From: doctor1@cbnewse.cb.att.com (patrick.b.hailey)
Subject: Re: FW: news release: abolish IRS
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 09:22:21 GMT

Stuart Krone is doing a better job than I could defending the LP (I'm new
to the LP, but learning), though he forgot to use the phrases "personal
responsability" and "compassion" ;-)

The U.S. is still the most charitable nation on earth, but less so than it
once was.  When government stops "fixing" all these troubles for us (yeah,
right) and people realize that it really *is* up to them, basic decency and
charity will rise again.

Anyway, my $.02:
>Allowing employers to pay $1.00/hr doesn't make it the worker's choice;
>it makes it the employers choice, and how are you going to deal with all of
>the people who get screwed over by stingy employers?  Bagging the min wage
>will only lead to exploitation, and greater need for gov't intervention.
I don't work for minimum wage.  You probably don't either.  Most of the
country doesn't.  In a LOT of places, McDonalds and gas stations have to
pay more than the minimum wage to even get, let alone keep, help.  The
market simply won't allow it.  They'd all *like* to pay that low, or lower,
but they *can't*.  Employer's choice?  I think not.

But they'd also like to hire someone to wash the windows for less, rather
than having the clerks do it.  This could give some poor kid his/her first
experience at the responsability of having to be someplace at a certain
time and produce something.  If he does well, he may move up to clerk.
But no, the government says you have to pay him X, file X inches of
paperwork, pay X in taxes, and generally makes it cheaper and easier to use
your higher payed help to do jobs that require less responsability than you
pay them for.

>>The only justification for private discrimination in employment, housing
>>and service comes from men like David Duke, et. al., who want to keep the
>>"bad elements" (i.e. Blacks, Jews, Asians, etc.) out of mainstream society.
>>Remember all white lunch counters, drinking fountains, bathrooms?  Do you
>>want those back?  Are you prepared to answer this question?
>Do you really believe that white-only drinking fountains would suddenly
>spring-up all over the country?
>If "Mom and Pop Country Store" wants to serve people of race X only, for
>example, why should they not be allowed to?  They own the store, it is a
>private enterprise.  Now I'm guessing that such businesses would not be
>very successful.  For one, they are excluding customers and thus possible
>profits; and two, they probably could not withstand the incredible public
>pressure that would result from their racism.
Evidence of racism in our society is increasing.  Lots of decent folks who
supported the minority/women's rights movements look around and see all
sorts of instances (true or false, it's what it *looks* like) where
minorities/women are "more equal".  My own SO (a pilot, no meek houswife
this) finds a lot of Affirmative Action policies immoral and revolting.  At
the same time, the [some other race than white and some other sex than
male] "underclass" is growing.  We have not solved the problem of xxxx-ism,
we're moving backwards.

Remove the hatred (or at least discomfort) associated with these things,
and people will again be sickened by racist ideas.  I know myself, when I
hear the word "racist" applied to most anything these days, I'm skeptical.
Too often that which I chalk up to my own ineptitude or the fact that life
isn't fair is called racism/sexism when it happens to others, and they
demand a remedy - and I'm tired of paying for those remedies.  But put up a
sign saying "whites only", show me real live statistics/evidence of hireing
bias, and so on, and I'll spend my own money trying to convince the world
to boycot that business.

And don't forget, no (or few) businesses are an island.  IBM or AT&T could
NEVER survive if they went "whites only", I'm sure you'll agree.  Well, do
you suppose they could survive if they dealt with suppliers who were?  Look
at all the pressure to stop doing business with S. Africa.  A lot of
companies stopped or at least cut back.  Again, people will take
responsability for finding these things out and publishing them - once they
get past the idea that the government is doing it for them.  ("I gave at
the office - and gave, and gave, and gave...")

Not that I truly think that NO equal rights laws should be on the books.  I
just think the LP is closer to the right thinking than not.  I *do* believe
that liberty is more important than security and equality - it gives all of
us a lot of tools to fight our own fights.

 Thanks awfully,
           Patrick

Xref: sparky alt.society.civil-liberty:3307 misc.legal:9030 talk.politics.drugs:2783