Salvation Through Private Property Alone (from the smart folks at Mises Institute)

http://www.lewrockwell.com/edmonds/property-salvation.html

***Begin Quote***

In a free society with all property being privately owned, the problems would have been reduced or entirely prevented.

I'll begin with Katrina: No one can stop a hurricane, nor affect its strength. Remember, though, that the hurricane did ordinary catastrophic damage to Louisiana and Mississippi. It was the existence of "public property" that resulted in subsequent flooding and bungled relief efforts that harmed the greatest number of people the most. If property were private, there wouldn't have been government levees to fail. Either that section of New Orleans wouldn't have been settled, or private levees would have been in place and been maintained far better than the government ones.

A likely scenario for private ownership of the levees would have seen their ownership in the hands of investors, and their upkeep paid for by insurers. Insurers would then charge homeowners in the levee-protected areas enough to cover the cost of maintenance. As it was, since government money paid for maintenance, it was possible for that money to be diverted — as it was, in this case, by the Bush administration, toward the war on Iraq. Then, in the aftermath, government employees turned away private trucks loaded with relief aid. The State continues to squander money earmarked for relief efforts, such as with the non-flood-zone approved house trailers rotting in the mud in Texas and Arkansas. Private insurance companies, who have to compete with each other to retain customers, do better than this.

***End Quote***

There is no doubt that the private free market leads to peace and well-being. Only the gummamint with it's use of force, its unique ability to force "services" upon us, and its inherent unappologetic inability to deliver on its promises is given a free pass on criticism.

Its police ride around in cars that say "protect and serve" but the courts say there is no such obligation.

Its theft is legitimized by "informal ammendments" to the restrictive Constitution.

It just ingores the rules it itself promulgates.

Any other entity that had such a track record would be delt with swiftly and severely. Yet we think gummamint is different.

Please leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s