Reply #71: Your arguments on several fronts fall flat...

[Solon]

Some of my objections are practical, and others more moral. To give you "Segregationist" argument a try at both. I agree in large part with it, for individuals, but that is a far cry from, let's say a bunch of contractors building a neighborhood in a area, with city maintained roads and streets, putting up a sign saying "Whites only". People have every right to associate with others of their "type" all they want, just don't expect a dime or public service to help you with so much as trash pickup or police protection in such a neighborhood. Unless you are an advocate of totally private roads and services, as some Libertarians are, then that is idiocy of the highest level.

On the labor and "free" market front(note the quotes). There has YET to be an example of an unhindered free market in the world that has been successful. As far as I can tell, most major industries in the world are subsidized by governments worldwide, why shouldn't the people through government "interefere" with what it bought and paid for to begin with? (If you have difficulty, think airlines, telephone, Internet, and of course electricity, namely rural electrification).

Labor laws are an example of this, why shouldn't there be any safety or labor laws to protect consumers and laborers? You bring up the "commons" which is anti-libertarian position if I ever saw one. This is one of the few areas we agree with each other on. I also support the commons of the world, the waterways, air, and land. So I suppose you oppose the water privatization schemes of South America and some U.S. towns?

Also, you contradicted yourself on the labor union part, how, pray tell, are they supposed to function without the power of collective bargaining?

Lastly, your remarks in the third paragraph are insulting to most people of this nation. Not all crises and problems are caused by the person who needs help to get out of that problem. Illness, accidents, and other circumstances can change someone overnight from a "productive citizen" to a what many would call a "leech". I assume that what you mean by community help are private charities. If that's the case, how will those charities, even with the most generous contributions, help the 45 million people without health insurance, that we know about, get medical care when needed, including many children?

Just like all problems cannot be solved by private means, not all can be solved by government means either. We are not talking about the government building unnecessary widgets to take care of a widget shortage. We are talking about national policies on the NEEDS of the people, food, shelter, medical care, and education are all considered needs of a modern society, and if that society cannot provide many, or even most of its citizens with those needs, that society will fail. It is really that simple. And many consider such policies "Socialist", I consider them common sense.