't claim to have the answer.
> 
> ++Lar



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: IP ( was Re: LP POINT 1
 
(...) Assuming those are true (that things are "free"), Dunno. Are there any downsides or hidden costs? I of course hold there are no utopias per se. But suppose, readdressing my question if we could, that I could give you a system that delivered (...) (26 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

78 Messages in This Thread:



















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

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