I was talking with a conservative colleague yesterday about regulations. He made some interesting points about how some regulation improved efficiency for consumers, and the market, since anyone would be afraid to do anything without at least a little assurance of some standards (don't want to drive somewhere unfamiliar, might be water in gasoline, don't want to make sure appliances won't burn down house, etc.) He conceded that at some point too much regulation would be a bad thing, but some should exist. Is there any articles that address this contention? Maybe just some talking points you folks can come up with (besides morality)?
DD5:How many Republicans in Congress today would support the elimination of the FDA? How about seatbelt mandates?
This one, perhaps?
Read my Nolan Chart column "Me & My Big Mouth"
ngoldovsky:Is it just me or do socialists and capitalists in their quest for a utopian socialized/capitalistic economy advocate the exact same thing using different terminology.?
The difference is the voluntary aspect of the capitalist proposals. Even though it may be next to impossible to do any business without insurance in the ancap ideal, you still have the option off opting out of exchange, and surviving via subsistence and localized barter, which is all I'd really like to do anyways.
Given that you would have no restrictions on where you could live. You would be able to choose freely your own social arrangement.
McDuffie: DD5:How many Republicans in Congress today would support the elimination of the FDA? How about seatbelt mandates? This one, perhaps?
Ron Paul is a software bug in the system. That's 1. Do you have any more?
DD5:Ron Paul is a software bug in the system. That's 1. Do you have any more?
Not yet, but I don't have any flowers in my garden yet either. The weather is starting to warm up though...
Peter Schiff
Rand Paul
Of course, you have to plant flowers first before they can grow (nudge,nudge, Mr. Voting is wrong)
Basically through this argument you come full circle to create institutions that impose their will onto others. Instead of calling them governing agencies they will be "consumer insurance agencies". For profit industry will still create inefficiencies by attempting to create a situation favorable to them. E.G the oil industry attempting to continue oil dependence in the world.
They won't have the right to impose their will on non-consenting individuals, no.
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
ngoldovsky:Given that you would have no restrictions on where you could live.
Without a state, I'm not sure where this restriction would originate from.
ngoldovsky:You would be able to choose freely your own social arrangement.
Yep.
No. There can only be one.
McDuffie:No. There can only be one.
Like the Highlander?
Jackson LaRose: McDuffie:No. There can only be one. Like the Highlander?
*chuckle*
Substitute MacLeod with Ron Paul
and that's not an industrial room but inside the Congressional building
But who's that woman?