robot-heart-politics:

crazynutjob:

I should actually stay out of this at this point. Robot-heart provided a rather satisfactory answer to my question. I won’t do that. Instead, I’ll mention that the government doesn’t always do a great job of protecting people from tainted food. But I am a hardcore libertarian, so no matter how many headlines I could produce, or how much evidence I provide, I’ll always be a crazy nutjob. The FDA actively covered up evidence that would have hurt Paxil and Prozac sales. The treasury’s SOP would be considered accounting fraud if replicated in any private company. The justice department tortures people. Most of the gigantic “evil” companies in the US got to be so big by finding a way to get taxpayer support. It’s the [Christopher Columbus](http://dailyreckoning.com/our-2009-christopher-columbus-prize/) effect. He “didn’t know where he was going, didn’t know where he was when he got there, and as Churchill pointed out, did it all at government expense. Anyone can make a mistake. But to make a truly colossal blunder you need the support of the taxpayer.” And I’m sure the appropriate response is that if only more people voted the right people into office, things would be better. I just haven’t seen evidence that the right people to wield this government power exist.

I actually agree with some of this, which makes me kind of nervous. ;)

I gave Kellen this analogy once for why I oppose libertarianism. A bottle cap company makes millions of bottles every year. The bottle cap company finds out that one of the products they use to make their bottle caps is actually leeching poison into the beverages they go on. Should the company stop producing bottle caps altogether, or should the company find a different way to make their bottle caps? This is kind of how I feel about government: it’s definitely got its problems, but I think the solution is not to get rid of it altogether, but to change how it works.

You argue that you’ve never seen evidence that the right people to wield government power exist. I’ve never seen evidence that the right people to wield market power exist. I find it interesting when people critique the current government/market system and they only point to the government as being the problem. The truth is, business leaders are gunning as hard as they can to use the government to gain market benefits: locking out competition, getting a pass on unhealthy and unsafe products, etc. There is no reason to believe that in the absence of government, they wouldn’t find another way to gain power and to use that power for the exploitation of the consumer in order to drive up profits.

Not to say that the government is innocent (HA!)—rather that I think anyone who argues that the people who exploit their government positions for personal gain and the people who exploit their market positions for personal gain don’t have anything in common (hint: it has to do with human nature) is smoking something. Figuratively, obviously, since I think you said at one point you don’t smoke. :) Just as I think it is ridiculous to argue that the government alone can make the market run perfectly, I think it is ridiculous to argue that the market alone can make the country run perfectly. There needs to be balance…and that includes the balance between government/constituent and business/consumer. What we need to do is find smart solutions to achieve equilibrium.