At 10:02 AM 8 October 2002 -0700, Ma Be wrote: >... However, please note that the main issue here is the discussion of >the role govs need to or play in regards to rules and regulations! > >If govs stipulate rules and regulations for the economy to follow and >procedures for certification of instruments, it's within their mandate and >their job to make sure these are followed by ALL, *no >exceptions*! Evidently they have the respite of the law if they >don't. And this is precisely the case here with these 'metric martyr' >guys. But perhaps you would want to discuss the very principle of >"punishment" when it comes to enforcing such regulations. In that case, >then, fine, perhaps it would be an interesting topic for discussion, and >perhaps we may end up converging in our opinions on this. > >... etc.
You also wrote "Govs have a mandate to secure law and order." in another email. And this is why you and I will never agree on these issues Marcus: You see a far, far larger legitimate role for government than I do. I do NOT agree that the government has ANY role beyond the protection of life, liberty and property. Ensuring non-fraudulent measures in commerce certainly is directly related to protecting property. However, mandating WHICH non-fraudulent measures (e.g., kg or lb) is NOT within the government's purview. I am not saying that is how even the US government currently operates, but that is how I think the US constitution says it should operate, and how I think it should operate. So, we will have to continue to agree to disagree here. But, I'm sure you knew that already. Jim
