 | | Re: Libitarian guff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | (...) No, it requires people and corporations to look into the future, evaluate long-term benefits vs short-term costs, and then make the right decision. Since all/most companies always do that, how come Y2K preparedness rose so sharply over the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) I'm glad that you agree with me that it's not altruism per se that is required. In turn, I agree with you on what IS required. Long term thinking. That seems to be in rather short (1) supply these days. Companies today in this particular mixed (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | (...) Definately agreed on what would be nice - but although Libertarianism might achieve this, I don't believe that it's the only way! Richard (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | Reordered things a bit... (...) So you agree that all of the below are laudable goals, then? Great. Let's talk more about what they mean and what sort of system would be needed to foster them. (...) No tax EVER and the common law (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | | (...) Authoritarian fascism. (Not that I'm comparing ANYTHING to Nazis, Jasper. *grin*) It's ALL regulated. 100% simple. (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) You got me there, it DOES deliver on the predictability aspect (as long as the reich actually lasts 1000 years, and as long as the supreme leader isn't very whim driven). How does it do on the rest of the list? Rather more poorly, I'd venture. (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | | | (...) War is actually quite a good driver of economy. The Germans weren't doing all that bad financially. They robbed a hell of a lot of people to do it, though. "when they came for the homosexuals, I did not say anything, because I was not a (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | | (...) No, they weren't doing all that badly--they were doing *abysmally*! The entropy of that system was increasing dramatically, because 40%+ of GNP was going to militarization--the only way to sustain the veneer of prosperity at the upper levels (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Hmmm. I suppose you're probably right. I'm not much of an expert on the 19th or 20th century. Larry, have you ever studied history? I wonder, cause you seem to rely heavily on that "charity" thing. Jasper (25 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Yes. Have you? I'd go with no you haven't really "studied" it, if you're positing tulip mania as some sort of actual free market thing or example of why business cycles are inevitable. (...) The most free societies are the most charitable. (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Tell me where the government interfered to make tulips more expensive. Tell me where the government interfered to make M:tG or Pokemon cards more expensive. (...) Does that include charity to non-organisations? Like, giving money right where (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | (...) It's predictable _from the government_. What makes you think the corporatist swine are going to be as predictable? (...) What's this "corporation" thing? "Officers" has always referred to cops, in my experience. (...) None. Not in an (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | (...) [snip] (...) This is what disturbs me about libertarian theory. It seems just as idealistic as socialist theory. If the system were totally different, worker-owned collectives would work wonderfully as a way to organize the world. But it (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, no. I believe that I can demonstrate why a collective will always fail, no matter how different the system, unless you can repeal cause and effect. (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | (...) I'd rather you demonstrate to me why property is 1) a natural right and 2) the only natural right. Then we'll come back to this one. :) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | I agree, let's put a pin in it for now. Let's start a new thread for that one. Until Todd fixes cnews, if we post in the thread where you discussed my life affirming post and agreed that initiating force is unacceptable, but didn't see the link to (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <3876C987.86AB9507@v...er.net>... (...) Wow, somebody better slap me before the praise goes to my head... Frank (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Libertarian theory and altruism (was: some incorrectly spelled thing not worth repeating —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | (...) Sometimes/usually. Not always. IOW: I can try. (...) Maybe, but would it be for the better? Or would the increased uncertainty in there being no government mean even more short-term thinking? (...) That would be a good thing. OTOH, in the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
