From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: [misc.activism.progressive] Clinton Office Requests Comments
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Distribution: na 
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:51:42 GMT

In <90201@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:

>In <bob1.726769032@cos> bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:

>>>From about 1750 to the early 1900s, the U.S. had an economic boom unprecedented
>>>in human history.  There was no charity beyond private charity, little 

>>And there were all those nice sweat shops, gouging landlords, child labor,
>>hospitals that were more like places to go and die. All the wonders of
>>enlightened self-interest. Of course, there was also a civil war where
>>the enlightened north objected to slavery in the south, while practising
>>economic slavery in the north. Ah yes, the good old days.

>I wonder, are you obtuese, or merely stupid.

No, just aware of some of the *real* history of those days.

>Sweat shops.  Face it back then all work was tough.
>this is because you had to work damn hard in order to produce enough to
>eat.  This is caused by a lack of technology, not a lack of benevolent
>government.

Not only technology, but management attitudes as well. There were the
wealthy few (who made damn sure they stayed wealthy) and then there
was the rest of the population.

>Gouging landlords.
>Evidence please.  Or were you just spitting bile, and forgot when to stop.

Oh come on, take a look at any current landlord/tenant contract form. The
standard one here in Maryland would be laughed out of court in any other
country. One major reason why we now own our own home. I assume that we
have advanced since *the good old days*, so I can just picture what they
were like then.

>Child labor.
>Lack of productivity demanded that every household member had to work in
>order to eat.  As productivity increased, families were able to afford
>to send junior to school.

Gee, so they somehow changed the normal market equation where food sold
at what the market will bear. Or did they perhaps deliberately pay the
workers so little that children had to work.


>Bad hospitals.
>Given the medical technology of the time, that was about all they could
>do.  For god's sake man, during this time they hadn't even figured out
>what germs were yet.

Even if the technology was poor it was little reason to treat people
the way they were.

>Economic slavery.
>Requiring that men work in order to be fed.  A condition that can be relieved
>through the application of a sufficiently benevolent government.
>-- 
Now you are being obtuse. When the mill owner also owns the town, the
houses, and the stores, he sees to it that the workers never get ahead
else they might move on to better things. But then, if you pine for
those good old days, see if you can find a time machine and off you
go. I imagine that I am not alone in wanting no part of them.

REB

>Mob rule doesn't become any prettier, just because the mob start to call itself
>a government.
>It ain't charity if you are using someone else's money.
>Mark.Wilson@AtlantaGA.NCR.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.libertarian:3289 comp.org.eff.talk:8521 soc.culture.usa:9654 alt.activism:20266