Hi Craig
> [chris] >> the Guys that had been sitting in cafes in Paris discussing how they >> could >> create the perfect society of only they got the chance - they got the >> chance and they tried their ideas... >> I was referring to Washington and Jefferson. > As you guessed from my guillotine comment, I originally thought you were > referring to Robespierre. > The Americans in Paris were Ben Franklin (not Washington) & Jefferson. > Washington, a great general & political leader, was not known as a thinker > or writer. He was not involved in the creation of the Declaration of > Independence > or U. S. Constitution. Indeed it was Franklin I was thinking of. Thanks' for calling that one. Just for fairness sake, I don't think one should judge Robespierre to heavily, or any lone individual for that matter as the sole power behind the revolution escalating into the reign of terror. But anyway, that's beside the point =) > [chris] >> Mr Smith's economic ideas are praised by so-called liberals all over >> the world as the perfect ideas for a free market. > > [chris] >> I really don't think that you will find many that would say that the >> model proposed by Smith is a very good idea > > These 2 statements together imply that there are not many so-called > liberals > in the world. This seems dubious. There are many people who support > free markets. Ah, yes, there are, but what I meant is that you will find few who support the totally-free economy that Smith proposed today (at least outside the USA) and furthermore, the term "free market" is a very hard thing to define. Because since most people wouldn't support the full-fledged Smithian model, there are of course those who think that the market should be as free as possible. "as possible" being the key words. But: see below > [Craig, previously] >> The free market allocates profits in proportion that they are earned. >> The humanitarian use of those profits is not part of the free market. >> That is up to the profiteer. > > Through their economic activity in a free market, some people make a > profit, > some people break even & some lose. Those who lose are in need of > charity. > Charity is not dispensed by the free market itself, but must come from > those > who have made a profit. "Charity" you say? So, am I right to assert that you are in favour of a totally free market, and that you think that those people who can't make it in society should be dependant on the "goodness" of those who do make the cash? Because we know that that doesn't work. This is where the "redistribution state" enters. Whiteout strangling the "free market" it's mission it to balance the wealth so as to reduce the social disparity. (I think it's called that in English, couldn't find a better word right now) 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/
