Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!decvax!cca!ima!ism780!judy
From: judy@ism780.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Libertarianism - (nf)
Message-ID: <312@ism780.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Jul-84 20:31:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: ism780.312
Posted: Thu Jul 12 20:31:27 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Jul-84 02:11:48 EDT
Lines: 30

#R:qusavx:-19200:ism780:20200009:000:1430
ism780!judy    Jul 11 14:04:00 1984

> How can we expect that all people are actually created equal and that
> they all compete on an equal level when each is born with an
> accumulation of inherited wealth?  If libertarians believed that all
> wealth accumulated within one's lifetime was forfeited upon death, I
> might actually think they BELIEVED in equal competition, etc.

> Libertarians often use the example of forest ecology to 'prove' the
> idea that nature exists rather nicely without the guiding hand of a
> government and the image is a nice one.

Given the latter statement, that libertarians believe in minimum government,
the assertion that libertarians should abolish inheritance is a
contradiction.  A law abolishing inheritance would be just the
kind of governmental interference libertarians are against.

And if there were not predatory animals in the forest keeping the squirrel
population in balance, the damn squirells would eat up all the nuts and
we wouldn't have any giant oaks coming from those acorns.

Equal rights means that certain basic rights are equally available to all
in this country.  That does not mean the same as equal opportunity.  Life
is NOT fair.  But it never has been.  And the person with the inheritance
does have a better privelege.  But it is not a guarantee.  That wealth can
be squandered as well as put to productive use.

The idea of abolishing inheritances is a socialistic idea and belongs
in another party.