On 06/26/2013 11:36 AM, keith smith wrote:
That is not econ. That is Gov spending.
Econ to me is in the market place, goods and services.
So let's say I buy something. I don't know what. Let's say it's boiler
plate for my steam boat. I buy that plate from a guy in Ohio who has
built a lot of steam boats. Let's say he short changes me on the
thickness of the boiler plate and why I'm on my steam it explodes and
kills me. Now the libertarian approach to this situation has three
arguments 1. Be an expert on every single subject so that no one can
ever trick you 2. hire several experts on every single subject to advise
you before you make any purchase 3. your family can sue the boiler plate
company out of existence. I'd like to point out that number 3 would
involve 1. force 2. the federal government and it would effect the
economy(transferring a large sum of money from an entity in one state to
an entity in an other).
There are ways of implement argument #2 that could work. Especially in
a properly educated society. Instead of having an FDA we would have an
independent non-profit that would pay be hired by the drug companies to
certify their drugs actually work and don't kill you, and nobody would
buy drugs that hadn't been certified by a reputable non-profit(or even
for profit) independent tester. Nice theory, but I just don't see how
it could really be any better than our current system. I don't see how
the testing organization won't eventually succumb to the drug
companies(Sure a new "good" one would be formed, but it would be a never
ending cycle).
People have pointed out industries where this type of thing does work,
but when ever I have looked into it there is always some sort of
government backing.
Kyle
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
