Ayn Rand, \"Antitrust: The Rule Unreason\" Alleged

¶ … Ayn Rand, "Antitrust: The Rule Unreason" alleged purpose Antitrust laws protect competition; purpose-based socialistic fallacy a free, unregulated market inevitably lead establishment coercive monopolies.

Remarks on Causation and Liability

This reading discusses the relationship between conduct and result. This mainly refers to an injury afflicted to a person because of negligence by another person. The writer specifies that an individual should be compensated for any injury they suffer that is directly caused by another individual's negligence Thomson, 1984.

The direct cause of injury might not be easily identified especially if there are two or more parties involved, but if the individual can prove that all parties were negligent then the parties should pay for the damages. The probability of negligence determines the percentage of payment by each party. The legal system is mainly concerned with justice and fairness. In the case presented in the paper, the plaintiff is injured, and there is no way for them to prove who caused the injury. The plaintiff sues the two people and the courts award him damages where each individual has the probability of causing the injury. The court determines that the plaintiff does in fact, have a right to be compensated and because there is no way to determine who caused the injury both parties had to compensate the plaintiff equally Braham & Hees, 2009()

The reading tries to establish the relationship between causation and liability. The writer provides different scenarios that would make it easy to understand how causation of an event would lead to the liability. For a defendant to be found negligent, they must have acted willingly and knowingly in a negligent manner. The writer continues to demonstrate that not all negligence could lead to liability. The negligence has to be directly related to the injury suffered. A plaintiff cannot sue an individual merely because they were negligent. The individual's negligence has to result in injury to the plaintiff for there to be causation that leads to a liability.

Wealth

Wealth is bestowed to those who work hard. People accumulate wealth in order to enjoy the best things in life. The wealthy have to reduce their expenses while increasing their incomes. This is the only way they are able to accumulate more wealth. There are laws that govern the accumulation of wealth, private property, and competition. These laws may be unequal or unjust in how they operate, but they have to be respected and observed. The proper mode of administering of wealth is the main purpose of this reading. The writer provides three methods by which wealth can be disposed Carnegie, 1889.

Wealth can be left to the descendants, bequeathed for public purposes, or administered while the possessor is still alive. These three models are all within the law, and it is upon the possessor to identify the best way they would like to dispose of their wealth.

The writer provides information as to the benefits and disadvantages of the three models. In each model, the writer provides his own conclusions based on their understanding. Disposing wealth after death seems like a noble thing, but the writer demonstrates that the possessor was not so keen on disposing it in such a manner. It would be best if the possessor would have disposed of the wealth while they were still alive. Giving to charities is noble, but it is only noble when they are still alive. The law taxes heavily any wealth that a person leaves behind. This way the government has the opportunity to take a larger portion of the money for the development and improvement of society.

Argument for causation and liability

In the first reading, the piece demonstrates that any negligence that leads to injury should be compensated. A person who causes injury to them self would not demand for compensation from another party Robert Lussier & Herbert Sherman, 2009.