Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!trc
From: trc@houti.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Pirate captains of industry?
Message-ID: <297@houti.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-Jun-83 08:35:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: houti.297
Posted: Fri Jun 10 08:35:42 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jun-83 06:51:52 EDT
Lines: 47

Response to tbray's note on laissez faire capitalism:

Whether or not a government *can* run a business efficiently is really only
part of the issue.  The real difficulty lies in the fact that governments
(try to) have a monopoly on the use of force in their country.  While this
can be reasonable (providing a system of justice, police, and defense), it
does make a government business either a very nasty competitor or, as it 
usually is, a coercive monopolist.  A coercive monopoly is one that is 
sustained by force, not by inherent ability.  It doesnt have to be efficient
to survive.

You believe government owned businesses are justified when private
businesses would not provide equal service at equal cost to all.  For the
reasons stated above, I would say it is not justified.  It seems likely
to me that postal rates, for example, would be much cheaper for local
letters, while long distance letters would not cost too much more.  At
worst, it would probably average out to the same price as now.  Since I
get a lot of long distance junk mail, I suspect that it would be lower
for individuals, and higher for direct mail sales businesses.  In short,
those that get the most value from the system pay the most for it.

Does the fact that every democratic government (and non-democratic one,
by the way) regulates the private sector automatically make that right?
Or does it really point out one of the failings of a democracy - that
it is open to the politics of pressure groups and lobbyists?  (I would
prefer a republic - a government of laws and justice rather than one of
men and politics.)

Laissez faire capitalism is equivalent to piracy?  Capitalism is the exact 
opposite of piracy.  The pirate takes what others have created, by force.  
The capitalist can create without coercing anyone.  You also seem to confuse 
the cause and the effect when you state that capitalism has only had its
successes in circumstances of rapid economic expansion.  What do you suppose 
caused the rapid expansion?

What makes you think capitalism could not work in a finite environment?
The human mind, not natural resources, is the source of all progress.
Light bulbs and automobiles do not form themselves.

And as to our finite environment - we humans have only just skimmed part of
the surface of the land areas of the earth.  In case you hadn't noticed, vast
new frontiers are opening up - space, and the depths of the Earth and
its oceans.  I dont think it is quite yet time for humanity to crawl into
a hole and give up on progress.

	Tom Craver
	houti!trc