This isn't germane to NFB philosophy but I'll make a few comments
and leave it at that.
On 11 Oct 97 17:53, Richard Webb wrote:
RW> As for bread lines, you don't see many
RW> libertarians in them, but you
RW> see a lot of folks who are second or
RW> third generation standers in
RW> said bread lines . This is real
RW> sad, but it's time to break the
RW> cycle. Our system should work,
RW> butthere are too many layers of crap
RW> in the way of getting things done.
A few observations: privatizing things won't help. There is just
as much bureaucracy in the private sector as there is in
government. Else how explain the phenomenal success of Dilbert?
(incidentally, I think every Newsline site should have a "Dilbert
Channel" wherein each day's Dilbert strip would be described --
grin). If you don't believe me, try calling your bank or mortgage
company. "Press One for This ... Press Two for That ..." and so
on ad infinitum.
Although I agree with you that we must break the generation-after-
generation welfare cycle and the cycle of hopelessness in the
inner cities, what gripes me about Libertarians and right-wingers
in general is that they say the present system isn't working so
should be torn down but don't propose anything practical in its
place. Were I President, I'd just love to get a bunch of real
pinko liberals in a room and say "Okay! You say we need to use
government to relieve poverty and ameliorate the bum conditions in
society. now, tell me how to do that on a shoe-string budget."
I'd also like to get all the laissez-faire capitalists and go-it-
alone types in a room and say: "Okay; you'r right; the
bureaucracy is stifling initiative. Now, tell me how you would
help the down-and-out?And don't fall back on just saying they
don't matter. I know you probably feel that some deserve to
starve but that's not an option. And don't talk about private
charity taking up the slack. First, it won't work because they
don't want to put in the time, effort and resources to help those
who *really* need it. Second, ever been the victim - er -
recipient of one of those charities?"
I am very, very uncomfortable with affirmative action. I would
have voted for Prop 209 in California. yet I am very leary of
just yanking affirmative programs because no one has *really*
proposed anything to take their place. I resent to my dying day
that I was hired Schedule A. But I'd much rather have the
paycheck than not!
In other words, it's extremely easy to spout simplistic solutions
to problems you don't have to solve. it's damnably difficult to
come up with something that actually might work and that doesn't
pander to some special interest or other or, rather, which pinches
all special interests equally.
RW> Javits Wagner ODay and the great
RW> society were both bad ideas. Maybe
I might agree with you. But consider: many thought that workshops
might make sense when no one else was hiring. That they paid a
pittance was as much a consequence of the contempt in which
workers in general were held as to anything else. Remember Ford
Morots with Harry Bennett and his goon squad? And yes, the Great
Society was probably eutopian. But it can be argued that it would
have worked better if President Johnson hadn't been trying to have
guns and butter at the same time. I'm not necessarily disagreeing
with you; I'm just saying that things are more complex than most
of us would care to admit.
RW> pretty on the surface, but the
RW> premise in the first was totaly wrong,
RW> and the second was real badly
RW> implemented.
As I say, I won't argue with you here.
RW> Btw, liked your comments on grade 3
RW> braille. I still find it useful
RW> today, and am glad I took the time to learn it.
RW> Notice I didn't learn it at the school
RW> for the blind in preparation
RW> for junior high and high school, but
Neither did I; I taught myself from a book by Ruth Something-or-
other. I've lost the book but believe I still have Rodenberg's
reference book on Grade III.
Mike Freeman
Internet: mikef@pacifier.com
--- PCRR QWK 1.60
--- FLAME v1.1
---------------
* Origin: Pacifier Online Data Service (1:105/101)
|