tsoon wrote:
>I should lay my cards on the table. I'm more of a Milton Friedmanite than a
>David Friedmanite. If we could start from scratch I would be a libertarian
>anarchist. However, while I find D. Friedman's utilitarian arguments for
>libertarian anarchism convincing, I also heed Popper's warnings that we
>minimise avoidable suffering and slowly 'test the waters' with gradualistic
>reform.
David Friedman totally agrees w/ you. ;) I quote: "All things that governments do can be divided into two categories--those we could do away with today and those we hope to be able to do away with tomorrow. Most of the things our goverment does are in the first category."
>Given that the State has already crowded out most voluntary
>institutions, simply abolishing it won't bring these institutions back
>overnight. It is also unjust to talk about abolishing a welfare safety net
>when as a result of regulation and taxation there are less jobs than there
>could be in the economy. The poor were not the ones who lobbied for the
>growth of the present regulatory state.
*I* wouldn't advocate just shutting down the gov't tomorrow, and I'm pretty sure Friedman wouldn't either. Education, alternative "skeleton" institutions, a strong voter majority who wants the smallest possible government... These are the stepping stones he advocates to anarcho-capitalism. I agree.
-Dan
-GIVE ME IMMORTALITY OR GIVE ME DEATH-