[extropy-chat] The Hidden Luddite was Re: peak oil debate

[Samantha Atkins]

There are actually non-government regulation ways of dealing with  
fraudulent or harmful businesses.  A system of laws against fraud and  
various forms of aggression on the rights and well-being of others  
would seem sufficient.   So this is probably not a meaningful  
example.   Is it just me or does the point seem rather strained in  
any case?

- samantha

On Sep 7, 2005, at 11:10 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps rather than just getting the word, A is not equal to B out,
>> when clearly some see A as like B, a worked example might be
>> produced that shows how a person applying the philosophy of
>> extropy would, or could, come to a different solution to a particular
>> problem than a person who was a libertarian.
>>
>> Once produced the worked example could then be pointed at.
>>
>
> Ironically, the thing that sparked this part of the thread was one  
> such
> example.  It was pointed out that some corporations put their own
> profits far ahead of human life, and indicated that government
> regulation - like requiring practices that make honest business a lot
> easier than murder for hire - could be a more effective mediator
> against the negative effects of this than pure free markets and
> reputations.  This is not the libertarian way, but it is compatible
> with extropian principles.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>