Pentagon's Futures Market Plan Condemned

Jim Watt wrote in message . ..
On 30 Jul 2003 10:23:01 -0700, (psyshrike)
wrote:

A mechanism for expressing this fact is what we are talking about,
nothing more.

I would take it that they haven't got a clue what is happening in
the world and feel that the traders have a grip on it and want
a mechanism to get their opinion.

Thats what the trading room says ... and they should know.

Reflexivity at work.

I am actually hoping this is some sort of trend. If you look at
PAM.Then look at polution emmissions trading that has been implimented
in europe it would seem we are on the verge of some sort of
governmental renaissance.

Governments that respected civil rights, begat free market economics.
Is sonny teaching pop a lesson? How much of public service could be
converted into open market tradable assets and futures?

Some states are looking at floating restricted driving lane rights at
auction (Buy yourself HOV lane access). Which begs the question, why
not float all driving licensing on the open market?

As the driver count increased, the price would go up, which would fund
the construction projects requisite to avoid congestion. Additional
licenses could then be floated reducing the price. The publics wants
of service would inherently balance with the publics willingness to be
taxed.

Campaigns would probably focus on license counts for particular
government services.

If you want to take you own trash to the dump, don't buy a trash
pickup license. If don't need to drive, don't buy a license. If you
are a polution activist, buy polution rights by the ton, and don't use
them.

Is there a bigger movement towards open market implimentations of
government services? And how would that effect civil rights and world
stability? And what do you call it, a Marketocracy?

-psyshrike