Debate : 3552


Off-Topic / Debate / 3552

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) And some will send their children to school not at all, which is the whole crux of the argument. Jasper (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) But are those children any better off now? If a child has whatever it takes to succeed in school when the parents have no care, they ought to still do well. There will be organizations working with these children (there are now). They will (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Matthew Miller

(...) I think a large part of what I'm reacting to is the concept that these will be profit-driven organizations, perhaps sponsored by large corporations looking for more skilled workers. That seems dangerous -- have you seen Disney's Pocahontas? (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) I haven't seen Pocahontas. Why should the organizations necessarily be run by corporations? They aren't now. Even so, what is necessarily wrong with organizations run by buisiness? Buisiness is more accountable than the government (for (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) That's a lovely notion, but it seems at best unrealistic. "Whatever it takes" is a lot more than academic ability or even a knack for succeeding on tests; it stems from a solid upbringing and a sound family unit, and there are demographic (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) If the kids don't have whatever it takes, they don't have it. No amount of government posturing is going to fix it. If people really feel these kids deserve a break (and perhaps if this REALY is the case, they do), then charity will step in. I (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks

(...) Agreed, studies of synaptic development favour the 'nurture' in nurture vs nature. (...) Sadly, as the wages go up, teachers who care less will be attracted the the profession. Not that teachers shouldn't be paid more, it's just a problem to (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) Just for clarity's sake, I wasn't referring to a genetic "whatever it takes;" I was using a more metaphorical meaning of hereditary, like hereditary royalty, or a generational history of child abuse. Dave! (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) to (...) Your posts are moving from annoying to hilarious. What have we got now? Teachers who could care less! Why? I care about kids, and I know most people do. I know most people can't live off a teacher's (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks

(...) I don't believe that myself either, in fact I've no idea where it came from! Do you believe that just because I don't agree 100% with you that automatically makes me socialist, communist, or any other leftist label? I'm tired trying to argue (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) he is (...) from! Do (...) automatically (...) Well, I must have took it the wrong way, but it sure looked like you were complaining that you might, under a Libertarian system, actually have to spend more of (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks

(...) Well I never claimed to be dogmatic about anything :) I took the (URL) quiz and I have edged closer to the Libertarian and Moderate spheres, but it still labels me left-liberal. (Personal Self Gov 80%, Economic Self Gov 40%) * Businesses and (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) ObPetPeeve: No we bloody well don't. The expression is "couldn't care less", ya damn buffoon. For whatever reason, this particular one _really_ grates. I suppoose because you're saying exactly the opposite of what you're trying to convey. (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

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 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) And be able to do much less with it? Jasper (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Jasper Janssen wrote in message <388835c3.72065940@l...et.com>... (...) Considering that by the time you buy something from a retailer, it has been taxed 5 or 6 times, I think you'd be able to do quite a bit more. -- Have fun! John The Legos you've (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) You've heard of something called inflation, yes? You also realize that in a libertarian system, all that changes is _who_ pays, not _that_ it's paid? And that when the businesses you buy from pay, you still pay? Jasper (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) This, yet again, sounds like "forget the stragglers" reasoning. What if "people" (whoever they might be--I'm dying to hear some suggestions, since in Libertopia a person's responsibility seems to be to himself and/or his family) don't feel (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) So let me see... your point is, these putative people who are dependent on the kindness of strangers because they're what, chronic crack smokers, deserve some sort of say in what morality their children are shown? I guess if you want things (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks

