 | | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Sweat shops in this country are primarily inhabited by illegal immigrants - since their actions are predicated on being "illegal", what protections do they have? As for third world country sweat shops - a people as a whole allow themselves to (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Scott A" <s.arthur@hw.ac.uk> wrote in message news:G4pAKx.Lz5@lugnet.com... (...) Its looked messy for a long time :o) Almost as big of a mess as some people who don't know how to count have on their hands - just not on a world scale. :-) -- Tim (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Today's the day.
|
|
(...) Yeah, sorry about that, my reaction was.. heavy handed. I don't really give two spits about any particular local candidate. I'm not solidly leaning in any other particular direction, but truly a Federal Reform government scares the screaming (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
(...) Me too. That is why I stuck to quick questions. It does look messy though. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
I prefer "Would Libertopia cause the needy to get less?" Libertopia infers that it is accomplishable - that man is willing to re-distribute his wealth. The fact that man, today, is willing to have kids working in sweat shops in the developing world (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) The idea that any system will/can get rid of poor starving folks is naive, at best. It is impossible to do away with poverty. Mainly because in some, if not most, instances it is self-imposed. Some people just do not have the desire or courage (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Scott A" <s.arthur@hw.ac.uk> wrote in message news:G4p7xF.Dzv@lugnet.com... (...) I read that as he'll answer one point, when that is said and done, move on to another one, so he's ignoring all the ones after the first until their time comes. Oh (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.3
|
|
(...) I think this sort of market control is OK when choosing a car mechanic, or perhaps a plumber. But to expect a trial-and-error approach to work where health and education are at risk is a bit much for me. What if one can't afford a decent (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
(...) Exactly. In theory, EVERYONE might decide "no Irish" and will only patronize No Irish establishments. To answer your question elsewhere, yes, schools could operate on a "no blacks" basis. I regard this as a much bigger point than the one that (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) OK, so corruption accumulates over time. This leads to a question: is better to cycle through politicians frequently, and spread low levels of corruption amongst a large number of people, or have just a few long-term politicians, and (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:G4p48p.2I5@lugnet.com... (...) that (...) They are like this as Larry will only answer one point at a time: (URL) at least he claimed he would. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 2
|
|
Larry, you are deleting my points rather than answering them. Scott A "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G4p2qs.K9o@lugnet.com... (...) with (...) What (...) give (...) your (...) was (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G4p2uy.KL2@lugnet.com... (...) who were (...) America's (...) neo-Victorian (...) Oregon (...) one, (...) the one (...) me what (...) the (...) populace (...) not (...) hit (...) seems (...) (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Here's where I have a big problem with that view. Your reasoning behind wanting to give your next door neighbor the $100 seems solely based on the fact that if you don't, he has the potential to cause more damage to you. Hence, it seems to me (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
"Bruce Schlickbernd" <corsair@schlickbernd.org> wrote in message news:G4p4oC.3w2@lugnet.com... (...) against (...) in (...) associate (...) one (...) or (...) Or they may choose to seek them out. They may prefer a "no Irish" way of life? Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:G4p452.23y@lugnet.com... (...) against (...) in (...) one (...) or (...) Fair points. But could, say, a school operate on a "no blacks" basis? (...) it. (...) Fair point. (...) work. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Cdn Election Day
|
|
Well I've been out to vote, and I'll be scrutinizing tonight, including monitoring the count. And unlike our neighbours to the south, we'll know the results by tonight or tomorrow... 8-) SRC (Who's doing everything he can to help Betty Unger defeat (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
One of the central arguments against libertarian principles is that there will be more poor starving folks. I assert that this will not be the case. It is to my benefit that my neighbor isn't starving and desperate. If he is, he is likely to rob me. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) I understand what you're saying, and as far as deterrent criteria, I agree with the ones you've cited (and which I've snipped). In the current system, an illegal drug carries with it the direct penalty of its use, in addition to whatever (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
