From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:07:04 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030308.WAA11470@einstein>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 19:09:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> 
> > A reasonable person recognizes that such a business has two ways
> > of fulfilling its responsiblities. They can either submit to
> > regulation and quality control from the local municipality or
> > else they can hang signs about their place of business declaring
> > "Caveat Emptor: Our food may be tainted, eat at your own risk".
> > Which do you think is the more reasonable?
> 
> It would be nice if businesses were offered that choice.  I would
> choose the second, myself.  Only my sign would say, "Our food is
> guaranteed not tainted by the Acme insurance company, not some
> corrupt government."  The problem is, governments do not allow 
> businesses nor consumers to make that sort of choice.  With them 
> it's, "my way or the highway" (or harassment and jail actually).

And any insurance company with a whit of sense would charge you rates so
high that your much touted small vendors and many of the medium sized
vendors currently in business would not exist. You think governments are
bad? Wait till you see a bunch of bean counters racing a profit margin. In
such a situation we wouldn't even have the opportunity for input into the
system via constitutions, charters, and votes. Just imagine how much support
a Japanese insurance company would provide its clients in regards to the
current epidemic in Japan, absolutely none because it is better the little
vendor go out of business than the insurance company.

> Until Jim shows me a business that isn't owned and operated by
> people, I'll have to respectfully disagree.  Businesses are just
> people acting alone or in concert.  Actions are what count, not
> whether the action is of a pecuniary nature or not.

I own 2 businesses (CyberTects & Linux System Development Labs) and work for
another (Tivoli - IBM), none are equivalent to my person. Businesses are a
system of rules and procedures that one offers another person in exchange for
some other commodity. Saying a business has the same rights as a person is
equivalent to saying the Empire State Bldg. has civil rights because persons 
built it and occupy it. My dog has a better argument for civil rights than
any business, it breaths and shits. Would you seriously give my dog a vote?
I shure won't, and I won't support any business with rights.

                                                 Jim Choate