[rogerv]

Individual liberty is not the whole concern of the Constitution. There is also concern for the common good. This is why there is in the preamble and description in article one of the powers of congress, some concern for the general welfare. This is why there is eminent domain: the reasonable expectation that some property would be needed for the common good. Case in point would be the building of infrastructure: roads, canals, electric, telegraph and telephone wires, water and sewage lines. The building of the transcontinental railroad was largely subsidized by taxpayers and the land acquired through eminent domain, but we all benefited from the cheaper prices afforded by cheaper transportation.

I think, by the way, that there is an argument here that socializing some costs can be justified even for a market economy: because cheap transportation and cheap communication reduce production costs and enable sellers to find buyers more efficiently. Sharing the the costs of infrastructure makes markets more efficient.

[jonestown]

rogev:
In a nutshell, the central question is this: how can we rationally institute changes in our society?

---

By following the basic principles of our Constitution.

No infringements on individual liberties allowed.
18 jones

---

I believe that regulation is consistent with liberty provided we always look for the least restrictive alternative when imposing regulation.
48 rogerv

---

Your last line illustrates again the gulf between Constitutionalists & Communitarian's.

Our governments were instituted to preserve individual liberty, not to impose 'regulations consistent with liberty'.
52 jonestown

---

Individual liberty is not the whole concern of the Constitution. There is also concern for the common good.
59 rogerv

---

You argue that government is best for regulating the common good, that "socializing some costs can be justified". -- We have been following that path, and losing our liberties on the way.

Can you agree that following the basic principles of our Constitution, --[No infringements on individual liberties allowed]; -- is our best bet to reverse course?