 | | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3887351c.71898961@l...et.com>... (...) I am glad you are familiar enough with it to point it out. You are right. It happens, that in my parts, in speaking, we usually leave out the "not". Similar to those horrible (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Corporations can take away anything we allow them to take away, in the same way that government can take away anything we allow them to. Examples? I don't see why they're necessary since we're so far into the realm of theoretical, but ok. Coal (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
Richard, (...) Well, I think money (Which is a form of trading) has been around since the beginning of mankind. If man has nothing to trade with, which is 100% tax, I don't think it would work. I would that would happen, but we will see. (...) Well, (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Game Theory and the like...
|
|
(...) I saw a program once on game theory as it applied to this sort of thing. Fascinating (to me), though my background in such matters is limited, and my knowledge of statistics amounts to knowing that I will *probably* be able to catch the bus (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) To be fair, I have to point out that Prisoners Dilemma requires participants to be unable to communicate - if you don't know what the other person is going to do then the safest strategy is the one that gives less consistent drawbacks. Even if (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: An Alternative..
|
|
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) that (...) extra (...) Marxist-inspired (...) workers (...) who (...) choose (...) in (...) there (...) part, (...) when (...) As (...) feared (...) makes (...) When (...) that (...) social (...) What I read (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) I think what you mean to say is that the government is not accountable at present, whereas corperations would be directly accountable to the people who buy their products, and shareholders. It's still not a solid argument IMO, but it's the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: An Alternative..
|
|
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) that (...) extra (...) Marxist-inspired (...) workers (...) who (...) choose (...) in (...) there (...) part, (...) when (...) As (...) feared (...) makes (...) When (...) that (...) social (...) What I read (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Nor am I asserting that all humans are bad--I'm merely pointing out that people's behavior will expand, so to speak, to fill the boundaries allowed to them. In addition, you've given spot examples to shore up your argument as well--how can you (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian stuff
|
|
(...) Stop thinking in absolutes. Incapable isn't the problem, it's that there's not enough of it. (...) Absolutes again. Show me that Libertopia is better, and I'll convert. Make it a practical example. Why don't all ya libertarians move to one (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
