Excursions, Ep. 36: Thomas Hodgskin Versus Jeremy Bentham

[@istvanzardai6318]

This is a particularly simplistic criticism of utilitarianism. And if G. H. Smith is offering a proper reconstruction of Hodgskin's work then it is but mere rhetoric. The utilitarians made serious attempts to explain how such forceful intrusions like taxation are justified by the greatest happiness of the greatest number by promoting security of property, subsistence, abundance and equality. Hodgskin seems to be one of those libertarians who assume with blind faith that if there would be a single businessman on an island with no society that businessman would still make money. No society, infrastructure, buyers, etc. is ever needed; money is not made in well working societies, it is made our of the sheer ingenuity of the free, untaxed enterpriser. Sad that these distorting, one-sided, only pro-big business arguments are still around.

[@ThomQuinnHere]

You clearly don’t understand economics, politics, libertarianism, utilitarianism, or how reality works. Your entire comment is a straw-man argument itself. No one is arguing that.