Mindblown: a blog about philosophy.

In reply to butimbeautiful. I just asked our Austro-Canadian houseguest whether she hated Australia. She looked at me as though I had lost my mind, denied it, and demanded to know where I’d ever gotten that idea. I thought I got it from her! But …

In reply to <a href=”https://prosociallibertarians.com/2022/12/14/government-actions-arent-pareto-optimal-they-are-paternalist/comment-page-1/#comment-306″>sean s.</a>. 1. Not without government approval. 2. Please explain. 3. I disagree. Imagine I have a used X (whatever that might be). I like the X and am happy to have it. You really want the X and I am the only one that has one. You offer me $50.…

In reply to <a href=”https://prosociallibertarians.com/2022/12/14/government-actions-arent-pareto-optimal-they-are-paternalist/comment-page-1/#comment-305″>Andrew Jason Cohen</a>. 1. Citizens can move or emigrate. 2. It is common for employees to have no real option to quit. 3. If an employer takes advantage of “situational coercion”, then that employer **certainly** is coercive. All coercion exploits a vulnerability. 4. The ” different positions” of “government” vs “employer”…

In reply to <a href=”https://prosociallibertarians.com/2022/12/14/government-actions-arent-pareto-optimal-they-are-paternalist/comment-page-1/#comment-304″>sean s.</a>. It would be incorrect as employees can quit. If they really can’t quit, they are slaves, not employees. If they “can’t” quit because there are no other jobs available and they need the pay, there may be coercion, but not by the employer; call it “situational coercion.” In that…

Reconsider the initial proposition. Take “Government actions entail coercion” and substitute the word ‘Employer’; is the proposition still correct? If not, why not?

In reply to Irfan Khawaja. Oh yeah, I forgot to say our rock music is awesome. You should hear my daughter on the subject of her home country. She thinks it’s a complete dump😃 LikeLike