From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Fri Jun 07 2002 - 01:07:40 MDT
Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Barbara Lamar wrote:
>
>> Randall Randall wrote:
>>
>>>Well, who decides what is "excessive"; what one "needs" or "deserves"?
>>>
>>>Since you're quoting that definition, I assume you believe that you
>>>have a dollar figure above which a person is being greedy? Care to
>>>share that figure, so we can all judge ourselves? :)
>>>
>>Surely, Mr. Randall, in a business context, the dollar figure is a function
>>of the value of the item you're offering in trade rather than a constant.
>>
>>Suppose you offer to sell me a widget, together with attachments A,B, and C,
>>for $400.
>>We both agree that the value of the attachments is $50 each.
>> I give you $400.
>> You deliver to me a widget with only attachment B.
>>
>>I would argue that what you deserved is an amount no higher than $300,
>>assuming we both voluntarily entered into the trade. Thus, you have received
>>an excessive amount.
>>
>
> Only if Mr Randall fails and refuses to deliver attachments A and C when
> his error is brought to his attention.
>
> Ms Samantha, Ms Bourlin, and other such anti-propertarians operate by a
> different definition of 'excessive', where 'excessive' is any amount
> greater than what you would have left if you divided what you had evenly
> with every other member of society, and then gave what you had left to
> your ex-wife, to ex-POWs of a country your's beat roundly two
> generations ago, to members of an ethnic group put upon and decimated by
> any body but you, as well as to another ethnic group who used to own the
> land you live on hundreds of years ago but unfortunately mostly died out
> from ignorance of disease. If you are left with anything after all this
> 'fairness', then you must have cheated the system somehow (which you
> obviously did if you are a white male) and are thus still a no good son
> of a bitch.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:38 MST