Comment 24171

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted May 28, 2008 at 13:57:56

I do not disagree that elected officials are influenced by more than the public interest. Knowing this, we should all agree that government should be limited in its scope of influence. By limiting governments role to narrow and specific tasks, the "bidness" culture you reference would not exist.

That is why property rights are such a great tool for the common good. Property rights ensure that all citizens can shape their own destiny, without fear of external controls. Property rights are based on the premise that rational people want to maximize their investments. In order to do this, property owners seek out the most valuable use for their property, and build accordingly.

The idea that a small group of experts need to tell people what is best for their property is arrogant. Democracy is not a license for allowing well connected individuals the power to shape their own personal utopia, by using the heavy hand of government.

The proper way of attacking "negligent" (your words) owners is moral suasion. Attack LIUNA's commitment to the Hamilton people, appeal to their sense of the common good. But do not force them to to what you want, when you do this, you lose the moral high ground.

When you look to government for help, it always has a way of coming back to bite you. Nothing is free in life, and using government decree to get
your own personal outcome, is not without a price. That is why Hamilton, in its fervour to beat the capitalists, has dug its own grave. Surprise, surprise, business does not love Hamilton. Why would they, Hamilton treats them like the enemy.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds