tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449956219867281294.post1425048411595807817..comments2023-04-06T05:11:32.222-04:00Comments on The Paltry Press: A couple of the many reasons why libertarianism and socialism are at oddsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449956219867281294.post-46710066266067962332010-08-30T09:28:55.493-04:002010-08-30T09:28:55.493-04:00If competing services are crowded out with state s...If competing services are crowded out with state subsidy or excluded from the market at gunpoint you can't really blame someone for using public services. They had no reasonable choice.<br /><br />The captured rents I'm referring to is everything that advantages business over labor. It is precisely what I'm focusing on!Ross Kenyonhttp://www.highseasmutualaid.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449956219867281294.post-4464703820156190092010-08-29T23:57:31.276-04:002010-08-29T23:57:31.276-04:00This is beginning to sound like a Marxist fallacy....This is beginning to sound like a Marxist fallacy. People shouldn't necessarily need keep the fruits of their own labor; that's why arrangements for wages exist. I don't think you're making some kind of bizarre Chomsykan claim about wage slavery, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. I think folks should focus their outrage at captured rents.<br /><br />When the state is involved in so much, it is impossible to separate out fully what benefits from state interventions are just from those that are unjust. That public police and public firefighters have crowded out private alternatives doesn't mean that it's immoral or unjust to call 911 and rely on those services, right? You purchase all kinds of subsidized goods, but it's not unjust, right?Seth Goldinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04125262627675298959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449956219867281294.post-50657891439924045652010-08-29T23:24:52.304-04:002010-08-29T23:24:52.304-04:001.) This isn't based upon the ltv. Its just a...1.) This isn't based upon the ltv. Its just a regular libertarian idea that people should keep the fruits of their labor unless they make other arrangements, such as wage labor. This is assuming you accept some sort of Lockean proviso for property acquisition.<br /><br />2.) If rich people got that way through state power, they have no legitimate claim to that property. I don't think any libertarian would deny that using aggression to make more money is unacceptable. Where we go from here, I'm not sure, but even Rothbard advocated syndicalist takeover of corporations which sought and utilized state power to their advantage.Ross Kenyonhttp://www.c4ss.orgnoreply@blogger.com