From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Libertarians live in Virtual Reality
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:39:30 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1992Aug20.162629.9678@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes:
> From article <1992Aug18.142212.3575@desire.wright.edu>, by demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man):
>> In article <1992Aug17.172013.10835@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes:
>> ...
>>> Be assured that the present government safeguards against those
>>> fraudulent and effectively criminal practices are woefully
>>> inadequate.  If you want to prevent them, some agencies of the
>>> government will have to be made much larger, and will have be be much
>>> more intrusive into private business, than they are today.
>> 
>> 	Bzzzt.  Exactly the wrong approach.  Government has failed, so the
>> solution is to make government bigger?
>> 
>> 	The "solution" is to let the victim recoup losses (through litigation
>> if need be).  Right now corporations are hiding behind government regulations.
> 
> That's no solution.  When an individual tries to sue a large
> corporation, the corporation throws its entire legal staff at the
> victim.  There is no way an individual can keep up with the
> expenditures that the corporation can afford.  

	The huge rise in personal injury/product liability lawsuits says
otherwise.

> And the corporation
> will spend far more than the case is worth in order to make the point
> that individual action won't work, so they can avoid future cases.

	Unlimited liability and deep pockets combined with the lawyer seeing $
signs has proven that individual action works far better than it should.

> Think of a bottle of suntan lotion that might be ineffective and
> falsely advertised.  That's not worth a lawsuit to the individual, but
> it is worth a lot of money to the company that makes the stuff.  In a
> case like that, I think the FDA approach is efficient.

	Cancer is not worth the attention of the individual?  For every
instance in which the FDA might take a decade or two to get around to it, there
are enough individuals affected to make a case.
	In addition, FDA stonewalling is keeping drugs like RU-486 off the
market because of political interference.
	And as long as there is the myth of government protection (FDA, OSHA,
AMA,...) people will cede authority/responsibility to the government.

>> 	The problem is that you fail to see that the problem is government.  Not
>> that government isn't big enough.
> 
> You haven't proved that the problem is government.  Remember, the
> Republicans have been systematically reducing the size of those parts
> of government that are chartered to prevent fraud.  That's a good way
> to make them ineffective.  In effect, you're saying that if they can't
> work when underfunded and otherwise hampered, they must be based on a
> fundamentally flawed concept.  I don't buy that.

	The Republicans did not effectively reduce any parts of government
(thought they wanted to).
	Trying to eleminate the bureaucracy is akin to approaching someone for
help in amputating their own leg.

	Proof that the problem isn't government?

	FDA
	OSHA
	EPA
	AMA
	Schools

	If you want specific examples:

	RU-486.  Aspertame.  Chicken processing plants.  Superfund.  Quota
laws.  Certification for teaching.  License/permit procedures.  Etc.

	Every time the government intervenes in public affairs it creates a
huge bureaucracy that does more harm than good.

	In the meantime, private organizations stay dedicated to their cause,
and not their continued feeding at the public trough.

	I'll take UL, Good Housekeeping, Consumers Union, etc. over the
FDA/EPA/alphabet soup any day.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: sci.econ,alt.individualism