Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Happy Thanksgiving! How the Second Thanksgiving Almost Didn't Happen

A wonderful piece by John Stossel (here) about how collectivism practiced by the Pilgrims nearly resulted in their starvation until they figured out that man is best equipped to take care of his own land and family.
As Governor John Bradford said,


"So as it well appeared that famine must still ensue the next year also, if not some way prevented," wrote Gov. William Bradford in his diary. The colonists, he said, "began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length after much debate of things, [I] (with the advice of the chiefest among them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land." "This had very good success," Bradford wrote, "for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many. "

As Stossel points out, "
What private property does -- as the Pilgrims discovered -- is connect effort to reward, creating an incentive for people to produce far more. Then, if there's a free market, people will trade their surpluses to others for the things they lack. Mutual exchange for mutual benefit makes the community richer."

6 comments:

Eileen (aka Coboble) said...

You are mixing up the value of land ownership, with the value of the labor.

I don't think it was "private property" but the value added component of the picture, which was the cause of the increased productivity.

The land was divided and given.
Each family given enough land to take care of their family. It was the labor that each family became responsible for.

No one has any natural right to consume what is produced by the labor of others.
But no one has a right to profit just by claiming ownership to land and other natural resources.
It is only the value added to those resources that one should be allowed to profit from.

While I do not believe that anyone has a right to the goods and services produced by the labor of others; I do believe in charity.
We are a very rich country, and providing basic medical care, and substance, to those who can not provide for themselves, is a good thing to do.

I am in favor of replacing welfare with a program of granting land use (not to be confused with ownership) and even some start up seed.

Eileen (aka Coboble) said...

And
Happy ThanksGiving

Klatu said...

Yea the Pilgrims early on saw the power of free enterprise free market capitolism vs. Socialist _ _ _ _ _.

Ps: Eileen please do not
run for Political office
ever. There's enough Nut
Case's working in the Public Sector
and in Political office already.

OH and HAPPY THANKSGIVING
but please don't tell
the Seattle School District
that I said this.

Eileen (aka Coboble) said...

klatu,

Don't worry, I have no intent of ever running for public office.
The nice thing about having idealistic ideas and no power to implement them, is that I don't have to see the flaws.

Instead I am going to publish my ideas.
Then after I am dead, someone will come across my ideas, and decide they are good.
They will then implement them in some corrupt distorted fashion which will fail.

Klatu said...

Eileen (aka Coboble) said...
Instead I am going to publish my ideas.

Klatu said: Don't bother eileen, the pilgrims tried your ideas and rejected your socialist ideas for
property rights and the Free Market system.

Ps: But I'm wondering when Republicans will be going out after "THE PILGRIM VOTE".

Eileen (aka Coboble) said...

Klatu,

If you understood my view, you would not have stated that the pilgrims rejected it.
You either did not understand what I said, or did not understand what the pilgrims did.

It is that "put everyone who believes X about Y, into the same box, and assume they all also have the same view on issue Z" thinking that you need to work on.

I try not to do that to you.
In fact I sometimes find myself looking beyond the surface of your posts, for some common ground.
As a result I have come to sometimes benefit from debating with you.