X-Message-Number: 28144 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:26:29 -0600 From: "Anthony ." <> Subject: Re: Libertarian economics References: <> On 6/29/06, egg plant <> wrote: > Government healthcare is a Byzantine network of expensive and confusing > regulations administered by foolish inefficient beaurocrates, the net result > of it all is I pay your medical bills and you pay my medical bills. I don't disagree that the system could be improved. I do disagree that the system should be totally scrapped. I see taxes as a social good - I don't mind paying for the medical bills of those who can't afford it, and I'd happily meet a tax increase if it funded cryonics or other life-extension research or services. I do mind funding wars and such, but the democractic process is about ironing out problems. > I humbly > suggest we all just pay our own medical bills and be done with it. And by > the way, the word "healthcare" is not mentioned once in the US constitution. So what? Aside from the US constitution being only relevant to that country, is your nation to be forever ruled by such inflexible approaches to an anachronism? If a society doesn't take care of the health of its nation (i.e. life-extension), what hope is there for more radical forms of life-extension? It is backward. > As for education, well look at the worst slum you can find in the USA, you > will find far more good cars than students that go to good schools, why? I explained that some posts ago when I pointed out that social pressures lead the poor to spend money on status-items to boost their social standing and sense of esteem. > It's a fact of economics, when any service has no competition quality goes > down. Should we then sell the schools to McDonalds and IKEA? The kids can build furniture while learning that Ronald McDonald brought burgers and freedom to the world. >And the reason the public schools > stink is not lack of money, the dreadful Washington DC schools spend $13,330 > per student per year, think of a private school that charged that, which > school do you think would be superior? The latter, though the former has the potential to be just as good. I find it funny that in Alberta everyone received a "prosperity cheque" to show us all how rich we were. $400 per person and all bar one kept it. This is because we have a "surplus" which means our provincial services don't need money. Except the hospital beds are over-flowing, the class-rooms are over-flowing (my son is in a grade 2 class of 48) - indeed, the schools are cutting back their school bus services because of a $6.5 million short-fall in the budget. Other school fees are set to rise - this is just in these sectors. And this is prosperity? > And by the way, the word "education" > is not mentioned once in the US constitution. What a shitty constitution. Essentially then, the US is set to be a dumb, sickly nation. > I admit that in a Libertarian society if nobody had any compassion > for the poor they would be in very serious trouble, but it's no different in > a democracy. If I refuse to give money to earthquake disaster victims > voluntarily why would I vote for a politician that makes me? Charity AND part of your taxes go to the poor at present. In your libertarian dystopia nothing would go to the poor except whatever charity there was - which probably wouldn't be much considering everyone was too miserly to pay taxes in the first place. > >If a homeless person asks me for money, I give them every cent of cash I've > >got. > > I very much doubt that, if you did you'd soon be homeless yourself. I said cash - you know, coins and notes. I didn't say I hand out my credit card number & blank cheques. > >the criminal underworld is a pretty good unregulated > >market right? > >well, except the force, threats, murder, etc. > > What did you expect? If government made chocolate bars illegal then the > underground Hershey candy company and Mars candy company would have no way > to settle disputes except through baseball bats and machine guns. I don't think the government has any right to make a great deal of services or goods illegal that currently are illegal - especially for reasons fo "morality". My point was that the "unregulated" criminal underworld is indeed regulated - usually by naked power. You've got pretty much the same situation as a regulated market essentially. Except there is less accountability. Would you rather a criminal organisation provide cryonics, or one that was legal? Anthony Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28144