[Platt] The absence of your denial speaks volumes about your socialist leanings.
[Arlo] Boring, insipid talk-radio rhetoric. What do you want me to deny? I am aiming for precision. [Platt] To humor you I'll play along with your idiotic questions. [Arlo] They are only "idiotic" because you can't answer them directly and honestly without betraying the obvious ridiculous foundations you build you assertions on. Which is why you don't answer them. As evidenced below. [To Arlo's question] Are the "poor" better or worse off because of public libraries? Would the"poor" be better off if we shut down all the public libraries and converted them to Barnes and Nobles? [Platt] Without individuals choosing to write books and publishers choosing to print them, there would be no libraries, public or otherwise. [Arlo] Typical. No answer at all. I repeat, are the poor better or worse of because of public libraries? Would the poor be better off if we replaced public libraries with a "free market" alternative? How so? [Arlo's question] Let's go back to the fabled pre-socialist era of the early 20th century. Give me some measures you would use to show me how the poor" were better off then? Better income? Better health care? Better education? Contrast the workers in the Pullman camps to the factory workers at GM today. Tell me in what ways the Pullman laborers were "better off"? [Platt] Without individuals choosing to build profit-making businesses and drug companies choosing to invent new medicines, there would be no improvements in income or health care. [Arlo] No answer. Were workers better off then? By what measures? [Platt] (Arguably, people were better educated in the early 20th century.) [Arlo] By what measures? [Arlo had asked] Since we favor the "free market", do you think people would be better off with a privatized police force than a socialized one? Why? Why is a socialized police force better than a private one? [Platt] Without individuals choosing to become policemen, there would be no police force, public or private. [Arlo] Just more evasion. Go figure. Can you answer the question? [Platt] The more individuals are free to choose, the more dynamic and wealthy the society becomes, as Pirsig suggests and America demonstrates. [Arlo] So public libraries, socialized police and public roadways are bad? Contrast the "pre-socialist" era of America with today. Give me some facts to back up your claims that people were better off. What America demonstrates, as does Europe, is that finding a good balance between freedom and order is what is best. That finding a good balance between "collectivization" and "free marketry" is what is best. [Platt] One of the ills of SOM is the bias towards thinking about groups and systems while ignoring the individuals in it. That bias spills over into academe and politics, helping to account for the appeal of socialism and Arlo's propensity. [Arlo] Platt forgets that the other bias in SOM is bias towards thinking about individuals while ignoring the value of collectivization. Once again you've proven that you can only think it ridiculous, nonsensical absolutist terms, as your ongoing moronic attempts to paint me as the enemy of the individual, only demonstrates. As I've stressed from day way, you are the only one here trapped in this ridiculous nonsense of "individual v. collective". If you ever think you can actually answer any of my questions above, feel free to do so. In the meantime, since all you continue to offer is moronic talk-radio bullshit, there is hardly any point, is there? Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
