http://www.airs.com/ian/essays/libertarian/libertarian.html
What is wrong with this picture?
Schools are labour camps.
What is "paraxology"? It's praxeology. Obviously, because no one will listen to him IRL because he has nothing useful to say, so he feels the need to post boring diatribes online. I don't even read these articles anymore. A waste of my precious time.
-Jon
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Jon Irenicus:. I don't even read these articles anymore.
It's not as if any of them say anything new either.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
i managed to get this far in the article:
"However, there are many types of coercion which come from the private sector. For example, your employer may tell you that you must start working mandatory unpaid overtime. This effectively lowers your hourly wage. Naturally, you can quit, but there may not be any other jobs in town, and you may not be able to afford to move, or to get training for another type of job."
If we dont agree on the definitions ("coercion" in this case) it's pretty difficult to debate the issue at hand. The above reeks of Marx's labour theory of value and the "exploitation" it entails.
Besides the things been said already about the definition of "coercion", what is obviously wrong is to claim that the air we breath is a common good.
This is at best hogwash, at worst the idea, that all resources belong to society which in turn, gracefully allows its humble members to use them.
If someone does not understand what a good is, than every debate has to start with clearifying the definitions.
A good is something that is "scarce" for a person. Under normal conditions air is not scarce and so obviously no good at all. It is the old fallacy of believing that objects have inherent value. Nothing is further away from the truth. Objects have a utility if someone has a need for them. If someone has a need, this means the object is scarce within his environment, else there would be no need. Scarcety of an item - scarcity to an individual in his current environment that is- makes an item a good if someone has a desire to have it. Else an item is just an item without any value for an individual.
But as I mentioned, a debate requires to arive at common definitions of terms upfront, else it is no debate but pure waste of time and energy.
In the begining there was nothing, and it exploded.
Terry Pratchett (on the big bang theory)