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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nihil who wrote (33570)	3/31/1999 12:52:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 108807

>Think I'll dump my gold and put the proceeds in internuts. < A classic example of "selling too late". >If you want condors you have to buy them now. They will never be cheaper.< That is a scary thought. But please include a recipe.

To: nihil who wrote (33570)	3/31/1999 1:07:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Respond to of 108807

Nihil, you make some excellent arguments against libertarianism by showing how proper tax policy can work for the public good. I am in your debt. But, as you pointed out, there is also a downside to government policies. The Auburn Valley (in Washington State) is generally regarded as the most fertile strip of agricultural land in the United States. Yet, as a result of poor tax policy much of it is now developed as industrial parks because government imposed highest and best use tests to determine taxes. So what was once a thriving strip of Japanese truck farms (prior to WWII) is now a combination of assembly plants, warehouses and strip malls. Libertarians often view tax policies designed to act as inducements for achieving social goals as abridgements of their freedoms by what they regard as an arbitrary and capricious government. I discussed these issues last night with a close friend. She is a self-styled libertarian and described the basis of her feelings as rejection of the smug, liberal view that government knows best. I contend that she mischaracterized liberalism, and made it synonymous with paternalism and political correctness (I have never been correct in my life, and she once again proved it by correcting my grammar!). I suppose it depends on our values. For example, I think it is important that children receive a well-rounded education. As a consequence, I think universal standards are important. On the other hand, there are those who argue that the imposition of educational standards robs them of a certain freedom, and they are undoubtedly right. But do we want our children to be taught bigotry and ignorance in school? Are we willing to give up the freedom to teach nonsense in favor of the national good? And would my friend say that this is just another example of governmental paternalism? There is no doubt in the minds of the most ardent libertarians that there must be limits to individual freedoms. Nobody would contend that it is acceptable to kill without proper cause. But why is the line drawn there? If it unacceptable to kill, why should it acceptable to produce products which kill and maim? Do we really want to end the existence of governmental bodies that are intended to protect us from drugs like thalidomide? TTFN, CTC