Market Competition for Security Measures

[jamesd at echeque.com]

    --
On 25 Oct 2001, at 0:00, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> > > A bare one objection to comprehensive market based 
> > > security: a market needs private property, and other 
> > > civil rights, in order to function efficiently, as 
> > > predicted.   Protection is what guarantees those 
> > > rights. If you place protection on the market, you no 
> > > longer have a guarantee that the market itself can 
> > > function as originally intended.

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 jamesd at echeque.com wrote:
> >And if we place food on the market, we no longer have a 
> >guarantee that anyone will be able to eat :-)

 On 26 Oct 2001, at 0:18, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> Of course. The point is, the market can work perfectly well 
> in the absence of sufficient nutrition for all of the 
> participants.

 But the market, unlike those wise benevolent folk who
consider themselves morally superior to the market, DOES
provide sufficient nutrition for all the participants,
whereas whenever the wise and good have set themselves in
charge of providing nutrition for all, or X for all, they
have usually failed no matter what the value of X.

    --digsig
         James A. Donald
     6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
     uzxAd0pvJ5PX1jXw2p1edtML+I4VCxipiT4j/VrF
     4V36lFs1xXlyoMvT6s5LYzy9iPrB3N+ruHLpuZfID