Doug R.: I believe I probably misquoted the article when I spoke or no zoning regulations. Probably it did not go that far. However, it did say, is that there were no restrictions on an owner's right to subdivide property, and that in exercising these rights, property owners had created extensive rural slums. (So that I misspoke in calling them urban slums.) And I did not have the impression, from the article, that Pima County was a one horse town. On the contrary, the impression was that the problem existed on a wide scale and was quite serious.

It could be, of course, that the article was just a pack of lies. Virtually anything could be. On the other hand, it is possible that serious problems exist under your nose, and you haven't noticed them.

GUEST Dewey: I don't think you read me correctly. I have not suggested, anywhere, that "capitalism is evil." For one thing, "capitalism" is a vague term that could mean almost anything. Among other things, it means the status quo. The status quo is not "evil," it is the set of circumstances we live under. Life is good, on balance, in the good ol' U.S.A., so the circumstances aren't "evil." On the other hand, the system does have serious flaws.

"Capitalism," as we know it, does involve some abuses. It does not necessarily follow it should be overthrown. On the other hand, one should not go out of one's way to make the abuses worse. And it appears to me that there are people whose only purpose in life is to make those abuses as bad as they can possibly be made.

As for "preaching self reliance," there is nothing wrong with telling people they should save for the future. On the other hand, it is a cheap shot to tell poor people that their problems all spring from their own improvidence and lack of moral fiber. It is wrong for the privileged to use "self reliance," as a slogan to belittle and demean others less fortunate than themselves, and to cheat them of what little they do have. And that, after all, is what is meant by "Libertarianism" in America today.