Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site whuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxj!houxm!whuxl!orb
From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Libertarianism & Luck
Message-ID: <447@whuxl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Jan-85 17:52:57 EST
Article-I.D.: whuxl.447
Posted: Tue Jan 22 17:52:57 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Jan-85 05:50:52 EST
References: <272@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <547@ccice2.UUCP> <428@whuxl.UUCP> <317@topaz.ARPA>
Organization: Bell Labs
Lines: 37

> >    tim sevener:
> > Why should a few people gain all the benefits of the economic system
> > and many other people sustain the losses?  Is there really anything wrong
> > with balancing out such benefits and losses to a certain extent?
> >          
> 
> If someone is lucky to be alive, are you justified in killing him?
> 
> --JoSH

Who is suggesting killing anybody? On the other hand there IS a valid
ethical concern here: the average lifespan for the affluent is much
greater than that for the poor and people in the Third World.
Right now, as we know thousands are starving in Ethiopia.  But this was
merely the event the media has temporarily decided to focus on.  In fact
many people are starving all over the world, and have been for some time.
The solutions to this problem are not necessarily just to send massive
amounts of food. The long-term solution involves promotion of a more
efficient agricultural system in these countries through land reform,
government price supports, provision of extension services to provide
technical aid to peasants who often use inefficient methods.
Will it kill the affluent to provide some money to assist in helping
their fellow humans in the rest of the world?  
Of course, Libertarians will now suggest that it is just a question of
getting people to *voluntarily* contribute to help the starving in the
rest of the world.  I would agree this would be better than promoting
such efforts through taxation.  But this is largely the system
we have right now.  The government is not stopping anybody from
contributing to relief organizations or very good organizations like
Oxfam America (which funnels its aid to help *production* and not
just the provision of food itself). Is this working?
What Libertarians are mounting a campaign to contribute to those starving
in the rest of the world?
If the advocates of totally voluntary action are unwilling to volunteer
their own time, money and energy to help the starving, then who is?
 
      tim  sevener     whuxl!orb