3 ms·

Really we should allow parents to sell their children into slavery, that would be a means of maximizing short-term return on investment for parents who can't af

Really we should allow parents to sell their children into slavery, that would be a means of maximizing short-term return on investment for parents who can't afford to provide food, education and clothing to their children. Remember, the free market is the ultimate selector for maximum efficiency, and to quote Milton Friedman, 'corruption is government interference into market efficiencies in the form of regulation'. Friedman got a Nobel (*swedish bank) Prize in Economics, so he must be right. Now, I wonder if I have to add the /sarcasm tag or not... source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yhAOs94n8k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yhAOs94n8k

kelseyfrog 4y ago
Economists working from first principles can reach horrendous conclusions[1]. 1. https://mises.org/library/children-and-rights https://mises.org/library/children-and-rights
- Dracophoenix 4y ago
  After reading the article, I don't see what's horrendous about it. Yes, having children has a market effect and is even a market unto itself. There's rarely any controversy to think in terms of the financial costs and legal obligations (or lack thereof) when discussing abortions, adoptions, disinheritance, estrangement, etc. All of these actions are connected by a single thread: Generally speaking, no person is owed anything for merely existing.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    It could be a fun exercise to consider why someone might find it horrendous. You know, just to put yourself in someone else's shoes for a bit.
    - Dracophoenix 4y ago
      Instead of my supposing or assuming, I'd rather you speak for your own position. Pretending to be a different person may be a fun exercise, but it doesn't get me any closer to understanding that person's motives or thoughts as they are.
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        The point behind the exercise is specifically to avoid an oppositional dialogue. It is a way to flex the muscles of empathy and authentically arguing an opposing position is one way to get there. Supposing and assuming is 100% the point. It's a shortcut to the frontiers of one's knowledge.

kelseyfrog 4y ago

Economists working from first principles can reach horrendous conclusions[1]. 1. https://mises.org/library/children-and-rights https://mises.org/library/children-and-rights

Dracophoenix 4y ago
After reading the article, I don't see what's horrendous about it. Yes, having children has a market effect and is even a market unto itself. There's rarely any controversy to think in terms of the financial costs and legal obligations (or lack thereof) when discussing abortions, adoptions, disinheritance, estrangement, etc. All of these actions are connected by a single thread: Generally speaking, no person is owed anything for merely existing.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  It could be a fun exercise to consider why someone might find it horrendous. You know, just to put yourself in someone else's shoes for a bit.
  - Dracophoenix 4y ago
    Instead of my supposing or assuming, I'd rather you speak for your own position. Pretending to be a different person may be a fun exercise, but it doesn't get me any closer to understanding that person's motives or thoughts as they are.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      The point behind the exercise is specifically to avoid an oppositional dialogue. It is a way to flex the muscles of empathy and authentically arguing an opposing position is one way to get there. Supposing and assuming is 100% the point. It's a shortcut to the frontiers of one's knowledge.