Subject:
|
Re: Libertarianism again.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 1 Sep 1999 04:16:33 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
cjc@newsguy.com*stopspam*
|
Viewed:
|
2050 times
|
| |
|
|
Moz (Chris Moseley) <moz1@ihug.com.au> wrote:
> I can, but none of them strike me as realistic. The scenario itself seems
> to be more or less believable, in the sense that it matches the observed
> behaviour of a statistically significant number of people. Are you arguing
So because a significantly significant number of people are
stupid/selfish/non-forward-thinking enough to not save ANY of their
income over their entire working lives that justifies the taking of
money from others to pay for their problems?
> Can you explain why what's yours is yours, or is it an axiom?[2] Either
> is fine, but I'd like to think that you can justify such a core belief.
Better yet, how about _you_ explain why, if so, you think that what's
mine isn't mine.
I _know_ what's mine is mine. I work hard for it every day, most
nights, and a lot of weekends. I don't know what things are like in
NZ, but here in the good ole USA, I've personally _seen_ people who
don't work much, if at all, get along pretty well, mostly with the aid
of tax money from people like me.
> By your beliefs surely a private police force should protect the private
> fire brigade, paid for by you directly. I mean, I know that there are
> problems with that, but I can't see how a socialised Police forcxe fits
> the Libertarian economic model.
Don't paint me as either an economist or a Libertarian apologist - I'm
neither. I'm talking common sense and basic "let them who do not work
not eat" philosophy.
> Do you value community at all? Community is not a free good, therefore it
> must be paid for. In your case, by theft. You seem to prefer organised
Depends on how you define community. I've lived in some good ones and
some bad ones. To be honest I mostly ignore the community I live in.
I've lived in the same apartment for 3 years and I don't know the name
of a single neighbor who wasn't already a coworker of mine.
> Mike, it seems to come down to how far each of us is willing to stick
> to a theory of how perfect people should behave, and how far we are willing
> to admit that in practice people are short-sighted, selfish and stupid.
> The few who do think ahead rarely agree.
Oh, I'm willing to admit that the vast majority of people are rather
stupid. I see them every day. My admittance that people, by and
large, aren't _willing_ to live other than in the now, doesn't make me
responsible for them.
> I count both you and Larry as
> apparently intelligent individuals who are mysteriously unable to see why
> my green socialist position is the only rational one. This seems to be a
> pattern repeated throughout history. Hence the popularity of nose-counting
> to settle disputes that are not amenable to rational discussion.
Well, I suppose I should be honored to be named in the same sentence
as Larry like that. I have to admit some basic ignorance as to your
particular brand (color?) of socialism, though. I haven't taken a
poli-sci course in years, and to be honest I don't have the time to
keep up with the politics in my own country, much less the various
misguided systems in every postage stamp country around the world.
All I know is that in just about any system, the politicians at the
top end are milking it for all they're worth, lining their pockets for
their own benefit.
> As I've said to Larry in the past[1], a lot of the things that Libertarians
> advocate have been shown to only work in practice if everyone does them,
> and to be enormously vulnerable to the tragedy of the commons. I have yet
> to see a defense of Libertarianism that addresses this, and only blind
> contradiction offered from those who admit it as a problem.
Well, again, I'm no Libertarian apologist. I think a lot of what
Larry says makes sense, and maybe in a few years I'll have time to
digest it all, but in the meantime you'll have to direct all nits you
want to pick with his party towards him.
> I am very interested in other solutions to both the direct scenario and
> to the meta problem.
I don't have any solutions. I just vent every now and then when I see
more of the money taken from me being spent on stupid things and even
stupider people.
--
The parts you want and nothing else?
http://jaba.dtrh.com/ - Just Another Brick Auction
Why pay eBay? Run your own LEGO auctions for free!
http://www.guarded-inn.com/bricks/ (still in Beta)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Libertarianism again.
|
| was: Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in (...) I can, but none of them strike me as realistic. The scenario itself seems to be more or less believable, in the sense that it (...) (25 years ago, 31-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
276 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
