Tim Re..Having a situation where the law does not artificially reduce someone's capability to compete in the market is closer to the ideal of capitalism then one where the law officially discriminates against some and gives special advantages to others<<<<<<<<
First, I assume you are not talking about racial quotas, etc. but rather fair trade laws etc. Many of these laws are designed to give equal opportunity to the small fry. In your tenets, you said all should have equal opportunity, but when the gov. enacts such laws, you say they are restricting capitalism. Both socialism and capitalism need more than the honor system to keep things fair. Socialism needs incentives. Capitalism needs punishment to keep the incentive, greed, from becoming overwhelming and interfering with equal opportunity and fair play. In ted's socialist shangri La , everbody would wake up in the morning, work like hell for the common good, and rest peaceful knowing he has helped, not himself, but his fellow man. In your utopia, chivalry, would keep people from exploiting advantages, (market control, distribution system, etc.), as if Intel doesn't use its market dominance to hinder AMD, and MSFT allowed other programs equal access in Windows. Both are dream worlds and need to be tempered with reality. And that is why we have gov. which try to bring out the best of both. |
