[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What kind of problem can be better solved by monopoly and violence than by competition and selection?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know this argument. I promote some 'thing' that in my view was solved on an idealistic a non-profit basis that went against the market, and then the political economics guy (well in this case replaced by the AC economics guy, aka you) put it into a 'hindsight' model and tells me it all lead to the betterment and higher efficiency of mankind, hence it was an economic progress. Results orientation for the win or the real deal? Who knows - and then we'd go back and forth for 24 hours in a grim version of the economic calculation debate.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
[/ QUOTE ]
It means I don't believe it when people have simple solutions for complex problems regarding millions of humans, and that my rhetoric radar flies through the roof when a theory for how society should be apparently has no flaws.
[/ QUOTE ]
Step One
Find some people.
Step Two
Arm them.
Step Three
Help them disarm everyone else.
Step Four
Give them enormous amounts of money.
Step Five
Give them your wish list.
Step Six
Wait for the solution!
Worst. Meeting. Ever!
http://www.lewrockwell.com/molyneux/molyneux31.html