X-Message-Number: 23208
From: 
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 19:45:04 +0000

CryoNet - Fri 2 Jan 2004

    #23204: Re: Topic A [Mark Plus]
    #23205: Re: CryoNet #23199 - #23203 [randy]
    #23206: RE: CryoNet #23199 - #23203 [Eytan Kollin]

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe



Message #23204
From: "Mark Plus" <>
Subject: Re: Topic A
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 07:58:46 -0800

In message #23202, Charles Platt says,

>Ron Bailey is a nice guy but his diatribe against socialist
economies is simplistic and ignores some cases which
contradict his bias, such as Finland. I have visited Finland,
where they still have a Lenin museum, public housing is the
norm, and socialism is not a bad word. The Finns are doing
very well indeed.

Scandinavian social democracy doesn't seem to have hurt the entry of 
Finland's Nokia and Sweden's Ericsson into the cell phone business. I wonder 
how libertarians explain that their cell phones come from companies based in 
countries with high taxes, many business regulations and generous provisions 
for the vulnerable.

Mark Plus
Mark I am surprised at you. Socialism is indefensible. Period. It is an 
immoral philosophy that assumes the state has supremacy over the individual. 
The reason some socialist states are more prosperous than others is because 
some socialist states "allow" more capitalism than others.

The socialist states that outlaw capitalism (N. Korea, Cuba, the old U.S.S.R. 
for example) become infested with poverty and misery, except for the ruling 
class. They are free to shop in countries that allow capitalism. The reason 
we buy from these countries, obvioulsy, is because the product is cheaper. 
That is probably due to some form of government subsidy or cheaper labor. I 
don't object to cheaper labor but I do object to any form of government 
subsidy.
 Jerry Searcy

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23208