From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lee@piclab.com)
Date: Mon Jan 14 2002 - 14:46:37 MST
> You seem to be making an empirical claim that starvation is not likely. If
> the null hypothesis is that some people do in fact starve how many deaths
> should constitute refutation of your claim? Perhaps I am soft, or soft in
> the head, but I would prefer to see a de jure solution rather than a de
> facto bet that starvation will not occur. (At minimum, this is consistent
> with the trickle down model with some safeguard built in in case the trickle
> down dries up).
"De jure solution" is an oxymoron. It's quite clear that every attempt
to simply outlaw poverty has been and will continue to be an abject
failure. Supply and demand, however, is a law of nature like evolution
or gravity, and can be depended upon. Desire for a "safety net" is noble
emotional response, but it doesn't feed people. Actual food feeds people,
and actual food is created by people who have a profit motive to do so.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:34 MST