I'm glad you asked. It gives me a chance to blow off about one of my
favorite subjects -- "Public Choice" theory of government.
Some 30 or 40 years ago, the academics woke up to a realization that seemed
to be common knowledge among ordinary folk which is that "politicians and
government employees act in self interest". Up until that time, academics
mostly taught in their "Political Science" courses (I'm not making this up)
that these people mostly acted in the public interest, that is the
so-called "public good". James Buchanan, (winner of the Nobel Prize in
Economic Science, 1986, for work in Public Choice) and Gordon Tullock are
credited with being the primary developers of Public Choice Theory. Their
book, Calculus of Consent, published in 1962, is still considered the
classic piece on this subject. (see my web page at
http://perspicuity.net/sd/pub-choice.html for more).
So, public employees and politicians act in their self-interest -- not
yours. It's simple algebra from that point on. For example, it is more fun
for them to have your property, rather than you. They also seem to get a
great deal of pleasure out of just seeing you squirm. You say, oh, but the
property goes to the government, not the employees. Maybe, maybe not - I
quote from a recent news article I posted here:
"FBI agents seized a suburban Atlanta mansion owned by a former
$18,975-a-year property room worker. Authorities also confiscated more than
$1 million from the car and Cordova home of a veteran property room shift
supervisor"
Does that clear it up?
Leon
Leon Felkins, FEAR Executive Director
Send mail to: leon@fear.org
"The sacred rights of property are to be guarded at every point. I call
them sacred, because, if they are unprotected, all other rights become
worthless or visionary. . . .What is the privilege of a vote, if the
majority of the hour may sweep away the earnings of our whole lives, to
gratify the rapacity of the indolent, the cunning, or the profligate, who
are borne into power upon the tide of a temporary popularity?" -- Judge
Joseph Story, 1852
On 9/28/2003 at 2:56 PM Bobbyleeslady@wmconnect.com wrote:
Organization: Forfeiture Endangers American Rights http://www.fear.org/
FEAR also offers a low-volume announcements list and digests for all lists
Just out of curiosity, why does the government want to get assets back
that
never belonged to them in the first place? People buy cars from
dealerships,
not the government. People don't buy lawnmowers, motorcycles, or anything
else
>from the government unless they get it from these police auctions. If the
assests are gotten by means of fraud or drug dealing, then why not give
the stuff
or money back to the people that sold such assets? That sounds more fair
than
the government getting all. We, the people, have to pay taxes on the
stuff.
Yearly. Is that not enough?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment: http://www.mapinc.org/temp/part4758.html
Organization: Forfeiture Endangers American Rights http://www.fear.org/
FEAR also offers a low-volume announcements list and digests for all lists
List update: mailto:owner-fear-talk@mapinc.org?Subject=FEAR-talk-update
List unsubscribe: mailto:fear-talk-request@mapinc.org?Body=unsubscribe
******************************************************
FEAR also offers an unmoderated discussion list and digests for all lists
List unsubscribe: mailto:fear-list-request@mapinc.org?Body=unsubscribe
Swap to digest: mailto:owner-fear-list@mapinc.org?subject=digest
******************************************************