From: jfh@beach.cis.ufl.edu (James F. Hranicky)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.bush,sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Tolls on the federal highways!
Date: 19 Dec 92 23:47:16 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.clinton
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.

In article <Bz8nxs.9H8@dscomsa.desy.de> Hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.135511.21767@njitgw.njit.edu>, aaron@funcity.njit.edu
>(Aaron Watters) writes:

>to settle for anything so megre. The new-right libertarians are unable to come
>to terms with the consequences of technology. Faced with a manufacturing sector
>that has the capacity to eliminate the need for the vast majority of assembly
>jobs they fix upon a social order founded in the protestant work ethic.

God forbid people have to work. Hey, why not just have everyone sit around
on their asses and have the governemnt give them everything. As much as
you may hate the fact that someone has to work to live, it doesn't change
this fact. If you don't work and receive goods and services, it merely
means someone else must work for you. I know this would mean personal
responsibility, so forget it, right?

>The major crisis in world markets is not lack of workers, it's lack of
>resources, lack of consumers and gross mismanagement. Only the new-right
>libertarian does not see disasters like Somalia as crises, they see them as the
>natural and healthy effects of market forces.

Where did you get this bunk from? The major crisis in the world markets
in the Leviathan governments sucking resources (taxes) and creativity
(regulations) from the market. The major crisis for humanity it the bleed-
ing heart left who demand that everyone gets something for nothing.

What kind of crap is this about Somalia. How many healthy market forces 
are going on in this state of anarchy?

>The moral and philopsophical bankrupcy of new-right libertarians is seen by
>their need to hide behind the name of a different, respectable set of values.
>Socialist Libertarians such as myself uphold the right of the individual to both
>political *and* ecconomic liberty, one without the other is worthless. What is
>the use of freedom of speech to someone starving to death, or to someone who has
>to surrender it to get a job?

A right on one's part implies an obligation on anothers. If I have a
"right" to food, shelter, clothing, whatever, it means someone has an 
obligation to give it to me. This is Freedom? Socialist Libertarian is an
oxymoron. The countries with market econmies have the most food available,
and government interference with this merely reduces the food supply.
The more the market is allowed to be free, the fewer people will starve.
(Oh God, they might have to work for it! NO!!!)


>The true motives of the new right in adopting the fig leaf title of
>"libertarian" is apparent from their policies. At every point they seek to
>abdicate the role of government in all socialy valuable areas to a mythical
>entity called the "free" market. Like free quarks and free lunches the free
>market may exist, however no evidence of it's existence has yet been
>discovered.
>
>--
>
>Phill Hallam-Baker

Get out. I personally seek to establish a free market because it is 
the best way to increase productivity. All the bleeding-heart left should
take note that the high standard of living, abundant food supply, and the
longer span of life all coincide with the rise of capitalism, and attempts
to revert to other systems will mean great harm being done to everyone,
especially the poor. The work ethic mentality would mean that everyone
would try to produce as much as possible, meaning there would be more for
everyone. Wouldn't want to have this, would you?

Jim Hranicky (jfh@reef.cis.ufl.edu)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh