I am new to this board, but have been reading about a week and I had to
respond to your clear thinking post.
Reading your response reminded me of the clarity of thought that I
experienced when reading Robert Ringer's "Restoring the American Dream" 10
years ago, or "Libertarianism in One Lesson" more recently.
The important thing for all of us to remember is that "UTOPIA IS *NOT* AN
OPTION! "
No such animal exists in human civililization, and probably never will.
But the overiding issue is the use of coercive force. The free market trys
to "sell" you an idea or an option for your life. Governments, on the other
hand, use force, corersion, and guns to force your choice.
Re: "stability" of free market economies...
Stability of the buggy whip industry may have been a goal of a few
manufactuers of buggy whips, but technogy and the free market has made this
particular brand of "stability" somewhat obsolete. And of course, technology
changes everything virtually overnight. Should we mandate today's equivalent
of the buggy whip to "assure stability?"
Your requesting that terms like "fair" and "perfect" be defined to expidite
genuine discussion is reasonable. If you work twice as hard, smart, or
effectively as me and gain a substantial economic advantage over me, should I
consider this "fair"?
Of course, most of us with libertarian/ capitalistic/ extropian oriented
value systems would say, "Absolutely!"
Those who define "fair" as systems that promote "equal levels of misery" as
we see in controlled economies would whine, "Not fair, Crocker has
accumulated more chips than me. Can't we pass a law to make him give some of
his chips to me?"
So anyway, I can't express the libertarian ideals and ideas with the cogency
of Harry Browne, or Robert Ringer, or even, possibly Lee Crocker, but I
wanted to tell you that I value and respect the clarity of thought you have
provided.
Warmly,
Rudi Hoffman
rudihoffma@aol.com