From: ausman@ocf.berkeley.edu (James Ausman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 5 Jan 1993 04:08:15 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: planecrash.berkeley.edu

In article <1993Jan04.075132.9679@microsoft.com> leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker) writes:
>>In article <1678600006@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
>>>
>>>1. In this world where the vast majority of people live in abject poverty,
>>>wealth beyond what one needs to take care of one's self and family is
>>>immoral.
>
>In this world where the education, health, and infrastructure to create
>economic prosperity are given only to a few, and where scientific
>progress and economic growth benefit all, _not_ producing as much
>wealth as one is capable of is immoral.
>
Do you honestly believe we live in a world with no limits?  How many 
people could The Earth sustain at the US standard of living?  Six
billion do you think?  Not a chance!  One of the central myths
of capitalism is that Growth Is Good.  This was almost certainly
true in the 18th and 19th century, but I think it is crazy today.
To a certain extent, economic growth is due to efficiency gains, 
technological gains, etc., which IMHO, are good (I am certainly no
Luddite - I differ from most Greens in advocating nuclear power, but 
let's leave that for another time...). but much "growth" occurs from
increased consumption of natural resources, especially fossil fuels.
Now, one of these days, fusion or some other cheap source of energy
will be developed and this critique will be all shot to hell, but it
hasn't happened yet, and probably won't for a very long time.

>Food, shelter, defense, and all of the other things to which leftists
>would "entitle" everyone do not fall from heaven; they are the products
>of work.  Providing them means encouraging work, and history has shown
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>that the best way to encorage work is to guarantee to each worker his
>or her exclusive right to the fruits of his/her labor.  That system is
>called Capitalism, and any other system is heartless and immoral.
>
Sigh.  Well I shouldn't try to argue with "heartless and immoral," but I 
will try. :`)
Wealth creation is only half of the equation of providing the minimum
level of wealth for human dignity.  Wealth distribution is the other
half.  History has shown that Capitalism is a very good way to produce
wealth, but it has also shown that it is a really crappy way of spreading
it around.  What tends to happen is that a small minority get all the 
power and keeps it.  Oh, a larger minority than in say Fascism, or Stalinism,
or any other form of totalitarian government, but still not enough for
my tastes.  I underlined encouraging work for a very good reason.  Do you
really believe that Capitalism allows each worker to keep the fruit of
his or her labor?  Give me a break!  At the hospital I work at, I do tests
that the hospital charges $50-100 for.  At least 30 a shift.  How much of
that do I get?  Not $2000 you can bet!  Sure, there is a great cost in 
keeping the place open, but the CEO, who doesn't work much harder than
me as far as I can tell, drives two Jaguars and owns three homes!  At 
least I should be glad I work in a "non-profit" hospital, eh?  Why don't
I start my own testing company?  Well, there are many reasons. One is that
I cannot legally do so (a libertarian should like that one).  But more
importantly, I could not assemble the capital to do so.  The wealth and
power all run one way, and it sure as heck ain't down...

Jim Ausman
-- 
	"You are not thinking.  You are merely being logical."
				-Niels Bohr to A. Einstein 
				(during their famous debates on QM)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens