 | | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
The usual massive and capricious snippage. (...) I'm not sure I'd agree that the degree of change (since the enlightenment, or more specifically, in the last 20 years) is that small. Certainly it's not as large as I'd wish it but it's a lot more (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Just for the record, I think it's worth noting that John and I arrived at our conclusions from widely divergent convictions; John's faith is apparently stronger than mine, but thoughtful rhetorical consideration, paired with a fair perception (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) Both of you have made my point very clearly - namely this, you cannot fix a problem until you are able to both realize and accept it's root. We cannot address any of societies problems until we accept the fact that it is bent on selfishness - (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The day after disaster
|
|
(...) Evidently there's a good number of people east of us that don't mind being lied to either. It may "come with the territory" as things are now, but that doesn't mean that's how it should be or would be. That's the whole point - "it's time for a (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) This has been my contention for some time, and I'm gratified to hear it restated so eloquently. My problem has never been with the conclusions in Libertopia's arguments, but rather in the assumptions necessary for the system to work. In fact, (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) If I may interject, because you two have crystallized the crux of the matter here for me. In a perfect world, Libertopia is, IMO, the best form of government you could have. Problem is, you need to have the perfect world *first*. People need (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Gafla (was: Re: LP POINT 1)
|
|
(...) I think it is the stuff you get when you try to make Lefsa but you don't do it right. /Eric McC/ (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The day after disaster
|
|
(...) Standing by your principals is commendable. If you concur with those principals, then you absolutely should vote for him. (...) Yes - the three "old-line" parties are various versions of the same thing. (...) Have you actually READ the (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G4qvDE.4D6@lugnet.com... (...) some (...) plan. (...) You know...we lose 90% of our communication online. Its an easy mistake. Well, you now see where I stand. Know that I don't hate you - don't (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
<text topped> <I'm saying that (...) <text tailed> If only you knew me. I'm far too disorganised to have any sort of master plan. I'm sorry if I have offended your sensibilities... I really am. Scott A (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G4qp1v.87r@lugnet.com... (...) I don't think its that simple, but suit yourself :-) BTW - I'll assume that the 'you' there is a typo, where 'he' should have been there. (...) in (...) Second I (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Freedoms in Libertopia? (was Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
|
|
(...) Well, here's my point. I am all for personal freedom, but even in Libertopia we need to draw some lines. Hey, use all the drugs you want; it's your life to ruin. As long as you do it with the understanding that there won't be any free gov (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
<SNIPPED> (...) You may view this as a snipe, but it is more of a BTW. Co-chair the CATA Walfare Privatization research the the USA is Jose Pinera. Pinera was a former minister of labor and welfare in Chile (nice dish), - managed the privatization (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) Read : (URL) key phrase: "Show me what the support for LP is. Show me it is a representative cross section of the US public." I then clairified: (URL) key phrase: "I'm interested in breadth - not depth. Show me that all socio-economic groups (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
Snip it all except the quote If you'd like to define the meaning of *this* (...) as that the LP (not small l libertarianisn) doesn't have deep, broad, election winning support in the US, then I would agree. However that's rather a smaller point than (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) What is Gafla anyway... it is not in my dictionary. (...) Which came 1st, the egg or the chicken? One way to view Libertarianism, is that it is a good idea taken to its illogical extreme. Saying the world is moving towards libertainaism is, in (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
<tim's text zapped> Tim, Larry could have ended this days ago if you had just answered my points. He asked me to state them here, look down to "Sorry. Stipulate..": (URL) did stipulate (URL) failed to answer me, instead he cherry picked a point made (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes(heavily snipped): (...) **snip** (...) Sorry, Lar, but I think you've broken the duly established "gafla" limit for a single post. 8^) (...) Would that be sufficient for the LP? To have a (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G4qF2F.EyC@lugnet.com... (...) to (...) should (...) Lar- I'm pretty much in agreement with what you said in your post. And sometimes I dunno why I keep skimming o-t.debate. :o) So (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
(...) Sqirmity squirm. (...) "Directions"? ROTFL. (...) Sqirmity squirm. (...) I think it is. I welcome it. It is gratifying to speak with individuals who are interested in addressing the points... rather than the crowd. "The man who follows the (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) Nope. Read it again. His assertion is that as America is an egalitarian society, it rejected the LP. Basically his point is that egalitarianism is at odds with the LP. As you well know, the point I raised referred only to the range of support (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
(...) What I actually said was this: (from) (URL)Tell you what though, Scott. Pick one point, one thought, one item that (...) and again: (from) (URL)I'll repeat my offer though. If Scott picks one point or small topic and (...) Note the use (in (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
Repeating the original cite and with much snippage of multiple quotes, irrelevancy, signatures, etc (the interested reader knows how to follow references upwards, or should), as always: (...) I'll repeat my analysis of this theme (that (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) In a Libertopia, just as much as you. (...) They operate in very desperate circumstances. Supply and demand in an unregulated labour market means that they must work at the "market rate" and at the market conditions - just like in Libertopia. (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) "Altruistic Charity" In a strong a economy, we would expect to have higher disposable income. We may choose to use that to better the circumstances of others, or we may choose to go to "Wally World" - that is a personal choice. If the (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Are we to understand, then, that a posting in disagreement with your view is nothing but an annoyance? If so, then please come out and state it clearly. If not, please explain what you mean, and while you're at it let us know why you're (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:G4p58v.5n8@lugnet.com... (...) Obviously. (...) issue. With or without rehab, recidivism is extremely high, check the numbers. Primarily, because there are laws against the use of drugs, and (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
FUT lugnet.off-topic.use...-annoyance "Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:G4osvM.Br7@lugnet.com... (...) yet. (...) blame" as: (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"John Neal" <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote in message news:3A228CA4.D204CA...est.net... (...) make (...) you (...) Oh I know the answer John, the question was more rhetorical, so I am not really offended nor even surprised by your attack. Hopefully (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Today's the day.
|
|
(...) Not really, no. (...) for starters, you're extrapolating a bit far. For another, if only it was that simple. It's not the simple political machinations that I'm worried about. The "lying, cheating and stealing" as you allege pretty much comes (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) I agree, not all selfishness is bad, yet I believe it to be the root of most of what ails us. Any crime or perversion can be sifted down to an illicit focus on meeting a selfish desire. Again, our freedom only exists in our ability to respect (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Today's the day.
|
|
(...) Why not? At least the CCP guy (yes, we have had a elected communist member of Parliment, if you americans are wondering...) he _stood by_ his principals, and voted against Canada entering WW2...(he knew we were going to war, but wanted a (...) (24 years ago, 28-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Today's the day.
|
|
(...) I enjoy constructive reasoned debate, sure. (...) Actually, it's the Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance. ie. C.R.C.A. (...) Actually I find the 22minute guy quite funny, including this particular bit. For those who would claim that such an (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) In my book, selfishness needs to be separated from "moral rot". Selfishness in and of itself is not bad (in fact, my proposal of just giving poor slobs money because it's cheaper than having them steal to get the money is based on pure (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I had a feeling I had incompletely communicated my stance. I do think that altruistic charity based on qualities like you list above is the most effective. My point is more that one needs to look at the entire system and examine (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) If a person is so adicted as to essentially be incompetant, then there clearly is a problem, however, I don't think Libertopia removes the options of prison or involuntary commitment to a treatment center, but the commitment needs to be based (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
|
First off the answer is an easy yes; however, a couple of points that need to be considered in this argument. 1. Who are we talking about when we say needy? Do we include those who refuse to work? and who makes this determination? My understanding (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
I am not a registered Libertarian, but I feel my ideology closely matches theres so let me give these a shot. (...) Yes, and in a very short period of time an individual or company with such a limited scope would be a failure; but let society and (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Today's the day.
|
|
(...) (you had to know this one was coming, Steve...) Ya, well, lets change his name to Doris :) (to those of you who don't follow Canadian Politics, the Canadian Reform Alliance Party (that's C.R.A.P., if you can follow the letters...) has in its (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Today's the day.
