From: HANLY-AT-BrandonU.CA
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 19:52:42 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Selling of Human Organs
To: marxism-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU


In reply to:
At 6:44 PM 4/30/96, HANLY-AT-BrandonU.CA wrote:

>LIbertarian idiocy isn't required to justify this, ordinary neo-classical
>idiocy can do it on its own.
   Doug wrote:
What's the difference, really?

COMMENT: Well there certainly is a family resemblance in that both support
the operation of a free market in this area. A libertarian however is more
likely perhaps to argue from the point of view of rights and if there is talk
of maximising it would be of maximising freedom.
Free persons should be left to make voluntary bargains as they wish without
government interference. The point is made not in terms of people's utility
functions but in terms of rights of free people.
The neo-classical economists claim that allowing markets to operate in this
area satsifies the Pareto principle--and also no doubt maximizes welfare as
well. Neo-classical welfare economics is primarily utility based whereas
many libertarian arguments are deontological and appeal to rights rather
than welfare or consequences of actions.
. This is particularly true of Nozick in ANARCHY STATE AND UTOPIA.
 Cheers, Ken Hanly




     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---