Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.RUTGERS.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!columbia!topaz!josh
From: josh@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (J Storrs Hall)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Newsflash! [Subsidized Education]
Message-ID: <3168@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Wed, 7-Aug-85 14:33:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.3168
Posted: Wed Aug  7 14:33:25 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 8-Aug-85 19:33:24 EDT
References: <955@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1110@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1680@psuvax1.UUCP>
Reply-To: josh@topaz.UUCP (J Storrs Hall)
Distribution: na
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 52

In article <1680@psuvax1.UUCP> berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) writes:
>   I find here very appealing vision: unemployed starve or hire themselves
>for pennys, ... [litany of Dickensian horrors]

Why do you think that the centralized organization of illegitimate
coercion, which is all that we're advocating the removal of, is the 
motive force behind social concern and compassion?  I don't believe it.

I believe that the amount of compassion is relatively orthogonal to 
these political questions, but that the wealth of a society determines
the amount of activity and physical aid this compassion enables them
actually to give.  Thus a rich society is a better place to live,
even if you are poor.

>   First problem: who enforces the law? Private agency? How about the 
>competition?

The competition keeps the prices low, the laws fair, and the cops on the
job.  Unlike the present situation.

>...  Perhaps hire another agency to shoot out the first one.

War is extremely expensive; it is almost never practiced except by
those organizations who obtain their incomes by theft, such as 
governments and criminal gangs.

>Now, assume that law enforcement is public.  ...
>  Who, in absence of democracy should decide?

I don't advocate this, but you'll find that the decisions in a 
"democracy" are made by a small group of bosses in a political hierarchy.
The difference between a two-party "democracy" (USA) and a one-party
"democracy" (USSR) is that here there are two sets of bosses who are
chosen from more or less at random.

>Conclusion: Libertaria is a police state governed by the rich.  [etc]

If I have two dollars and you have one dollar, I get two lollipops and
you get one.  If I have two votes and you have one, I get everything,
and you get nothing.  Sorry!

>   It occurred to me that this is exactly what our net free-marketeers
>(and/or libertarians) have in mind.  ...

If you actually think this, you are remarkably close-minded.  If, as
I rather suspect, you really understand that we believe that everyone 
would be better off with the rights and principles we advocate, and
you are merly throwing "cute" insults, shame on you.

>Piotr Berman

--JoSH