I have several questions about accountability with respect to private property rights:
a man invites himself over a friends house and is injured from a structural problem in the house…
an employee is injured while working with machinery…
a doctor accidentally injures the patient during surgery…
who’s to blame?
for the first one I would say that a man willingly goes to a friends house and therefore takes the risk of something happening. Assuming that the problem was not set up to hurt the man on purpose.
The second one I see as to vague, what kind of machinery?Was it his own error? the machines error? or someone elses fault? What extent is the injury?
I would say for the last one the doctor is to blame, but the patient does or should know the risks of getting a surgery, obviously some surgeries are more risky, i.e. tonsil removal vs a triple bypass.
Since he went into the friend’s house in the first place, it would be his fault. The fact that he invited himself over places more guilt on him since he was not unknowing invited into an house about to collapse, but I presume he knew the place and the risks that he took in going over there.
This problem is a bit difficult to answer due to its generality; there are factors like: a) was it the empoyee’s part in the first place that he was hurt (though I highly doubt this was the scenario you were speaking of) and b) was the accident the fault of improper maintence or was it “merely” a freak accident. Overall, I would say that the terms of the contract would dictate who would be financially liable for the expenses resulting from the accident, for instance: the contract may very well have said that the employee accepted all risks involved with his position and was liable for any mishaps that he would be stricken with, or that the employer would be willing to pay the medical expenses for all accidents resulting on the job. To fully understand everything at work here, one must understand the value of the workers to the employer and how wages not only dictate the amount a worker is employed but also the perks of the job. If the employees were highly skilled, had years of experience under their belts and were hard to find, it is more likely that they would be paid a higher wage and that their wage would most likely be high enough to enable some sort of a health insurance with still a large monetary payment to the worker. On the other hand, if anyone could do the job, then obviously their wages would be far less due to factors given above, and that their wages would probably not be high enough to both attract employees and give a health insurance policy for the job’s risks would need to involve a higher compensation to attract demand for it. Ergo, in this example everything depends directly on the terms of the contract signed by the empoyee.
In this example, I would once again say that the terms of the surgery would dictate who would be liable if a surgeon injures a patient during surgery. Of course, surgery can be a very expensive service, and because of its expenses many would prefer a lower cost that involves the risk of them being liable for injury than a higher cost with the surgeon being liable. It all boils down to risk, and how much risk the patient is willing to risk to get a lower cost - thus entering into the realm of subjective valutations were no further commentary is possible.
Truly all of the above incidents involve individuals taking on risks. There are some that are not willing to take risk and prefer a mediocre future than the possibility of mishap to enrich themselves; however, there are some that are the inverse- and it is to those people that the last two examples happen to. As for the first example, I’m assuming that it is a freak accident (if the two individuals involved were squatters in a deserted building falling to pieces due to no maintence, they knew their risks) in which I hope the two would be able to come to an amicable agreement; nevertheless, if someone invites himself over and gets there, then his injuries are his liability.
Good answer, but I’d also suggest reading Kinsella’s article on a libertarian theory of causality (in the legal sense.) Contracts (and customary arrangements, if we’re speaking of a common law system) are very important in these affairs.