Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site gloria.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!pesnta!qumix!ittvax!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rochester!rocksanne!sunybcs!gloria!colonel
From: colonel@gloria.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: minimalism in government
Message-ID: <911@gloria.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 13:19:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: gloria.911
Posted: Mon Jul  8 13:19:14 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 15:48:20 EDT
References: <1615@dciem.UUCP> <1340273@acf4.UUCP>
Organization: Jack of Clubs Precision Instruments Co.
Lines: 26

["In the service of Virman Vundabar we learn perfection!"]

> > Laws should be the minimum
> > that permits society to function both freely and efficiently.  We can
> > argue about the means to that end, but I think that both libertarians
> > and socialists on the net would agree on the objective (fundamentalists
> > might not).
> This is indeed the view of utilitarians and libertarians , but I don't see
> how socialists fit in.  It seems to me that they wish to introduce laws
> promoting their own moral agenda, quite apart from considerations
> of freedom and efficiency (I assume you mean efficiency in the production
> of material wealth).

Socialists generally feel that the production of material wealth is
efficient enough now.  They are more interested in distributing
material wealth and producing non-material wealth (e.g., nursing
care, public transport).

Apart from political beliefs, many people want laws governing anything
they disapprove of.  This approach ought to appeal to those who think
of people as interdependent, but it doesn't always work that way.
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel
CS: colonel@buffalo-cs
BI: csdsicher@sunyabva