Re: [OT] Civil Rights End In Canada

In article <g1moj11jg36c57lf307eam6v6fcn0gmf41@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:44:33 -0400, ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> chose to
> bless us with the following wisdom:
> >In article <2kblj1llv0vm059v0pnrpluj7btk66ebo3@xxxxxxx>,
> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 13:38:49 GMT, TravelinMan <Nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >> >Regardless, my comment applies equally well to that topic.
> >>
> >> The best part about economics is that its totally divorced from such
> >> things. The market works the same for evil as well as good.
> >
> >I'm not a fan of the word 'evil', but whatever.
> The point is that supply and demand curves don't give a rip about your
> morals. They work independently of all that.
> >
> >You've clearly got an exceedingly narrow view of this subject. Specific
> >market economies result in certain outcomes, simply because of the way
> >they're structured. These outcomes differ between differently
> >constructed market economies, and certainly between market economies and
> >other sorts of economies. It is possible to look at these outcomes and
> >judge them against separate standards of good and bad, fair and unfair.
> In a market economy the outcomes are decided by the individuals
> participating in ther market. Some people decide not to participate or
> they participate poorly. Such is life.
> Its clear from your posts that you want to guarantee outcomes. This is
> a bad idea. This is 'from each according to his abilities and to each
> according to his needs' under another name.
> So long as the market gives everyone an opportunity its as fair as it
> can possibly be made.
> >
> >The economy of the United States, for instance, allows many costs to be
> >externalized. Costs related to pollution, for instance. This has the
> >effect of resulting in more pollution. That's bad.
> We've done as much as can possibly be done by enacting pollution laws.
> In the case of many polluting industries their are positive
> externalities that offset the negative ones.
> And I've already explained why externalites aren't assigned costs. It
> wouldn't be done in a rational way. It would be done by pure political
> power. We would have all kind of costs shoved onto unpopular
> industries and needed or popular ones would get away with little or
> none assigned to them.
> And neither you nor Tim Smith ever answered my question about this -
> What are you going to do for the guy who has to drive 30 miles each
> way to his $10/hour job when you assign all the externalities to
> gasoline and raise the price to $8.00/gallon? He won't be able to
> afford the gas or a new more fuel efficinet car. You've put him and
> millions of others like him out of work.

Liberals don't care about the consequences of their policies, just
results in terms of agenda.