Liberale aforismer

Tyvstjålet fra Russell Hasan, der skriver på Liberty Unbound. En række af dem er endda passende i dagens anledning:

  • Running your own life is difficult. Running someone else’s is impossible.
  • There is no such thing as safety, but there is such a thing as courage.
  • The job of business is to make life livable. The job of government is to make business impossible.
  • If war is hell, then pacifism must be heaven.
  • Assuming that to want something you must also want to pay the price to get it, everyone always gets what he wants in a free market.
  • Taxes are the price we pay for living in a society that has not yet become truly civilized.
  • Wealth is what society gives to the owners to compensate them for bearing the risk of large-scale failure.
  • Democrats sacrifice the healthy to save the sick.
  • Government: ambitious thugs who proclaim themselves saviors — which is precisely what you would expect ambitious thugs to say.
  • The difference between libertarians and conservatives? Libertarians have more fun

4 thoughts on “Liberale aforismer

  1. Johannes Polemicus

    Assuming that to want something you must also want to pay the price to get it, everyone always gets what he wants in a free market.

    Det er da noget vrøvl. Helt nøgternt set.

    Svar
  2. Christian Bjørnskov

    @Johannes Polemicus: Det er da langt fra vrøvl. Tag et eksempel. Anton har en dims, som du gerne vil have. For Anton er dimsen 200 kroner værd – han vil ikke sælge den for under 200 kroner. For dig er den 300 kroner værd. Dvs. at i et frit marked kan I dele en nettogevinst på 100 kroners værdi. Hvis markedet ikke er frit, er i forhindrede i at foretage en frivillig transaktion, der er til gavn for jer begge. For mig at se er det ret klart, at kun et frit marked tillader den slags værdiskabende transaktioner.

    Svar
  3. Johannes Polemicus

    Sætningen er vrøvl – og det ændrer dit eksempel ikke på.

    Assuming that to want something you must also want to pay the price to get it,…

    Hvorfor skulle man også antage det? Der er tale om to forskellige ting.

    …everyone always gets what he wants in a free market.

    Det følger ikke af første sætningsled. Det Hasan udelader, er den anden modalitet udover vilje, nemlig evne. Hvis han i stedet havde skrevet:

    Assuming that to want something you must also want to pay the price to get it and be able to do so,….

    Men sætningen her er jo åbenlyst absurd: betænk en tigger, som pga. håbløs invaliditet ikke har nogle penge. Han ønsker mad og han vil gerne betale prisen for et brød, men han kan ikke. Så skulle det følge af Hasans formulering, at han i virkeligheden ikke ønsker mad.

    Svar

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.