Showing posts with label values. Show all posts
Showing posts with label values. Show all posts

Friday, August 31, 2012

Some business people in Superior, Wisconsin don't believe in free markets

One of the conditions of a classical free market is the ability to enter and leave the market at any time.

Many are faulting a homeowner in Superior, Wisconsin for not selling to a supermarket chain that wants to build a new store.  See "One homeowner holds up construction of new Superior Super One", Shelley Nelson, Duluth News Tribune, 2012-08-31.http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/241725/

Shouldn't the company have made sure that all the homeowners were willing to sell before buying any of the properties?  Many say the homeowner is holding up progress and should accept the very generous offer above and beyond "fair market value".  But are all values measured in dollars and cents?

The end result will most likely be that his house will be taken by imminent domain and at a price far less than the maximum he was offered.  I know, I know, it's "eminent domain", but unless you are a large corporation with deep pockets, the result is imminent.  Remember Best Buy versus Lindahl Oldsmobile in Richfield, Minnesota?  Lindahl Olds and many homeowners were forced out.

Monday, May 21, 2012

Quote of the day: Even a dead fish can…

"Swim against the current: Even a dead fish can go with the flow"

Title of a book by Jim Hightower:

"…serious words of wisdom to share here, namely: question authority, trust your values, seek alternatives, break away, stand up for your beliefs, and swim against the current!

"Their book introduces readers to people across the country who have actually done this-people in business, politics, health care, farming, religion, and other areas who are taking charge, living their values, doing good, and doing well."

From the ad at http://www.jimhightower.com/store/swim_against_the_current.

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Real values from a real conservative

I enjoy reading David Brooks columns in the New York Times because he often makes sense out of all the conflicting ideas. He is conservative in the non-ideological sense; he doesn't take automatic positions because those are the currently popular "conservative" "values". He looks at ideas from several perspectives; he weighs the good and bad of proposals both now and on a longer time scale.

A good example is his column "The Values Question", New York Times, 2009-11-24.

The values in question are caring for the vulnerable in our society. If we care for the vulnerable, then we may not have resources to invest in other things we as a society want. On the other hand, do we want to live in a society that does not care for the vulnerable?

To me, this is real conservatism, even compassionate conservatism.

His apostasies from "true conservatism" include that to pay for the costs of some of these programs "the Democrats have admirably agreed to raise taxes."