A Question I got via PM - Page 5

Copernicus · #41 09-01-2007, 07:07 PM

"I big corporations only have the power they do (and only get big) because of the influence of federal government."

hogwash

tomdemaine · #42 09-01-2007, 09:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Or the companies who own the roads will be worried about their legal liability so will require your car have a certain low level of pollution output before you can drive on their roads. There are a million and one solutions.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can only think of solutions that involve enforcement of extremely expansive concepts of vicarious liability, then you're really not proposing anything less unjust than government regulation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it is because it's voluntary. Also that isn't the only possible solution it's one of many. Back to the status quo is the worst case scenario.

slickpoppa · #43 09-01-2007, 09:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Or the companies who own the roads will be worried about their legal liability so will require your car have a certain low level of pollution output before you can drive on their roads. There are a million and one solutions.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can only think of solutions that involve enforcement of extremely expansive concepts of vicarious liability, then you're really not proposing anything less unjust than government regulation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it is because it's voluntary. Also that isn't the only possible solution it's one of many. Back to the status quo is the worst case scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

Being dragged into court and forced to pay money for the actions of others is voluntary?

Misfire · #44 09-01-2007, 10:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It buys hybrid and natural gas cars at a much higher rate than the private sector

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd buy one too if I had unlimited access to other people's money.

[ QUOTE ]
Third, everything that Borodog likes to claim about how ownership of resources solves the problem can be applied to government as owner. Essentially, the government owns resources like the atmosphere, rivers, etc. And unlike a private landowner, the government's actual goal is protection of the resource.

[/ QUOTE ]

Goals do not necessarily lead to results, and often results are obtained through unrelated goals. More products are provided affordably to the poor through the pursuit of "greed" than through altruism.

Nielsio · #45 09-01-2007, 10:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It buys hybrid and natural gas cars at a much higher rate than the private sector

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd buy one too if I had unlimited access to other people's money.

[/ QUOTE ]

DING DING DING

nietzreznor · #46 09-01-2007, 10:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"I big corporations only have the power they do (and only get big) because of the influence of federal government."

[ QUOTE ]
hogwash

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I'm convinced!

Copernicus · #47 09-01-2007, 10:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"I big corporations only have the power they do (and only get big) because of the influence of federal government."

[ QUOTE ]
hogwash

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I'm convinced!

[/ QUOTE ]

As much as I was convinced by an asinine assertion that has been the subject of a dozen or so threads and numerous counterexamples shown.

nietzreznor · #48 09-02-2007, 12:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
As much as I was convinced by an asinine assertion that has been the subject of a dozen or so threads and numerous counterexamples shown.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that you disagree with me on this point--fair enough. I just don't understand why you'd bother finding this one (admittedly unsupported in my post) statement and declaring it 'hogwash' without providing any reasoning, since the comment wasn't a response to anything you said and was clearly part of a larger post intended for someone who shared certain assumptions that you obviously don't.

Phil153 · #49 09-02-2007, 01:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
big corporations only have the power they do (and only get big) because of the influence of federal government.

[/ QUOTE ]
So it is your unequivocal claim that big corporations (or an analogue to corporation) would not exist under AC? Do you want to share with us how you know that?

One would think that the economies and necessities of scale involved in things like oil production, refining and retailing; defense organizations; insurance, certain software systems, microprocessor manufacturing, aerospace manufacturing, and so forth would result in some very large corporations. Especially when combined with people's natural inclination to become as powerful as possible and to horde as much as possible.

Copernicus · #50 09-02-2007, 01:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As much as I was convinced by an asinine assertion that has been the subject of a dozen or so threads and numerous counterexamples shown.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that you disagree with me on this point--fair enough. I just don't understand why you'd bother finding this one (admittedly unsupported in my post) statement and declaring it 'hogwash' without providing any reasoning, since the comment wasn't a response to anything you said and was clearly part of a larger post intended for someone who shared certain assumptions that you obviously don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt realize your post, which depended on your incorrect proposition, was intended only for those with the same incorrect belief. It is not a matter of opinion, it has been demonstrated in numerous threads that companies can and have grown without (and sometimes in spite of) government "interference", unless you agree with the equally untenable premise that the corporate form in and of itself is the problem. If you do, go live with the Amish, because thats about where you'd be without the corporate form.