blackduckdog2 wrote:That totally free trade would descend into anarchy though, and that right quick, I feel relatively sure of.
Can anarchy exist if there is effective law enforcement? You will never have free trade without effective law enforcement. There are just too many people that do not respect your right to life, liberty, and property and will take what they want via force.
Free trade requires effective law enforcement. Without effective law enforcement of some form, anarchy will ensue.
I think this is the biggest determinant of a successful society. Does society effectively enforce the law to protect basic rights? If you look in lawless societies, do they look to achieve order or do they look the other way? The wild west, if you will, looked to law and order. Obamaville looks the other way. Society as a whole seems to be moving toward looking the other way more than looking to compliance with the law.
John Adams - "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion"
Free markets require and are not free of law enforcement. Both parties to every interaction are free to do as they choose without fear or deception in a free market.
blackduckdog2 wrote:"A fool and his money are soon parted" is a good starting point, too……..by what Christian ethic does a man propose to part another from his means, simply because he is a fool?
Why do you think the Catholic church and nearly all American Protestant churches are so pro-education? Education, education, education, that is the Christian ethic to address this reality of life. It's not to pretend it doesn't exist. It is not to leave the fool a fool by shielding him from the consequences and therefore the feedback to learn. I'm sure you allowed your kids to make some mistakes so that they would learn and stopped them from others so they would not be harmed too badly. As an adult, there is only so much you can do to shield your equal from his on foolish actions. You cannot be his father and he your child nor can the government treat him like a child for the duration of his adult life.
Education is the largest part of the solution to this. This is why it is so heartbreaking to see how horrible education is and where is it worst? Who controls those systems? Actions speak louder than words. A free society must be an educated society.
blackduckdog2 wrote:Intelligence and creative ambition are surely to be reward, but why must a fool (and we will assume, for the sake of this polemic, that the fool was made by God) be punished? What's up with that?
So he does not remain a fool. If there is no consequence for being a fool, why not remain a fool?
We have bankruptcy laws. There is no debtors prison. They can only lose so much and then get to start over with the knowledge of the consequences of their foolish actions. If they continue to repeat them, seriously, what do you suggest we do? Institutionalize them for the insanity of doing the same thing over again and expecting a different outcome. Some people don't care if they go bankrupt. They enjoy living beyond their means and then conning the next set of suckers into funding their lifestyle. If you came from a dysfunctional part of society, you would know people like this. They are not fools. They are short-sighted conmen. Poorly educated, which is why they are so short-sighted and make what we deem as poor decisions.
blackduckdog2 wrote:I worked with a "fool" if you will. I would never call him that to his face, he was a wonderful man with a true genius for repair and my little coffee repair business would have been MUCH less a going concern had my wife not introduced us (he was a janitor at the hospital where she worked)
I could easily have paid him a tenth of what he was worth and he'd have accepted it as his due……..but it WASN'T his due. He was worth so much more than he knew, but, since he was a fool, he had no real way to assess his value. This sounds like I'm touting my own wonderful generous nature (which I do not really have, at least not in most cases) but I don't know any other way to say it. If we are capable of NOT taking advantage of someone's position, by what virtue do we excuse ourselves when we do it anyway?
And at the end of the day, there is a small subset of society that will require people to step up and take care of them. Only individuals and not the government can distinguish the mentally handicapped, was he a fool or was he handicapped mentally and there is a big difference, and treat them like children for the duration of their life because mentally, that is what they are. My aunt has been a nurse at a hospital for the mentally retard since I was pretty young. I have gone there many times and am very familiar and have a special place in my heart for these poor kids. They are not fools. They are children for life because of their mental disability. As such, yes, we should treat them that way.
Of course, there is a continuum and the line is not so clear. That's why their family has to step up and look out for them. That is why their friends have to step up and look out for them. They are the rare exception and making policy based on exception is the most foolish thing we all do and that is why the politician are able to part the average fools of about 40% of their money without them even knowing that it is gone.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.