[quote=greekfire]@XBoxBoy: free markets would do a much better job of regulating themselves if they were allowed to fail. It’s the “too big too fail” bailouts and gov’t restrictions such as the Fair Housing Act that create a moral hazard.
@Arraya: I believe that the laws of economics are natural and not determined through the state. The state is supposed to allow free exchange of goods and services and enforce laws against things like fraud and counterfeit.
This is somewhat similar to the Civil Rights Act and why I think libertarian thought holds human beings to a higher standard. We don’t get our rights from government, we get them from our creator. It’s the people’s duty to act responsibly and respectfully towards one another.[/quote]
Free markets would have removed lead from paint? put seat belts into cars?
The Fair Housing Act creates a moral hazard by prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin? Is mixing coloreds and whites a moral hazard?
The state creates common currency. Without it, we’d be trading chickens and grain. Money is a social and political construct, nothing “natural” about it.
Libertarian thought holds human beings to a higher standard? Like slavery, “no niggers allowed” lunch counters, and no Jews allowed to own property in La Jolla? Are you arguing that in good time it would have all worked itself out? (Isn’t it possible that your “creator” actually sponsored the Fair Housing Act or the Civil Rights Act? Or is there some evidence that your “creator” is also a libertarian?)
