[MD] Flying Spaghetti Monsters

[ian glendinning]

Hi Craig

(1) Yes. (Though "want" is subject to a good deal of cultural
conditioning and pragmatic limitations, and actions may not literally
reflect wants, but my objection is second order here. So still yes.)

(2) No, not necessarily. It certainly affects their choices (actions)
and affects which costs are borne where. Any net increase in cost is
not necessarily bad either, if there is some net increase in value
too. That may be "bad' for some individual members, better for other
individuals. (We can't avoid individual vs social debates here) The
choice of the word "interference" is negative to start with, but
incentives and limits can (do) have positive value.

(3) Yes. Stultification is a negative word, so yes that's not good, but see (2)

(4) Yes. Pure redundancy would indeed be simple wasteage, so not good.
But gimme an example. Clearly by choice (democratic elections for
example) people do delegate their choices upwards, for reasons of both
efficiency and greater goods. There are natural monopolies and the
like.

(5) No. Bad public interference is not good, but not all public
regulation of (otherwise) free markets is necessarily bad.

Even in Rand's utopia, the members freely delegate some of their
choices to certain members, and support their specialist authority on
certain subjects. Authority can command respect.

By free choice, people choose to have controls and incentives on
otherwise "free" markets. It's pragmatic common sense. As I think I
mentioned already, the only weak link is in choosing the form of
governance to which you delegate such (contingent) authority. Some
form of democratic freedom seems to be the clear "western' choice, but
there are many possible flavours for setting up such institutions, and
remembering that they are just that ... instituted as servants of the
(free) people.

I'd really welcome a discussion on the latter point, free of partisan
dogmas, but most people here already seem pretty polarised on this.

Regards
Ian




On 9/27/06, craigerb at comcast.net <craigerb at comcast.net> wrote:
> Ian,
> 1) In a free economy, the voluntary actions of its members express what they want.
> 2) Public interference (i.e., interference with the voluntary actions of the members) either stultifies what the members want or duplicates what they would want, but at a greater cost.
> 3) That which stultifies the wants of the members is not good.
> 4) That which duplicates the wants of the members but at a greater cost is not good.
> 5) :. Public interference is not good.
> There should be something here which you can either agree with or refute.
> Craig
> 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/
>