I'd be amused if I didn't suspect that the dough for this nonsense came from the feds.

There are definitely some areas where the markets fail horribly. I wouldn’t count health care necessarily into that category because it’s a murky issue though certainly there is a salient point that when it is ones life one is bargaining with the potential exists to distort the relative power of the entities involved to the point where the market can’t function.

Still I’d say the jury is out on healthcare. We’ll have to see what the countries that have a largely privatized healthcare system end up looking like when they approach Western levels of economic development. Still there are some fields where the markets fail unambiguously; I’m amused by my unconscious irony in saying fields since they’re an example. I’m referring of course to the tragedy of the commons. I’ll illustrate with a quick anecdote from home in eastern Canuckistan.

When I was just a pup I read in the history books about the days when the cod was so thick in the North Atlantic that you could lower a basket over the side and then pull it up full of fish. Even in my own youth I can remember fishing with my Grandfather (I hated it, manual labor, ick!!) for the swimmy buggers. But in that same era when I was growing up the market discovered that if you lower a huge whopping dragger over the back of a big factory fishing trawler you could sweep up all the fish (and everything else) you wanted! Better yet you could do this with a lot fewer workers than long-lining, trawl lining or even with traditional nets. Fish were as cheap as dirt, maybe cheaper. The government didn’t involve itself much; this was kind of before environmentalism took hold very hard I guess. Certainly there were no government subsidies of the fishing or much else government involvement a libertarian could blame. We all of course know how this story ends, turns out that baby fish like the bottom of the ocean to be not churned up into a wreck. Turns out that even big ecosystems like the Atlantic notice when you sweep all the life out of the water like a broom. The waters of Eastern Canada today are as empty as George Minor’s brain or Dick’s conscience. The great factory trawlers rust in heaps outside the emptied out fishing towns. I hear they’ve about done in the tuna now as well and are hard at work on the other fish stocks.

Another example is air. Industry discovered back in the 80’s that if you put your smokestack high enough so that the pollution doesn’t rain down for a couple of states you’re in the clear. Acid rain came close to totaling the fresh water fish (the trawlers and draggers couldn’t fit up the rivers) in the northeast. In that case government actually did get involved and forced the polluters to install scrubbers and now thanks to the heavy hand of government acid rain is a minor issue and the fish stocks are recovering there.

Anyhow, suffice to say, when it comes to things that one person can’t (and shouldn’t) own then markets suck big time. Which is one reason I’m a neoliberal instead of a libertarian.

How about too much? It's a waste. Did you ever read Bloom County when they described the Drug War using hair tonic? Pure win.

Ah, but Peter, part of the cause of the great depression was the Smoot-whasisname Harley? Protectionist movement that ignited trade wars and contributed to the depression so in a way WWII can trace it's roots back to diminished trade (among of course plenty of other causes).

Hey okay by me Greg. I'm certainly more inclined to believe in Big Bang than I am in God dun it. I just hadn't heard about any experiments that were done to validate the hypothesis. And yes, claiming CO2 isn't a pollutant is kindof stupid. As far as I can see both Mike and I used the terms Hypothesis and Theory correctly in our posts.

Meh, Climate Science probably deserves some of the mud getting slung it's way. How hard do we even push the Big Bang theory? Actually isn't it more of a Big Bang hypothesis? I haven't read anything about tests done to substantiate it though then again the sciences aren't my forte.

What a pity.

Damnit Jay! I was hoping that meme would stay dead.

Maybe it does Bob but if so I don't know what it is. Mainstream American Culture is an enormous hole in my personal knowledge.

I'm melting! What a world... what a world...

Oh my god, I'm sorry Jason! Too early in the morning it seems.

Well I can't find the stupid study either way. Curse my feeble googling skills... if you have al ink Mike I'd be much obliged.

Never heard it before. Seems inapt considering how prevalent heterosexual child molestation is. But to the original question, should we shoot them, if by shoot you mean punish I think that any ones who act on their desire must necessarily be punished. They're rapists after all.

If by chomos you mean homos with a typo wouldn't that be murder just to start off.

Yeah exactly Freddie. As a side note kudos on your posts about Athiesm. I noticed that a bunch of the evangelist non-believers were taking a bead on your position so I shouted out on your page in support of moderation but I think it put my comment down under my real name instead of my moniker.

It's always an unparalleled delight to see you contribute to the conversations my dear lady. Please grace us with your erudite views more often.

A clarification. I don't mean to belittle the plight of a non-practicing pedophile. As a gay man I can just barely imagine the wild hell such a person must endure in day-to-day life. Still the difference between the homosexual and the pederast remains, to me, profound. A homosexual who abstains is a eunuch or a monk or a celibate, perhaps under some faiths this is admirable but without faith it's just self-deprivation. To give in to their urges merely makes them human. A pederast who abstains is a human being with or without faith. To give in to their urges makes them a monster.

Grats on the house by the way Mike.

Mmmmm