wrote (in passing)
>... but man, i'll tell ya: this issue is one of the reasons i grow increasingly
> concerned about the issue that bodi raised on another thread: the
> poilticization of consumer choices.
>
> ugh. they are already politicized now, of course, but i can't imagine what
> happens when those choices become a topic for public debate where we're
> talking about "socialist planning". ughfuckingughughugh.
>
>
> kelley
Kelley - at one point Albert and Hahnel did advocate policies that would have led to this. Not only just about every critic but most supporters had the same reaction you did, so they don't make a point of it any more. They may have changed their minds. At any rate socialist planning does not require discussion of individual consumer choices, and most supporters of socialist planning would be against any optional add-ons that let people know the amount of fat you ate, the amount of whiskey you drank, and would be against any semi-official forums where people would be encourage to bring the subject up. (People might be rude and bring the subject up in dinner parties, grocery stores or resteraunts or any other circumstances where they observe your consumption, just as some do now. Presumably you defend against that through ignoring them, humor, return rudeness or whatever forms of self-defense you use against rude and irritating people now.)
I know that wasn't your main point - but I just did not want to let the comment stand unaswered.
Thanks
Gar