Harry Pollard wrote: > Have I said I approved of privatizing railways? If someone else wants to do > that so be it. I am on record as saying privatizing monopolies is dumb.
But who says the railways have to remain a monopoly ? Ending the monopoly is part of the privatization process. The WEF guys (and gals) want to privatize the railways (and just about any public service), and you are on record as swallowing the WEF's sales pitch of "improving the state of the world". Just another contradiction from you. > The problem is that there is a shortage of jobs, which cannot be if you > agree with the Classical assumption that "people's desires are unlimited". Independent of the latter assumption, there is no shortage of jobs, just a shortage of money. If there is money for X jobs, then the X jobs can be created, no matter what content. (This doesn't mean that they actually are created, but that's another topic.) > So, attention should be focused on why people are unemployed, something > that socialists rarely do. They concentrate on manufacturing jobs for > people who don't want them. It's silly, but that's the way it is. Have sweatshop jobs been created by socialists ? Do people *want* sweatshop jobs ? > But, socialist lemmings blindly follow their leaders, so what can be done? The last thing that I can be called is a "socialist lemming"... > [ on WEF no-go areas: ] > >You don't understand. The no-go areas apply to well-behaved citizens too, > >not just to evil terrorists. The reason is that the WEF guys don't want > >to hear the complaints from ordinary people who understand what the WEF is > How do you tell terrorists from "well-behaved citizens"? The terrorist will > be a "well-behaved citizen" right up to the point when he throws the bomb. You still don't understand. Of course any bombs etc. have been filtered out long before (at road/rail blocks many miles before Davos which only is accessible from two valleys). Nonetheless, the "filtered" citizens were NOT allowed to come into "debating proximity" to the WEF delegates. > Seems to me the Swiss were looking to maximize their profits by hosting the > WEF. In their greedy quest for profit they accepted all the costs of no-go > areas. Of course, the hotels, banks, shops, all maximize their profits - Hey, _you_ want globalization and Free Trade, don't you? If Klaus Schwab decides that the cosy Davos atmosphere is best for his WEF, then he'll shop there and not in NYC or Kananaskis. Your racist stereotypes about those "greedy Swiss" are really irrelevant. > If the members of the WEF had to exist in a free market they wouldn't be > able to "(maximize) the profits of the few at the expense of the vast > majority" . Then why do they want the "free" market ??? Because it _increases_ their profits... Chris _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
