"Pindell, Tim P" <TPindell@otterbein.edu> wrote:
>> Should the buggy whip manufacturer continue to thrive
>> after the demand for his product goes from 90% to 5%?
> I think at this point we're talking past each other. Of course we
> shouldn't be buying buggy whips (unless you're into that sort of thing).
> Perhaps the relevant issue is: What do we do with skilled workers (human
> beings) who we've displaced because we now buy cheap-ass widgets from
> somewhere else? It would be a shame to simply waste this productivity.
"We" shouldn't do anything about them. It is not the government's
role to create jobs, its only roles are to provide national defense,
mete out justice according to proscribed law, and enforce the
contractual obligations of its citizens. Anything not covered by the
previous sentence is an item that government should not be involved
with in any way. Government's "role", (if you want to call it that),
in regards to finding new jobs for displaced workers is merely to stay
out of the way and let the market work.
Now, if private citizens want to voluntarily get involved in a
charitable way to assist those people, that is admirable, and another
thing entirely. Churches, charities, privately run community centers
and the like can do a lot here. However, the act of removing a dollar
from one person via taxation and using it for the benefit of another
is a very dark and malignant undertaking indeed, no matter how noble
the intentions may be. The dollar, earned via blood and sweat, is
implicitly taken (stolen) via gunpoint under the threat of
imprisonment and the complete removal of your freedoms. To break it
down to its roots and to take it to its natural conclusion is to
discover that this sort of redistribution of wealth is nothing more
complicated than forced servitude or slavery. Call me melodramatic
if you will, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind as to the
truth of this, and there can be no doubt about this in the mind of
anyone who takes a truly honest look at the situation.
Ok, so what about the people out of work? Most of them probably
need no assistance to correct their situation, but doubtless there
will be others who will. There is still no need for government
involvement, because market based solutions will work even better.
Just off the top of my head for example, I can envision an
organization (a company or corporation) which would provide assistance
to those workers who desired it. In exchange for assisting a person
to get a new job, this company would receive a portion of that
person's paycheck once they obtain that job. The organization's
compensation might be a certain percentage for a specified length of
time, or simply a fixed fee which is paid off like a car loan. This
assistance might be as basic as providing (or paying for) education
and training, or as involved as providing food, shelter and health
care during this period. The amount of compensation received by this
organization would naturally depend on the level of support provided
to the individul during this "between jobs" time. I have no idea if
organizations such as the above currently exist which would provide
that level of support, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. People
out of work have an incentive to get a new job, and there is a market
level incentive for corporations to get involved in this sort of
thing. Best of all, there is no government involvement, save the
aforementioned enforcement of private contractual obligations to
ensure that the organization provides what it has promised, and the
individual repays the debt according to the terms of the contract.
--
-Jon-
.- Jon Steiger -- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com -.
| '96 Kolb Firefly, '96 Suzuki Intruder, Miscellaneous Mopars |
`-------------------------------- http://www.jonsteiger.com --'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 02 2008 - 02:10:10 EST