[ExI] Strong libertarianism, societal good, & suffering (was: Cephalization, proles)

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Damien Sullivan
<phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> This all feels related to my observation that when Adam Smith attacked
> government intervention in the economies, he was mostly talking about
> monarchs using mercantilism and artificial monopolies to raise revenues
> for war.  Not about universal-suffrage democracies using progressive
> income taxation to fund univiersal pensions and health care, public
> schools and transportation, and a side order of environmental and safety
> regulation, especially as none of those things existed in 1776.
>

### What's the difference? Mercantilism was the idea that the wealth
of nations is gold, and policy should maximize internal production,
minimize consumption, so as to achieve a "favorable" trade balance, so
as to cause transfer of gold from abroad. Modern intervention is a
version of "Panem et circenses" (i.e. pension promises without
coverage, public schools to keep the masses docile, war to keep them
occupied), all based on the scribblings of a long-dead economist
(yeah, I know I'm both paraphrasing and denouncing Keynes all in one
sentence). Both are stupid.

Rafal