On May 15, 1:08 am, "John Galt" <whoisjohng...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Bret Cahill" <BretCah...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:1c575d05-e3ae-4424-ae93-3fbcd4b43c97@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> >> >> Friedman was an issue dodger just like all the remaining ****lls at
GOP
> >> >> "thank" tanks like Hoover, Heritage, Am. Enterprise, the Chicago
> >> >> School, etc.
>
> >> >> Friedman would never address the land issues raised by the
Georgists
> >> >> and he'ld never touch the "free markets w/o free speech" issue
either.
>
> >> >> When you dodge issues that are fundamental to your field you are a
> >> >> fraud.
>
> >> > Care for some cheese with that whine?
>
> >> > Yeah, and let us know when you win a Nobel Prize.
>
> >> It's also a classic straw man. "I'll decide what issues should be
> >> fundamental to 'your field',
>
> > The precondition of free markets is of no concern to free marketry?
>
> Not directly. Free markets exist in Singa****e, Hong Kong, China, now
> Vietnam, and to a lesser extent Malaysia, all nations which different
sorts
> of personal expression are limited if you use the Bill of Rights as your
> standard. The "rights" question is limited to if the buyer and seller
are
> able to commerce without regulation or precondition on their commerce.
>
> As much of a sup****ter as I am of personal rights, it seems clear to me
that
> a free market transaction can occur between individuals who are not
> permitted the right of free speech to the extent that I personally enjoy
it.
>
> JG
>
liar, all countries you mention are police states, or quasi police
states. they do not have open markets either. thanks for showing us
what you are really about.
>
>
> > Bret Cahill
|
