Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (21455)	7/20/2005 11:46:24 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

I followed you until this statement. "This is just one example of how one of the "inalienable" rights can be in conflict between people." What 'inalienable' right is in conflict? There is no inalienable right to do as you wish with property you possess. That might, in some cases be a legal right, and in other cases be a restricted legal right.

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (21455)	7/21/2005 12:36:25 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

"An externality is a "spillover" of involuntary, unavoidable costs or free benefits onto others from one's choices." I am well aware of what it means and I make no claims to be an expert in economics. But as I said, the “externalities” have no parameters. They are as myriad as the creative imagination. To rationalize even a small portion of these issues through the courts would tie up courtrooms perpetually. For instance...what if I consider the affect of your smoke stack on my flowers? (as an aside--you will remember or recognize that society encouraged smoke stacks to be built higher and higher to get the pollution away...and this accentuated "acid rain". Ask Nova Scotia about economic externalities? Shall they take the U.S. of A. to court?? "This is just one example of how one of the "inalienable" rights can be in conflict between people" You are stretching things a bit. A river is not private property and neither is the air. The idea of economic externalities is more applicable to pragmatism than it is to natural law. I mean, come on. If I pee on your lawn it is an "economic externality": but have I crushed your inalienable rights?? I don't think so. I have merely posed a question for the courts to weigh objectively. "This is just one example of how one of the "inalienable" rights can be in conflict between people." I disagree. People are certainly entitled to dispute this or that. These are matters for the courts to decide. But the entire idea of inalienable rights involves a concept of rights which are immutable--and "incapable of being repudiated" as the dictionary rightly says.