David the Savior is back and writes:
>Let's try one last time.
Please do. We appreciate your altruism.
>The suggestion was made that a socialist economy will
>more highly value transportation safety than a
>capitalist economy.
If you are trying to cite thread precedent, I applaud you.
"Economics and law" was my thread about space heaters. If you have a new
one about "Yugos," try starting it under that thread name (sorry,
process is important to me, as a would-be lawyer, you understand that).
Nonetheless, you write (and you write well):
>Every historical example I come up
>with to try and test the suggestion, you say is not an
>appropriate comparison. For example, you imply there is
>apparently something in the historical development of East
>Germany, as compared to West Germany, that would cause East
>Germany auto manufacturers not to value safety as much as
>their West German counterparts, even though the East Germans
>had a socialist economy and West Germany had a capitalist
>economy, but such fact has no relevance for the validity of
>the suggestion that socialist economies value safety more than
>capitalist economies. I am at a loss how to respond.
You are narrowing the issue. That is why you are "at as loss."
But I will take the bait. Show me what you have learned about "eastern
Germany" and why that section of that country would be a tad less able
to produce cars. (You can do it!)
>How do you propose to test the hypothesis? Is there nothing
>relevant from 75 years of historical experience that will satisfy you?
Sure. You are a kind of proof yourself.
Grin.
Ken.
--
When I look back on all the worries I remember
>the story of he old man who said on his
>deathbed that he had a lot of trouble
>in his life, most of which never happened.
-- Winston Churchill
