nickycheese Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 Surely the freedom of people to not have something done to them (murdered, punched, gently poisoned by 2nd hand smoke) outweighs the freedom of someone else to do these things (murder, punch, smoke in public building)??? No? Not always. It's a balance between the individual good and the general good. For example, the freedom of me not to have the air around my house polluted by vehicles is outweighed by the freedom of other people to drive their car where they wish. Another example - the freedom of me not to have my house compulsorily purchased and knocked down might be outweighed by the freedom of other people to drive faster / sit in a bigger traffic jam on a bigger road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 19, 2011 Author Share Posted August 19, 2011 Very good points. Although in the case of the pollution it's actually two groups that can be compared. The freedom of everyone to have clean air and the freedom of everyone to drive a car. So what we do is incrementally make steps towards achieving both goals, hence catalytic converters, lower emission engines, alternative fuels. Compulsory purchase doesn't abrogate your right to own a house though, nor does it allow the state to steal your house, that's why it's a purchase. But still a good example, the state forces you to sell whether you want to or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.