Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!linus!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646
From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: The Myth of Robinson Crusoe
Message-ID: <2380049@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Jun-85 16:38:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: acf4.2380049
Posted: Tue Jun 25 16:38:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 03:10:20 EDT
References: <663@whuxl.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 58

>/* orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) / 11:19 am  Jun 24, 1985 */

>But this consideration is not
>part of the "economic" sphere and hence totally unimportant. Trivial.

Not at all.  Individuals' preferences (in aggregate  -  demand) are the
reason we have an economic system in the first place.  Whether or not
to have children is a question of such preferences.
 
>Libertarians and their kindred economists will go on at great lengths
>about the individual's right to create as many widgets as s/he wants
>in their own home.  

If you wish, this libertarian will go on and on about the right of
people to have as many children as they want.

>Not even Communist societies prevent
>individuals from producing all the widgets they want in their own
>homes.

You've GOT to be joking  --  not even Communist societies?
Our own society has passed numerous laws against working at home.
 
>But this is not what Libertarians and neo-classical economists
>are really talking about.  What they are talking about is the
>*social* claim for Mr. X, widget-maker, to be able to claim as much
>of other people's production as he can possibly extract out of
>Mr. X's production of widgets.

Thanks for straightenning us out, Tim.

Actually, what libertarians are talking about is the right of Mr. X and Mr. Z
to do anything they wish so long as they do not innitiate force or fraud
against others.

>Without being able to claim *other
>people's production* Mr. X's production of even a million widgets
>is completely useless.

How does he claim other people's production?  Does he force them to work.

>This is not a case of totally individualistic production- in fact 
>as we all know there is no such thing for even Mr. X must rely
>on the work, intellectual or otherwise, of others to even get the
>parts for his widgets, for the machines to make them,etc.

Mr. X has contracted wiith some individuals for them to perform some work for
him.  Both parties have agreed voluntarily.  Everything was going fine until
Mr. Sevener began to forcefully interfere with something that it was not his
place to interfere in.

These parties may decide tomorrow to interfere in the relationship between
Mr. Sevener and his wife or girlfriend, but I don't thinnk Mr. Sevener
will approve of that.
 
>                                tim sevener whuxl!orb

							Mike Sykora