[Vision2020] RE: Unstable, Doomed, Missed Points

[Ted Moffett]

Jeff et. al.

Melynda made the point about brothels and government regulation relating to
the Wal-Mart debate, and I thought you dismissed her point too easily.  I
don't think her point, or mine, is "silly," given the support for legalized
prostitution from many libertarian free market advocates, Noble Prize
winner Milton Friedman among them, resulting from the compelling logic of
libertarian free market capitalism, an approach it appears you support.

As far as I can tell from your response, when it comes to prostitution, you
declare this a "moral" issue (and Wal-Mart's human rights, labor or
environmental violations are not moral issues with equal importance to
prostitution?), based on community standards, which the community has
reasonably (I assume Jeff thinks illegal prostitution to be reasonable,
given that he chose to not come out in favor of letting marketplace freedoms
operate on this issue) decided to regulate with criminal sanctions
.
But if some think there are moral issues with Wal-Mart's international
conduct, or local community standards that some think Wal-Mart may violate
in bringing a supercenter to Moscow, Jeff turns to the arguments supporting
the benefits of the unfettered free market.  Jeff seems to argue there are
no valid "moral" objections that can be raised to Wal-Marts conduct.
Correct me if I am wrong, Jeff.

Jeff wrote that we have a "reasonable strategy for working with China."  I
don't call assisting the Chinese Communist Party with denying freedom of
political speech, and providing information that results in the jailing of
political prisoners a "reasonable strategy."

I could offer documentation regarding Wal-Mart's conduct internationally
that raises moral issues, but this information has already been posted to
Vision2020.

Ted Moffett



On 3/8/06, Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com> wrote:
>
> At 01:39 PM 3/8/2006, you wrote:
>
> Jeff et. al.
>
>  Your examples are interesting. Brothels are illegal, so a straw man
> argument.
>
>
> You can't get out of that point that easily!  A change in the law in
> Idaho, and brothels could be legal.  Why limit the "free marketplace?"
> Regulated brothels might be safer for all, with mandated testing for STDs,
> etc.  Brothels exist anyway in Idaho, no doubt because they make money and
> have an eager customer base, so will you come out against the
> "protectionism" of laws against brothels?
>
>
> *Nope - I would not - and I think you are being somewhat silly.
>
> *
>
> A change in Moscow's regulations limiting the size at which a retailer can
> build (sq. ft. of the building(s) at a given site) would render a Wal-Mart
> Supercenter thus "illegal."  Then your championing of the Wal-Mart
> Supercenter would become a "straw man issue" because it would be "illegal"
> to construct.  Somehow I think you would still be arguing that the proposed
> Wal-Mart Supercenter was blocked unwisely.
>
>
> *Yes, I would make that argument - it would be a foolish thing to do and
> that is why I am engaged in this issue.
>
> *
>
> I wonder, do you support anti-trust law of any kind?  Under what
> circumstances?  When US corporations violate environmental, labor or human
> rights laws in other nations, laws that are widely accepted in the
> democratic world, to allow them to out compete business competitors, should
> any government regulation be imposed to stop such conduct?
>
>
> *Yes, I support the existing anti-trust law in the US.  Do I think that
> the US should interfere in the trade and economics matters of other
> countries?  Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  Each non-democratic country brings
> its own special challenges.  I think we have a reasonable strategy for
> working with China.  On a related note, should Latah/Moscow be interfering
> in the planning and zoning issues for Whitman County - absolutely not!
> *
>
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060309/73738fec/attachment.htm