3 ms·

Clearly people, in aggregate, need to have some choices made for them. It's not feasible for everyone to be knowledgable enough to know what constitutes accept

Clearly people, in aggregate, need to have some choices made for them. It's not feasible for everyone to be knowledgable enough to know what constitutes acceptable electrical wiring in a home. In such a case isn't it best to have an agency make this choice for us? That is, an agency to say this is the worst wiring job that is acceptable? I'm glad for this. I'm not talking about the article above. I'm wondering how extreme your position is in regard to your statement "If you think that people who claim that human beings need to have their choices made for them, and their freedom limited, are on your side, you are deadly wrong."

jonhohle 15y ago
I think it's reasonable that all people (or their guardians) know exactly what they are putting in their bodies. We have an entire infrastructure of schools to educate people regarding healthy and unhealthy choices - if people choose something else who are you or I to say they shouldn't consume it? I would argue electrical wiring or other infrastructure is no different. If it poses no threat to my neighbors' property or infringe on their rights in any way, why shouldn't I be free to proceed? I'm not saying that I'm not glad that there are standards I can expect a contractor to meet - I just don't think they should be a requirement. In the computing world we have POSIX - it's great if an OS implements it, but a very popular one which has succeeded in the market is not beholden to the standard (though at one time implemented it). Unfortunately, this is why I'm also against universal health care. There is a huge conflict of interest. People who make stupid dietary decisions are going to use the majority of health care resources available. It is unlikely that someone making smart, healthy choices will be able to get the same benefit. While I think a basic level of care would benefit all people, I am unwilling to act as an enabler for people who have no interest in looking out for their own best interest. There needs to be an underlying expectation that people are responsible for their own choices and actions. People need to be more active in their decision making, not have choices taken away from them.
javert 15y ago
Clearly people, in aggregate, need to have some choices made for them. No, I don't think so at all. And it's critical for people who oppose the "control state" (for lack of a better term) to stand their ground on this point. Otherwise, they are throwing away the fundamental principle, which is their only intellectual ammunition. -- There are lots of trivial applications of this (like electrical wiring). But gettings bogged down in those is missing the forest for the trees. However, just to prove that the principle still applies, I'll answer your electrical scenario: If electrical wiring were not highly regulated, best practices and self-regulatory mechanisms would be develped to deal with the situation effectively, just like any aspect of any industrial activity that is not regulated. It is key to recognize the truth of the part in italics. Just think of how commerce and trade work - there are abundant examples.
- yequalsx 15y ago
  The history of the free market (to the extent that markets can truly be free) shows that your view in italics is not correct. Regulation has led to clean water standards, electrical wiring standards, safe working environments, etc. In countries where such standards don't exist or are loosely enforced one sees that mechanisms aren't developed to deal with these situations. Just look at China. Companies try to cut corners. They do it whenever they can get away from it. There are examples where companies don't cut corners but there are a plethora of examples to show that enough companies do cut corners that it is needed to have some regulations.
  - javert 15y ago
    The history of the free market ... shows that your view in italics is not correct. I completely disagree with your analysis of history (although I'm aware it's the commonly accepted and promulgated one). Still, a fine technical analysis of history is not needed to see the truth of my point. Think about the PC revolution, or the Industrial Revolution, for example. Think about how trade and commerce is carried on in aspects thereof that are not highly regulated.
GFischer 15y ago
It's not so much that they need choices made (I disagree with that), but that we need some authoritative experts because we can't be experts in everything. What libertarians propose is independant certifications. I'm fine with the government agency doing it, but I believe it should be optional (possibly opt-out). If you believe you're knowledgeable enough, the by all means do your own electrical wiring (and maybe then have it inspected).

jonhohle 15y ago

I think it's reasonable that all people (or their guardians) know exactly what they are putting in their bodies. We have an entire infrastructure of schools to educate people regarding healthy and unhealthy choices - if people choose something else who are you or I to say they shouldn't consume it? I would argue electrical wiring or other infrastructure is no different. If it poses no threat to my neighbors' property or infringe on their rights in any way, why shouldn't I be free to proceed? I'm not saying that I'm not glad that there are standards I can expect a contractor to meet - I just don't think they should be a requirement. In the computing world we have POSIX - it's great if an OS implements it, but a very popular one which has succeeded in the market is not beholden to the standard (though at one time implemented it). Unfortunately, this is why I'm also against universal health care. There is a huge conflict of interest. People who make stupid dietary decisions are going to use the majority of health care resources available. It is unlikely that someone making smart, healthy choices will be able to get the same benefit. While I think a basic level of care would benefit all people, I am unwilling to act as an enabler for people who have no interest in looking out for their own best interest. There needs to be an underlying expectation that people are responsible for their own choices and actions. People need to be more active in their decision making, not have choices taken away from them.

javert 15y ago

Clearly people, in aggregate, need to have some choices made for them. No, I don't think so at all. And it's critical for people who oppose the "control state" (for lack of a better term) to stand their ground on this point. Otherwise, they are throwing away the fundamental principle, which is their only intellectual ammunition. -- There are lots of trivial applications of this (like electrical wiring). But gettings bogged down in those is missing the forest for the trees. However, just to prove that the principle still applies, I'll answer your electrical scenario: If electrical wiring were not highly regulated, best practices and self-regulatory mechanisms would be develped to deal with the situation effectively, just like any aspect of any industrial activity that is not regulated. It is key to recognize the truth of the part in italics. Just think of how commerce and trade work - there are abundant examples.

yequalsx 15y ago
The history of the free market (to the extent that markets can truly be free) shows that your view in italics is not correct. Regulation has led to clean water standards, electrical wiring standards, safe working environments, etc. In countries where such standards don't exist or are loosely enforced one sees that mechanisms aren't developed to deal with these situations. Just look at China. Companies try to cut corners. They do it whenever they can get away from it. There are examples where companies don't cut corners but there are a plethora of examples to show that enough companies do cut corners that it is needed to have some regulations.
- javert 15y ago
  The history of the free market ... shows that your view in italics is not correct. I completely disagree with your analysis of history (although I'm aware it's the commonly accepted and promulgated one). Still, a fine technical analysis of history is not needed to see the truth of my point. Think about the PC revolution, or the Industrial Revolution, for example. Think about how trade and commerce is carried on in aspects thereof that are not highly regulated.

GFischer 15y ago

It's not so much that they need choices made (I disagree with that), but that we need some authoritative experts because we can't be experts in everything. What libertarians propose is independant certifications. I'm fine with the government agency doing it, but I believe it should be optional (possibly opt-out). If you believe you're knowledgeable enough, the by all means do your own electrical wiring (and maybe then have it inspected).