🚀 go-pugleaf

dcitron@gate.net (D. Citron) writes:

> Jim Nakamura (jzero@netcom.com) wrote:

> Grievances are one thing. Asking for products and services obtainable 
> only by taking them from others are something else! That's legalized 
> plunder. 

	You agree the AMA has taken from the public via its
	use of govt power, but you don't believe the only
	practical remedy available to the public to rectify
	this situation is fair, govt intervention on behalf
	of the public.  You call that two wrongs making a 
	right.  You imply that the only fair remedy is to 
	remove the govt monopoly - the libertarian solution 
	of anarchy - which will never come to pass.  

	The fact is the libertarian solution is utopian.  It
	has never existed, it will never exist.

	You're not offering any practical solutions to the
	initial "wrong" committed by the AMA.


> : 	                Libertarianism is not a religion.

> I know that. But to you Marxism obviously IS a religion!

	Marx made some valid points.  If the sum of your reply
	is to label me a Marxist, there isn't much to argue
	about.


> : > Consumers as a special interest group have no moral superiority over any 
> : > other special interest. In fact, they are worse, because they pretend to 
> : > be altruists, while the others are at least honest about their 
> : > self-interest!

> : 	Here we go again with that self-interest crap.  I'm
> : 	really not interested.  I'd just as soon argue about
> : 	the existence of God as argue about the moral 
> : 	superiority of one group over another.

> I don't care about your religion, if any. Just don't impose your "to each 
> according to his needs" marxist dogma on me!

	There's nothing inherently Marxist about using "need"
	to allocate resources.  Happens every day.

> : 	Consumers as a special interest group may or may not be 
> : 	morally superior to any other special interest group, but 
> : 	they are superior. 

> Sounds like Animal Farm (please read). "All animals are equal, but some 
> are more equal than others." And whom among us IS NOT a consumer?

	Animal Farm sounds like your Bible.  1984 came and went.

> :       They're the largest.  

> Oh, then sheer volume makes for moral superiority of claims. You sound 
> like a member of the Ku Klux Klan, claiming that this is primarily a 
> white christian w.a.s.p. country and that everyone else should be shipped 
> out. We'd both be gone then!

	No, but sheer volume does make for superiority.

	It's not unfair for society to make a claim on the
	income of doctors in return for subsidizing their
	education.  After all, it costs more to educate a
	doctor than to educate a school teacher.

	Perhaps all post-university professional education
	should be not be subsidized AT ALL unless the
	student is willing to cosign a percentage of its
	future income to society as a form of repayment.

	We could apply this to lawyers as well.  Lawyers
	should be expected to provide low cost legal 
	counsel to the indigent.

> : 	By the way, aren't you folks supposed to believe that 
> : 	the customer is always right?

> Another Zero non-sequitur.

	Another sourpuss insult.

> Businesses and individuals, everyone is everyone else's customer in 
> a free society. But that's another thread, another day...
-- 
jzero@netcom.com