Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umich.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!mb2c!umich!torek
From: torek@umich.UUCP (Paul V. Torek )
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: market value in law
Message-ID: <381@umich.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 6-Jan-86 20:09:42 EST
Article-I.D.: umich.381
Posted: Mon Jan  6 20:09:42 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 8-Jan-86 19:48:24 EST
References: <374@umich.UUCP> <28200442@inmet.UUCP> <2664@umcp-cs.UUCP> <312@frog.UUCP>
Reply-To: torek@zippy.UUCP (Paul V. Torek )
Organization: University of Michigan, EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 19
Summary: 

In article <312@frog.UUCP> tdh@frog.UUCP (T. Dave Hudson) writes:
>> Yes, but it seems to me that the current practice of the courts in this
>> respect is very un-libertarian.  That is, I would think that a libertarian
>> regards an individual as the best authority on the value of his own life.

>The value to himself, perhaps.  Value is relative to the
>valuer, and values have no objective measure. 

Thank you for ESTABLISHING my point!

>But in legal matters, it is sometimes necessary to assign a value to
>something.  (Unfortunately, this is abused, as in taxation
>and eminent domain.)  

Or as in janw's scheme.  No?  Why is it that libertarians forget their
libertarianism at the most convenient moments?

Fed up,
--Paul V. Torek							torek@umich