Re:The Two Flaws Of Libertarian Economics
by cchooper on Thursday January 08, 2009 @07:44PM
(#425955)
I'm not grinding any axe. mseebach said that he didn't see how property rights were a form of coercion. You have explained precisely why they are. You are agreeing with me against him. I am not right in a 'strict sense', but in an absolutely correct sense. What could be a better example of coercion than enforcing a law?
Re:The Two Flaws Of Libertarian Economics
by cturner on Thursday January 08, 2009 @08:14PM
(#425985)
> What could be a better example of coercion than enforcing a law?
Well - gravity.
I mistook your motive. I've read the thread a few more times and see you've been quite specific in your responses.
Re:The Two Flaws Of Libertarian Economics
by cchooper on Thursday January 08, 2009 @08:35PM
(#426006)
"Coerce" is defined in the OED as "persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats", so I don't think gravity really falls under that definition, except perhaps metaphorically.
Since all people need to be cared for until a certain age, all people who survive past the first few days of their lives are born into coercion under a strict meaning of the word. Some would escape by living as hermits in desert land or remote islands that nobody cared to enforce law on. Hell - if you're going to be a pedant why restrict it to human coercion? The weather itself is a form of coercian. As are the laws of physics themselves.
Although in a strict sense you're right, I think you're wasting time. However, I have a morbid curiosity for some things and would be genuinely interested to learn what axe you're grinding.