[584] in libertarians
Housing rights discussion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vernon Imrich)
Wed Jan 25 16:09:24 1995
To: libertarians@MIT.EDU
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 16:06:15 EST
From: Vernon Imrich <vimrich@MIT.EDU>
Seems like the classic "pie" argument. The basic assumption of the
"right to affordable housing" proponents is that there is no way
for them (or anyone) to create more housing, that the supply is limited
by the "giant global pie" of resources from which all should have
equal share. The basic refutation of this line of reasoning is that
there is no global pie, so no one's "slice" can be "too big" or
exclusionary of others. Weath is infinite, created by human action.
If you want more, you do not have to take it from others, nor do you
have to place a demand upon others to provide it to you.
What is interesting is that they seem to tacitly accept the premise
that their needs will not make slaves of others by indicating that their
"right" does not do so. This crack needs to be explored, showing that
(by their admission) since their need doesn't place burdens on others,
they need no legal recourse or "right" with which to place artificial
demands on others since the others are not then depriving them of
anything.
Anyway, where wealth is concerned, the "pie versus Doritos" argument is
common and seemingly never ending. (I use Doritos for the unlimited
wealth side because of their slogan: "don't worry, we'll make more.")
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Vernon Imrich | market failure, n. The inabilty of the |
| MIT OE, Rm 5-329b | market to recover from a blow by |
| Cambridge, MA 02139 | intervention. (The Exchange) |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| MIT LP: http://www.mit.edu:8001/activities/libertarians/home.html |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
