From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Post-modern liberalism didn't spring full-blown into being like Athena from
the forehead of Zeus. It evolved rather over time from classical
liberalism
through several fairly-distinct phases.
You're right on this. But it might be more accurate to say that at any
given
-business
forces have won consistently. But in fact, it is a case of Brer Rabbit
hollering Please don't fling me in that briar patch!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Wage-Price Controls Under Nixon
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 21:58:42 EDT
I
From: Bryan Caplan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kevin Carson wrote:
I'd say just the opposite, that SS is an important component of state
capitalism; and like most regulations and welfare spending, it serves to
cartelize the economy.
By acting through the state to organize pension programs, the large
Post-modern liberalism didn't spring full-blown into being like Athena from
the forehead of Zeus. It evolved rather over time from classical liberalism
through several fairly-distinct phases.
In the earliest stages of progressivism people still by and large believed
in free markets and
I would agree that not every government infringement of liberty warrants the
label socialist, although on a larger level a rose by any other name still
has thorns. It's ironic, however, that Tom chose pension reform as an
example to illustrate the point that not all government infringement of
the rich!
Tom
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 June, 2003 12:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Wage-Price Controls Under Nixon
I would agree that not every government infringement of
liberty warrants the
label socialist
Thanks for the clarification Tom. I do agree that government money, as it
predates socialism, probably doesn't rightly fall under the category of
socialism. I wonder though if most folks would agree that social security is
socialism. Americans don't like to admit that they like socialism.
) and second pillars.
A full second pillar includes forced savings, which becomes the property
of the individual. And a third, IRA type optional pillar, which would
reduce the basic benefits in some 1:2 proportion.
Tom
Subject: Re: Wage-Price Controls Under Nixon
Thanks for the clarification Tom
Well, the average American is not so pro-freedom as, say, Walter Williams,
but considerably more so than the average Frenchman or German. So it's all
relative.
By the way, contrary to Kinsley's assertion, wage and price controls were
not merely a cynical re-election ploy. There was a real
Well, the average American is not so pro-freedom as, say, Walter Williams,
but considerably more so than the average Frenchman or German.
Really? How do you measure this?
The remarkable fact is that it is apparently perfectly legal for the government in the United States to control the price
]
cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Wage-Price Controls Under
Nixon
[EMAIL PROTECTED
11 matches
Mail list logo
