(May 12, 2014 at 4:59 pm)KUSA Wrote: First of all I will state that I am interested in a system that everyone can make at least a bare living. But, please answer my original question.
Quote:
Why should anybody be forced to provide anything for anyone? This includes businesses, governments, and private individuals.
How is it right to force anyone to provide something to someone else? It's really more of a philosophical question than an argument.
Oh goodie, a question not directed to me. I would counter by asking why the masses of Walmart employees should provide the status quo to the Walmart heirs? Isn't the status quo which puts so much power and opportunity into the hands of the advantaged also a kind of "forced providing"? I believe that " ..when in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another" there is good precedent for the many to throw over the few.
The great advantage of a fair social contract is precisely the avoidance of such upheaval. Personally I don't appreciate being forced to subsidize the workers at Walmart so that the ownership can get still fatter. Under the status quo that is precisely what is happening. The question isn't whether or not to force anyone to provide anything. It is rather a question of what happens when we stop providing the existing respect for precedent.
