From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:32:05 +0800
To: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030617.BAA11822@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802231226.25121A-100000@crl3.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate's dog wrote:

> Really? Then would you mind explaining why costs rise over time
> instead of going down?

Gladly. Prices rise over time because of inflation of the money 
supply.  While it is possible for private actors to temporarily
inflate the money supply (e.g., extension of credit by banks),
only the government can increase the money supply indefinitely.  
Inflation is the most insidious form of "taxation."  It steals
silently and punishes the savings in favor of consumption.

> Insurance has become involved in the medical industry, what
> happened? The cost has gone through the roof. The airplane
> industry was deregulated in the late 70's, what happened? The
> price of a ticket went up...yada yada yada.

Technically, Jim's logical fallacy is called /post hoc, ergo 
propter hoc/, after this, therefore on account of this.

> If this is so then by your own argument, business are operated
> by people therefor they are people...

Nope, that's not what I said.  This fallacy is called a "straw
man."  It is a weak or mistated opposing argument set up by a 
politician or debator, etc., in order that he may attack it and
gain an easy, showy victory.

Since you have mistated my position, the balance of your argument
is irrelevant.  (But thanks for playing.)

> Is your contention that because I own and
> operate a computer it should be given rights?

Nope.  Whatever gave you that idea?

> > > Businesses are a system of rules and procedures...
> > 
> > Made and enforced by PEOPLE.  Jim is begging the question.
> 
> Which question would that be? "Should businesses be considered
> people with the same rights and priviliges?"

Nope.  You just don't get it, do you?

> Sounds like the original proposition, that businesses should be
> awarded the same rights as people because they are owned and
> operated by people, is a reduction to absurtity.

More straw men.  From what orfice was that proposition pulled?

> If I may, I would like to use a quote from the Transformers
> movie,

Could these be the source of Jim's legal and economic knowledge?
You be the judge.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~