formidable doer of the nasty wrote:
And we all know that a free market is the highest purpose of government. Not a means to an end, it IS the end. If the well-being of our citizens have to suffer in the interest of a free market then that's worth it.
Adam Smith himself would never suggest that these particular services were best provided by leaving the market unregulated. The virtues of a free market are predicated on a set of very restrictive assumptions that do not apply to education, healthcare, national defense, security, etc. But you, Sagarin, and your ilk have never actually educated yourself on that kind of boring stuff. You just like to spout off cheap rhetoric about "distortion" of the markets and then pretend you're actually debating economics.
And you, of course, undermine any credibility you would otherwise have when you don't even recognize that Sagarin-space-period is not the same poster as me. That I have so many stalkers and people preoccupied with my existence is rather flattering though. Pay attention to 800 dude and Carnivore 69, the real ones that is.