Here is what I said:
“Thats a pretty involved question. Not as a general free for all no. Not in terms of a lot of spending or great levels of compulsion.
But I see the need for industry plans to take many industries smoothly to a situation where they are functioning like a free market ought to.”
Here we are talking mostly about tax exemptions and deregulation. So for example with the taxi industry, we want enough taxi licenses out there to bring the cost of a license down somewhere to the cost of a background check. But people have borrowed money to buy these expensive licenses. Hence an industry plan to bring the situation to a state of free enterprise might consist of talking to the industry about how reform will be handled. Then going through the following process:
1. Issue enough new licenses until the price of a license has fallen in every last locality.
2. Exempt taxi driving from being taxable income for a period of twenty years.
3. Exempt any work for a stand-alone taxi company being taxable income.
4. Once license prices have recovered start issuing more at a rate which brings the license price down in a pre-determined way. Perhaps by 1% every week.
The upshot is that you are not destroying the capital value of peoples property without first helping their cash-flow. Giving them a chance to reform. Its pretty hard to ask voters to support you if you are advocating destroying their capital value and their cash flow at the same time. So it is here we can see that industry plans to bring various dysfunctional industries to a functioning free enterprise situation are a good and necessary thing.
Or take farmers water allocations. During dry spells, water is priced too cheaply in many areas. We don’t want to destroy farmers cash flow, and the capital value of their farms at the same time. So we take away the farm income taxes and company taxes first and then slowly crank up the price of pumping water when the river is low. They get the cash-flow boost prior to being hit with the capital value hurt, or extra water costs.
So yes in every case industry plans are necessary because its a long way to a free society, and we want to get there quickly and smoothly. But morons who put word-connotation ahead of word-meaning are willful in their exploitation of the “Gotcha” moment. I must have gone over this issue about 50 times with people at Catallaxy. And they know, if they choose not to lie, by “industry planning” I mean neither increasing compulsion, nor expensive spending programs. But despite this knowledge, one of their number has struck again:
“Does Bird, the libertarian support industry planning?
In a word yes, as long as industry policy he approves. Any other form he disapproves and you could very well end end up being “mass sacked” which is really a euphemism for mass executions commie style.
So he lies and he links straight to me as proof that he’s lying. Just shows what an irresponsible moderator Sinclair is letting such a defamatory and inaccurate post through.
Lets go through the implications of reform in a number of industries, and I am sure I can show once and for all why passive libertarianism cannot work, would be unjust, and will not succeed. Libertarianism is the goal and but passive libertarianism isn’t the method wherein we get to this goal. Neither a fair, just practical or even a potentially popular route.