Replies

"Pictures of children chained to machines or working in coal mines at age 8 will sour people pretty quick on laissez-faire capitalism."

Yeah, right. Like that's going to happen. First off, what coal company would ever be foolish enough to let children work in its mines? Mining today is highly mechanized. But more importantly, what coal company could ever withstand the publicity of children working in its mines? And maybe even more important than that, what parents would allow their 8-year-old children to work in mines?

The idea that *government*...and especially the *federal government...is what's keeping us from reverting to 19th century conditions is nonsense. What keeps us from reverting to 19th century conditions is that we're incredibly more wealthy than the poor devils in the 19th century were.

"Ask yourselves, libertarians: why do unions exist?"

Because conditions stunk in the early 20th century. No, conservative, ask yourself this: why has union membership severely declined, and will likely keep on declining? (Answer: "Because conditions don't stink anymore.")

"But it happened precisely because of the pursuit of an idiotic capitalist 'ideal'."

Capitalism is the most spectacular source for wealth generation ever devised by man. There is a direct and positive correlation between how capitalistic countries are, and how wealthy they are. For example, the median per-capita income in Sweden is now LESS than the median per-capita income of blacks in the United States. (Blacks being one of POOREST of social groups in the U.S.)

Why is India poor, and Taiwan rich (well, compared to India)? In part, it's because India's Constitution states it to be a socialist country.

Apparently you missed my point. All of this stuff happened because laissez faire capitalism is brutal by nature. Capitalism is great; unfettered capitalism ain't so great.

By the way, all that stuff I describe about children being chained to machines happened. So, anyway, I guess I'm learning not to get in heated debates with libertarians. I forgot that when I was a Randian libertarian myself that no amount of argument would convince me out of my "pure liberty" standpoint.

Cheers.

HumanaeVitae says ...

"Pictures of children chained to machines or working in coal mines at age 8 will sour people pretty quick on laissez-faire capitalism." </I

Mark Bahner says ...

Yeah, right. Like that's going to happen. /i>

I tend to agree with HumanaeVitae ... I feel that business left totally unchecked will resort to whatever makes the most profit and especially what makes them competitive. If a company is out performing another, the lagging company HAS to adopt the same policies of the better company or cease to exist. It IS the natural evolution of business. If that means using cheap child labor as in the past and presently illegal or using cheap offshore foreign or American worker displacing H-1B labor onshore as is today, the company WILL resort to it if only to survive. The adage ... "if you don't like your job work somewhere else" is woefully naive especially in a total "laissez faire" business environment sans fair business laws e.i. monopoly restraint. A dissenting worker is not going to get a job anywhere in this "laissez faire" environment because the companies will have evolved into a few giant conglomerates with shared data bases about such "disruptive" people. This dissenting worker also will not be able NOT start his own business because all other competing businesses will be or will have been eliminated by use of one or another presently outlawed business practice. To think that businesses in a free for all environment will NOT resort to whatever makes them the most profit ( which means ANYTHING they can get away with) is the height of naivety ... IMHO