Comments on: The Candlemakers’ Petition

By: Gerry Flaychy

Gerry Flaychy — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:23:18 +0000

One of the things that this story says, is that if we have to chose between two producers of the same good, one onerous and one gratuitous or partly gratuitous, the only criterion should be the best interest of the consumers, not the importance for the country of one of the producers, or the importance of one producer over the other.

The chief care must not be the interest of neither one of the producers, but the interest of the consumers.

By: T. Ralph Kays

T. Ralph Kays — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:02:36 +0000

Gerry

Woohoo, you just keep getting better and better, by the way , where do you get whatever it is you are smoking?

By: Gerry Flaychy

Gerry Flaychy — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:24:49 +0000

Asking to replace the already existing light of the sun by the light of other producers of light, is equivalent to asking to broke already existing windows to replace them by the windows of other producers of windows: two versions of the same basic story.

In both cases, if the petition is agreed, consumers are the losers !

By: Thomas Talionis

Thomas Talionis — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:05:28 +0000

I’m sure there were people who would’ve petitioned to ban the light bulb because it put all those candle makers out of business.

And they call themselves Progressive.

By: T. Ralph Kays

T. Ralph Kays — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:17:18 +0000

Another beauty by Bastiat! My favorite line in this article is “to reject wealth itself under pretense of encouraging the means of acquiring it”, what a powerful statement.