Mike Lee wrote:
>
> David Hobby thinks that workers are coerced into taking dangerous jobs and
> that government can make us all safe:
Mike-- If you mischaracterize my position, I won't discuss things
with you. Basta.
> > That's a great laissez-faire argument, which I might even
> > accept if unemployment were sufficiently low that it was
> > clear that employees had some other options.
>
> Are you really going to try to argue that people don't have multiple options
> about what jobs to take, regardless of the unemployment rate? Just checking,
> before I spend time with obvious rebuttals.
What if all the options are equally bad? Yes, people could take a
safer job that paid even less, or that was dangerous in a different
way.
> > When the market messes up, and people start dying from risks
> > they did not have a chance to freely accept, then Government
> > SHOULD intervene.
>
> Do you really feel that helpless, living in the presence of more abundant
> choices than at any previous time in history?
No, I don't feel helpless. Intervening when markets malfunction
is an integral part of what Government should do.
So you want to excuse the present by saying that the past was
worse? Sure it was, but that's not an excuse.
---David
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
