Hi alea,
Yep you pretty much understand my view. I have no problem whatever with a group or individuals freely pursuing a collective good. In may even be a noble pursuit.
I believe Ayn Rand recognized an individual may even choose for themselves to place the welfare of others ahead of themselves; for example, their child or other loved/admired person. But it must be that person's choice to do so.
My problem is with government selection of a good that is pursued and the coercive power government possesses to pursue that good. Inevitably it leads to the politicalizaton of the pursuit.
For example, education is good. However, government involvement in education has resulted in an education system operated by and for the benefit of the teachers union, not the students. There are many good teachers but they have little choice but to participate in the govenment run system. They are influenced to vote based on their own economic interests not the collective good.
I could go on and on.
There are collective goals that are good. However government is not the proper agent to pursue those goals and in the end the pursuit of the good is simply thwarted. Then we come up with some new government plan to throw more money at a new problem.
On another topic.
Material wealth is created only by human effort to alter the resources of the world the improve the quality of human life. That wealth thus created can be exchanged by the means of a currency that acts a temporary store of value.
Wealth is not created by providing the means of demanding wealth to someone that has not put forth the effort to produce wealth, but rather providing fiat currency that has as its only store of value the declaration by the government that it is legal tender and that it is the only means by which the taxes demanded by the government can be satisfied.
Effectively fiat currency enslaves those who have created wealth to those who may not have performed any effort whatsoever.
Sorry for rambling. Out of time for now.
| 