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Don't you find that somewhat illogical? For one, it assumes that Day will "lie, cheat and steal" (if I may use that expression) like Cretien has, but all evidence is to contrary. You say you're scared that Day will "impose" his (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.3
|
|
(...) As I mentioned above, there would be no central regulation. Yes you would be able to just buy a degree (you can do that today). Libertopia will offer more effective control because the "regulation" would be subject to the free market, which (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
(...) Since this has been posted individually, I will point out that there was a thread (or at least a sub-thread) exploring this point. That debate (and it was a pretty good one) did not convince me one way or the other. Larry and other folks (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
(...) No, my understanding of Libertarian philosophy is that you can say, "Irish aren't allowed." Or blacks, or Jews, or fat people, or whatever. People are free to boycott companies/individuals that do this, of course. I'll snip the rest 'cause I (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
(...) Yes. I have never met a Libertarian who said otherwise. Most think it dumb, but they do believe you should be able to. (...) In the form of indentured servitude, yes. (...) I don't have the "official" Libertarian answer to this. This would be (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3.2
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G4p3vD.14C@lugnet.com... (...) So what is the point? Why are you now posting these individually? Why couldn't all of this be in one big post from the beginning?? ...I guess I'm learning who is a (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) And what before the fact control keeps your current doctor from taking an unwise hit of LSD in the current system? Ok, LSD isn't easy to get, but I bet your doctor could get it easier than the average person. There certainly isn't anything (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
(...) I'm hardly Libertarian, but I think I can field a few of these: (...) Sure, as one is able to discriminate now, based on race. Not currently in terms of employment or pay, but the right to associate or not to associate is spelled out very (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | LP POINT 3.2
|
|
From: (URL) Slave Under libertarian principles, would one have the right sell oneself into slavery? Scott A (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | LP POINT 3.3
|
|
From: (URL) Regulation Would medical doctors etc be regulated to ensure their competence? Or could one just buy a medical degree from a University, and open a practice? Scott A (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) LP is a vote of principle, and it largely benefits from disillusionment with the political process – a belief that a win for Gore/Bush will result in same outcome for the USA. I'm willing to bet that a good deal of LP voters would rather not (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
I have made my point with this. My assertion was that that the LP is not supported by a broad cross-section of the US public. We agree that its support is from the "haves" not the "have nots". Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
(...) You are avoiding my points Larry - YES or No is all that is required. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) The libertarian claim to benefit all society... not just the poperty owning part of it. (...) So you have to be cruel to be kind... I see. So, how long would it take? How many would die? How much would crime rise by an the short term? (...) No (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 2
|
|
(...) What's so hard to understand about one point at a time? Did you want to give up on your other two for now and talk about this one? I am taking them in your numbering order. This bears repeating, though... (...) as does this... (...) ++Lar (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 3
|
|
One point at a time. I'm not willing to invest more of my free time in teaching singing at this point. (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 2
|
|
(...) This is an easy one Larry - One or Two, whats is gonna be? Would a starving man/woman have a right to food? Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | LP POINT 3
|
|
4 Quick Questions: 1. Race Under libertarian principles, would one have the right discriminate against others based on race? 2. Slave Under libertarian principles, would one have the right sell oneself into slavery? 3. Regulation Would medical (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) I'm not sure what that phrase means, exactly. It seems pejorative and seems to (along with phrases like "cramped, Victorian") show the speaker's bias and tendency to want to use ridicule instead of critical thinking. But I don't believe I (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) That is not the point of my point: "Show me it is a representative cross section of the US public." I'm interested in breadth - not depth. Show me that all socio-economic groups support the LP in a broadly representative manner - show me it is (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 2
|
|
(...) One point at a time, sorry. But in the meantime, you can either apply first principles and derive your own answer, or you can read old threads, where something very like this was discussed, at length. Check your assumptions, though. They (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
