orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (05/28/85)
jj wants to know: > Tim, > It's obvious that people aren't immune to propaganda, indeed > your own note demonstrates the same quite satisfactorily. The only > question I have for you is: > Why are you constantly spouting the "blind adherence to free enterprise > myth" phrase at us. That, in itself, is a phrase that has been used by > "leftists" <I use the quotes of contempt, there are many kinds of > leftist, just like there are many kinds of middle of the road people, Tim> > for many years. > ......... > Why do you not examine the bankrupt rhetoric that > you insist on placing before us at least once a week? > -- > (ihnp4/allegra)!alice!jj I repeat the phrase "blind adherence to the free enterprise myth" because that's what is repeated by Michael Sykora and many others on the net. When Mr. Sykora suggests that it is some sort of crime for *anyone* to pay taxes then I find this a ludicrous assumption even on the part of many Libertarians who in general support the myth that somehow leaving the government totally out of the economy will resort in the laissez faire utopia. When others suggest that public education should be scrapped despite strong evidence that it has been a key factor in the growth of our economy in the past I also find this flying in the face of reality. When Mr. Sykora admits that he has never heard of the "cobweb effect" by which a free market can develop wild oscillations (all following the theoretical formulations of neoclassical "free market" economics) then I wonder about his understanding of the "free market" that he touts as the answer to all economic problems in general. As for examining my own assumptions I certainly do that. You do not hear me spouting the rhetoric of "exploitation" - nor do I tout total government interference in the economy. As I pointed out in my article socialists often have their own blind spots - one of them being the assumption that collectivization would improve agrculture's benefits to the masses. tim sevener whuxl!orb
jj@alice.UUCP (05/28/85)
> I repeat the phrase "blind adherence to the free enterprise myth" because > that's what is repeated by Michael Sykora and many others on the net. > When Mr. Sykora suggests that it is some sort of crime for *anyone* to pay > taxes then I find this a ludicrous assumption even on the part of many > as the answer to all economic problems in general. > ... > As for examining my own assumptions I certainly do that. You do not > hear me spouting the rhetoric of "exploitation" - nor do I tout total > government interference in the economy. As I pointed out in my article > socialists often have their own blind spots - one of them being > the assumption that collectivization would improve agrculture's benefits > to the masses. > tim sevener whuxl!orb Tim. First, I think you need to re-read some of what Mr. Sykora has said. He hasn't said that YOU can't pay taxes, if YOU want to, unless I've read him very wrong. IF you think that some other entity is better able to spend the money, give! Just don't make that judgement for others. Second, you should look at libertarianism as a natural outgrowth of our current socialistic disaster, in government, economy, and schooling (and elsewhere). Perhaps, if you looked for a balance between the current situation (which I view as separating a person from responsibility for their own actions/inactions) and libertarianism, which is the opposite taken to extreme, you might see the value of their philosophy, as well as that which you do not like. It's historically been true that whenever people have been isolated from the effects of their own actions, disaster has ensued. The US is currently demonstrating that in no uncertain ways. Libertarians can point to many facets (labor unions that prevent any incentive, regressive taxes that remove money from the hands of those who can produce something for everybody with it, schools that force bright students to slow down and be normal while having separate and advanced programs fro the disabled, and so on) of current society that would clearly be better handled in a libertarian society, and use that as an argument. If you want to maintain the socialist norm and quiet the libertarian cause, you must eliminate the PROBLEMS, not the philosophy, and change your philosophy in the process. It's clear that many things are wrong, and that our individual economic and ethical (I do not say moral, since Mr. Falwell has irrevocably corrupted that word) standards have failed completely. Rather than argue for more of what has caused the current collapse, you must address the failures, and try to see where the current philosophy has failed. It's unfortunate that some of the "right wingers" who are taking advantage of the realization that something is wrong are using it to further their religious beliefs and need for power. Therein lies another, and even more bankrupt behavior. <which I shall not currently address, since I have finite time. IT is a much clearer type of behavior, and has been addressed.> Third, why don't you examine your reasons for claiming that arguing with JJ is a waste of time? Do you perhaps feel that you cannot succeed in debate, and must resort to emotional rhetoric? Do you perhaps wish to merely co-opt the debate by encouraging people to stop reading JJ? Do you wish to insult me? What DO you intend by your ad-hominem style? -- TEDDY BEARS ARE OPINIONATED! AFTER ALL, SOMEONE HAS TO BE RIGHT! "Then one said to the other, I think we must be gone, We'll leave a present for our friend before me move along..." (ihnp4/allegra)!alice!jj
josh@topaz.ARPA (J Storrs Hall) (05/29/85)
In article <639@whuxl.UUCP> orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes: >When Mr. Sykora suggests that it is some sort of crime for *anyone* to pay >taxes then I find this a ludicrous assumption even on the part of many >Libertarians who in general support the myth that somehow leaving the >government totally out of the economy will resort in the laissez faire >utopia. Well, here's another straw man by Tim Sevener. Nobody suggests that it is a crime to *pay* taxes--What is suggested is that it is morally reprehensible to *collect* them by force and by fraud. Most libertarians maintain that leaving the government out of the economy would result in a better-working, fairer economy; the "laissez faire utopia" and other ludicrous characterizations of it are artifacts of Mr. Sevener's imagination. > When others suggest that public education should be scrapped >despite strong evidence that it has been a key factor in the growth of our >economy in the past I also find this flying in the face of reality. Flying in the face of your unfounded opinions, you mean. I would believe that education per se has been useful--But gov't administration of same doubles the cost (which is still borne by the people, remember) and reduces the quality. > >As for examining my own assumptions I certainly do that. I flatly do not believe this statement. The fact that your assumptions differ from those of other socialists does not mean that you have examined them critically. > tim sevener whuxl!orb --JoSH