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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (182690)	3/1/2006 3:24:28 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Have you ever come across anyone who didn't think collective action was not only useful, but essential? You, since you maintain governments don't do anything well, ergo, there must be some other way to do it better. However, I don't view much as black and white, 0 or 100%. That’s the religious/true believer crowd. I think there is a very important roll for governments, and very important rolls for individuals. I also think that almost any roll can have overlap, and that the efficiency of one vs. the other is very much on a continuum, having more to do with the people involved than the structure per se. So when I meet individuals who say, Governments never create wealth, I know I'm dealing with someone rather hobbled by philosophy, since I see governments engaged in pretty much the full spectrum of commerce that individuals and corporations play in. Take the Post Office in the USA or foreign TelComms when they were publicly owned or foreign Airlines, etc. There is not a clear boundary between government and commerce other than the particular laws of a given country. There is also little difference between a government monopoly and one which arises from sector dominance in commerce. Both can create inefficient systems, and both can be clobbered by eventual competition (especially foreign competition in the case of governmental monopolies). Its not like the laws of human behavior are magically different if one is a government employee vs. working for a large company, vs. being self-employed. There are important dynamics but they are always only a fraction of the total system. Libertarians, at least many I meet, seem obsessed with only part of the issue. People with strong philosophical approaches to issues, be it economics or politics, tend not to want to look at both sides. I'd much rather understand things than pigeonhole them. So I very much appreciate the strengths of capitalism, while also understanding its weaknesses, which calls for governance. I do enjoy toying with alternate ideas for how one might achieve commercial governance aside from regulation, which IMO, most people are very unimaginative about. Anyway, I've tried to explain this as best I can, so will give it rest for now. Oh, right. You vote for Libertarian? I did once waste a vote on H. Ross Perot, that great sucking sound himself. I'm older and wiser now :)