|
(...) Clearly state the question, please, along with your assumptions. In the absence, though... I've never claimed that the LP has massive support among the voting populace as a political party. If it did, we'd win a lot more elections than we do. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) Not admitting defeat doesn't mean a debate hasn't been lost (or won). Sometimes the debate provokes further thought on the subject - and that's the place that people change their minds. Admit it, how many of you are second-guessing eating (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | LP POINT 2
|
|
LP POINT 2 Larry If an individual were to find him/herself in your propertyist dreamland with no food, no water, no education, no money, no property and starving. What rights would he/she have? Which right would be strongest: 1. The right of the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | LP POINT 1
|
|
LP POINT 1 Larry, Can you please show me how wrong I am? Scott A From: (URL) > I liked this, it pretty much sums up my view of the LP: (...) So weak that you will not answer it? Show me this guy is wrong. Show me what the support for LP is. Show me (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
1. 1st I had to state my arguments - you refused to answer them. 2. Then you asked me to raise one point at a time - you refused to answer it. 3. Now I have to raise a single point at a time, and start a new thread for each. You _really_ are (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) Not sure I understand the question-- are you asking me why I would still make it a crime to drive a vehicle under the influence of drugs? Because if you are, then you are more obtuse than I thought. -John (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) Every catholic - perhaps. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) I (mostly) disagree. Of course part of my agreement is that in a way you are right, very few arguments are ever "won". But this group can and has been the catalyst for changes in opinion. I have certainly changed my opinions (and you can go (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Parental strategies? (was: Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne)
|
|
(...) Uh, we don't know that... (...) And you do? Please enlighten, but first please cite your source of this understanding. (...) I think he's shown how to get your kid to call you by your first name, that's about all. (...) Uh, we don't know (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) According to my understanding of Catholic doctrine yes, or effectively yes. If a Catholic wishes to refute this, I'd welcome a response. My understanding of Catholicism includes the following points: 1. The pope is the leader of the Catholic (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) Web interface doesn't support it so I have to manually ignore... :-) Dunno what Scott's reasoning is. (...) This is an excellent summation. He won't do research, I won't do it for him, he won't stop sniping, and I will not answer every snipe. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
(...) By which I you mean, I imagine, a dictionary that agrees with your definition. Fair enough, but I think you haven't found such a dictionary yet. Even that "not screwed up" dictionary identifies the verb form of "to blame" as: 2 a : to hold (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) It way well be obvious to you. But many economists accept that there is no reason to think that the market will always work. From what I read of Larry's friend, Hayek, on Friday I know he was one of them. I understand Larry has an (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
If you look at www.m-w.com for the verb form of "blame", you will find a dictionary that is not screwed up. "John Neal" <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote in message news:3A11ED4A.689B2C...est.net... (...) designation of (...) can be (...) population." (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
Uh, society is not the victim here, dude. When talking about murder, the victim normally is the person who was murdered, but maybe on your planet the purpose of justice in a murder trial is to figure out how the unfortunate slaying of an innocent (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | feticide Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G42sw2.pM@lugnet.com... (...) around (...) However, (...) in (...) mind, (...) Au contraire. The cases are basically the same. In my country murder is murder... if you kill a postman or a (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) Arguments are never won here Tom, they just end. Often weight of numbers, produces and end. However, just because a debate ends it does not follow that is has been won/lost. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the US membership of LUGNET does (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lets keep politics out of Lego
|
|
(...) I find it ridiculous that Larry asked me to raise specific question so he can clarify his thinking - but he then refuses to answer me. To a certain extent, cherry picking questions one wishes to answer is part of a debate. Refusing to answer (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
|
"John Neal" wrote in message (...) people) (...) liberals (...) sociopaths (...) ever) (...) under the (...) huge (...) Would the Libertarians call this wussy flash? Why would you want to keep the most abused of all drug laws on the books, Mr. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
