trc@houti.UUCP (T.CRAVER) (08/23/83)
Response to stan the leprechaun hacker: Hacker: If you will carefully read what I wrote, I think you will find that I did not state that the few rational people would be in *control*. In fact, the concept of "being in control" is radically opposed to the concept of laissez-faire capitalism. I resent your attempt to make me out to be promoting fascism, when I have clearly presented views that directly oppose that political system. The only thing that those individuals would control would be their own property. In fact, what I said, for those who only saw Mr. Hacker's note, was that so long as the majority did not *interfere* with the rational laissez-faire capitalists, laissez-faire capitalism would *work*. I did not claim that it would work as well, or that it would benefit everyone, nor that those who are involved in it would naturally rise to power over others, etc. As to the abuses you list, I agree that some are abuses - but that they are ones that can only arise *when laissez-faire capitalism has been dropped*. What good would lobbyists do, if the government cannot interfere with the market? How would a legally enforced monopoly be obtained? - that is one of the clearest indicators of government interference. If there were no govt safety regulations, then only that safety equipment that people wanted in their cars would be put in them. In a laissez-faire system, the government would not "carry" defense contractors - which lax attitude I believe leads, in part, to the tremendous cost over-runs. Tom Craver houti!trc