|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: humanities.philosophy.objectivism
From: Jim Klein <rum...@ix.netcom.com>
Date: 1998/05/09
Subject: Re: Smith v Cantillon (long) was Re: To David Friedman: Antitrust
In <DDFr-0805982007410...@ddfr.vip.best.com> David Friedman <D...@best.com> writes: Where'd you find this, over the doorway to the U.S. Congress? >"If enough employment cannot be found to occupy the 25 persons in a >hundred upon work useful and profitable to the state, I see no >objection to encouraging employment which serves only for ornament or >amusement" >So when everything that can be done to serve the state is done, It's hard to tell absent context, but I think it may be worse. Isn't >Cantillon thinks it harmless if any remaining labor goes to produce >things that give people pleasure. he saying that if "productive work" on behalf of the State can't be found for those in its employ, then even "make-work" work is justified in being supported by the State? If not, then somebody should tell the U.S. Congress...because that's PMFJI jk You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message, you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||