SEARCH BLOG: DYSFUNCTIONAL
If I want to do something (example: sell my body parts), for whatever reason, why should I be prohibited from doing so?
If something makes perfect economic sense for my country (example: develop clean coal power using large, readily available coal deposits), why should unions have the power to make it economically infeasible?
If businesses benefit from the protection, stability, and marketplace that the U.S. offers, should they be able to make decisions (example: shifting production to China) that harm the economic welfare of communities within those states?
- Should individuals decide or should governments regulate?
- Do countries trade or do corporations (businesses) trade?
- Can individuals bargain effectively or are unions needed for power?
- Can selfish individual decisions lead to overall community benefit?
The heart of the issue is whether there is a place for regulation or restriction of individual or business decisions. From my perspective, individuals are almost always limited in their decisions by external forces... if nothing else by the choices available which often may be from bad to worse depending on that individual's means.
Then there is the short-term versus long-term decision. Why should an individual choose a course that has only a chance of improving the situation for his yet unborn grandchildren when a more expedient course definitely will benefit him now?
Realistically, there are choices that an individual may want that are unavailable to him because of choices that other individuals make. I want free, unlimited solar power provided to everyone by the government; you want profit now for providing me with petroleum products. I want to decide how my money is used; the government taxes me for my existence in this country. This dynamic tension is in play everywhere and most all of the time. It both restricts and strengthens individuals and groups... whether unions, businesses, governments or communities.
What is key is the process by which this interplay of interests is managed. The choices are anarchy to collectivism. History has shown that these extremes are ineffective beyond a very short time. Effective individuals need freedom to be their most effective; less effective individuals need some protection by either law or banding together against dominant individuals who would abuse them.
The issue is how can these competing forces most effectively be balanced for the most positive results? How do we prevent dysfunctional choices regardless of source?