re Further comments to The Rise of Brownianism at The Daily Bell

Further comments posted at The Daily Bell (slightly modified here).

http://www.thedailybell.com/1630/Anthony-Wile-The-Rise-of-Brownianism.html


Statements in quotes belong to Mr. Herman:

@Carl Herman (LA County Nonpartisan Examiner)

"Here's your future for considering public sidewalks, public fire departments, or a public monetary system."

I want none of these, yet you state this is in my future.

"You want a competing monetary system of gold and silver? Fine. Propose it and subject it to scrutiny."

It has been scrutinized. Only competition, proven via profit and loss in a free marketplace has demonstrated the ability to consistently raise man's standard of living. It does so for every other good, why not for money?

"I want a national monetary system..."

Yes, clearly you are for central planning. This is like saying I want a national standard for blue jeans.

"Be afraid of "government.""

I am. Your website seems to indicate you are at least skeptical. How you can hold such different views in one head is beyond my understanding.

"Give up on universal health care..."

Certainly, when dictated by government.

"...painting our criminal government past upon what can be created in a newly-created future."

Yes, the new Soviet man. Just like Lenin.



"No public sidewalks for you, or public roads, street lights, traffic signals, street drains, street cleaning? What's your alternative system under a free market system without "central planning"?"

Alternatives to each of these have been written about quite extensively. These examples are, frankly, some of the easiest to resolve in a free market and without government. Go to mises.org for a start, if you are serious about gaining an understanding.

"And universal healthcare has about 3/5 to 2/3 preference among We the People when polled..."

So what? Then let those 3/5 to 2/3 pay for it. By what right do they have claim on me in order to fulfill their fantasies?

Underlying your view is a philosophy that believes slavery is a legitimate way to order society. Try to defend your statements without relying on this fact. It cannot be done. Once you admit that you advocate slavery, try to define with some philosophical consistency those parts of your private life that should be protected from the slaveholder. There is no line other than zero that can be legitimately defended.

Now compare the evil that is slavery (your ideal society) with my lack of concern about where I might find a public sidewalk. I will risk the possible lack of a sidewalk.