(...) I don't think that asking questions, or even giving examples of situations that might give a particular idea problems can really be called potshots. A lot of the other stuff that's been flying around certainly could be. Richard (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) too, (...) that (...) I should control myself, but I'm evil! (1) Sorry about that. Seriously, why don't you answer his question??? Or, was "more government spending" the correct answer? 1 - I admit, I am not (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) that (...) Certainly true. But I guess I'm a little frustrated by the way .debate is lately. It seems to be a few libertarians trying to explain how to make the world a better place vs. several times as many people saying "what if this, what (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) That is what I was thinking as well. (...) Interesting... (...) I am wondering, especially Matt Miller, view on rights. He keeps calling on them, but doesn't really say what he thinks. Scott S. P.S. Larry, I read most of the Libertarian (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) Perhaps you misread my post, but I'll answer anyway. I'm saying that the children of people (none of whom I've called, even by implication, "crack smokers") who are unable to meet their responsibilities can't realistically expect support from (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) sense. (...) through (...) agree, (...) I (...) sizable (...) get (...) So what's the problem here? If a child's parents are so incapable of nurturing the child for success, why should they have much if any (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Frank Filz wrote in message ... (...) the (...) realistically (...) that (...) necessarily (...) all (...) so (...) everyone (...) I sort of thought it was hopeless too, Frank. This is directed to those who have been "debating" us. I decided, since (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Dave Schuler

(...) Liberama is disqualified because it relies on the assumption that in its great society people and corporations will be motivated by higher ethics and community responsibility--an assumption which is fine on paper but has never come close to (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Frank Filz

(...) If individuals and corporations are incapable of charity and community duty, then why do we have it currently? As far as I know, PEOPLE created our government. You don't seem to be preaching the "god" factor. Also, I see "deliberate, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Jasper Janssen

(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —John DiRienzo

Jasper Janssen wrote in message <388a3894.72786960@l...et.com>... (...) In your opinion. (...) Not too long ago, you said you'd ruled it out. So, you are still willing to consider it? Glad to hear it. (...) Is there an empty state around? I guess (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Jasper Janssen

(...) Certainly I'm willing to consider it. I just don't think you'll be able to convince me. (...) When there are few of you, centralising yourselves and starting small certainly is easier than going for the big bucks right from the start. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —John DiRienzo

Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38970e5b.389705315@...et.com>... (...) Oh, really?! (...) a (...) I'd like to see that happen. I am sure the Liberals (Socialists) of this country would love it, too... "Wow, those Libertarians in that state are (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Jasper Janssen

(...) Yes. Really. "Going by past successes", that is called. (...) So what you are really saying is that you'd rather not do it because you're afraid it might not work. Well, your choice. (...) Thought you were talking about donors. Okay, (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —John DiRienzo

Pointless jabber... Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38acafe0.562152541@...et.com>... (...) It was a joke. (...) this (...) Why bother only changing a small community when its possible to change the world? Anyway, I am not afraid it won't work, and (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) That's not what he said at all. He's saying that others would victimize us if we did do that and made a success of it. And that's largely why it won't work in this country. The only way to be safe from the predations of others would be to turn (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Jasper Janssen

(...) So make it work despite opposition and predation. If it's so much better than the current situation, a measly 70% income tax shouldn't harm you at all. Jasper (24 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) But in Libertopia, everyone who chose to work would have more money due to wildly less government waste. If we all have more money it will be easier to donate more. So maybe there would then be 'enough' charity. right? (...) Does Libertopia (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Scott Edward Sanburn

Dave, (...) Tell me if this is wrong, but this discussion seems to imply that our current school system is completely neutral on things, which is not the case, based on what I know. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Dave Schuler

Scott: (...) If that's what I implied, it was unintentional. Actually, your argument about a liberal-leaning school (or any -leaning school) supports my concerns about a Libertopian school system, simply changing the flavor of the -leaning! Dave! (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Dave Schuler

(...) Many people and corporations contribute to charities simply for the tax write-off. Beyond that, some people contribute, I have no doubt, because of a sense of spiritual duty or because it's proper to do--and that's laudable, certainly. Maybe (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Frank Filz

(...) Two things. First off, how did the tax break get there in the first place? Second, the tax break just makes it cheaper to contribute to an approved charity, it doesn't improve the actual bottom line. (...) To be honest, I have yet to see any (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Scott Edward Sanburn

Dave, (...) Well, that is why I favor the school choice (Vouchers, etc.) I think we should be able to have our children go to the school we deem best, not what the government thinks. I think school choice will be a big topic in the coming years. I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Exclamation points —Dave Schuler

Scott: (...) Why yes! It's Dave-factorial! Actually, I don't know why I started, but I've been signing my name that way for about 12 years. Just something weird I came up with during my crazy teen years. And, as you speculated, it's a way to (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Libertarian stuff —John DiRienzo

Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) (and (...) middle-of-the- (...) to (...) view (...) Your a moderate what? (...) So (...) Good memory. And sadly, you (actually Jasper said this first) "aren't anywhere near ready for it" may be true. (...) me. (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Dave Schuler

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes a lot of unhelpful nonsense ultimately decaying to a simple ad hominem, yet again. John, are you wholly unfamiliar with the conventions of interpersonal communication? You seem unable to mount an (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —John DiRienzo

Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) nonsense (...) you (...) Deal with your problems if you have any, too. I am dealing with my own as quickly as I can, and I don't mind you pointing them out to me (1) (well, sometimes!). To help me with my "sad (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Dave Schuler

(...) That's all anyone can ask, and I will likewise try to be more civil. Larry's done a great job of pointing out that my behavior has been less than exemplary, so I'm hardly able to cast the first stone. As a general suggestion (and Richard has (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Larry Pieniazek

(...) With the threading as broken as it is, this deep in a thread tree, it may be useful to quote enough of the post that you're replying to for us to find it. Or are you just ranting against John in general rather than at a specific post? I'd say (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Dave Schuler

(...) Did I break the threading by failing to quote the message? If so, then this break is obviously my fault. I guess I would say that I am ranting against John in general as well as at a specific post of his, but my initial message was in response (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Didn't say YOU broke it, merely that it is broken. "this deep in a thread tree" for various reasons, the reference lines being posted are truncated. Todd has a proposed fix to cnews that will compensate for (I think in most cases) other (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff --Time Out! —Dave Schuler

(...) Mine was a face-value question--I wasn't saying that you accused me. (...) Why are you so hostile now, of all times, when I've admitted in two separate posts that you were right and I was wrong? Is it because I didn't like Bicentennial Man? (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff --Time Out! —Richard Franks

They say it takes 20 minutes for the hormones caused by anger to fade and dissapate. That when you're in the middle of an emotional argument, it is better to go into seperate rooms, whatever, for 20 minutes until both parties become rational again; (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff —John DiRienzo

Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) of (...) It seems that irony and sarcasm are often overlooked by the beholder, and I personally will be far more careful in their use. I refrained from pointing out the "do gooder" mentality that I also saw (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) The problem is who _does_ get a say in it. Are you saying that if, say, only criminals are willing to pay for schools, they should be allowed to raise innocent children into criminals (...) Not a bad idea. (...) Anarchy == no government. A (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Hey, Jasper, we might agree on something! ;) Scott S. (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) Quick, someone call the news! Film at eleven. Jasper (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) in (...) family) (...) If no one wanted to help them, then how in heck do we end up with a law helping them? Who passed the law in the first place if no one wanted to help them? I really doubt ANYONE (no (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) That's an interesting assertion, but it has nothing to do with what I said. (...) Obviously I'm not suggesting that all "charity" is or should be driven by blind funds--that would be akin to throwing money down a well. My question, however, (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Please use our term. It's our meme, not yours, and using some other word means you are talking about some other thing, which we don't have to defend since it's your idea rather than ours. Libertopia as a name was chosen specifically to drive (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) Actually, whatever the intent, I think it comes across as an implication of rather than a distinction from Utopia (...) I used the word interchangeably, and as far as I was concerned they were the same. You're right, however, and I apologize (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) For what it's worth, I have a different take on this than Larry does. I agree that (to me, at least) Libertopia implies "our flavor of utopia" rather than something wholly different. And, I think the use of Liber-rama (which is how I'd spell (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) "Libertopia" comes across (to me) as a name specifically chosen to drive home the point that it _is_ utopia. You did a fairly bad job if the above was what you were trying to convey with the name. Would have been better to avoid any mention of (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) Maybe I need to re-read what you wrote, but perhaps you could expand and clarify what you were trying to say. (...) It seems to me we are on the verge of corporations running the schools anywise. Look at all the product advertising which is (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) (Banging head against wall) Why oh why was I so silly as to begin reading this thread. Why not just tie 'em to the land and call them serfs? Heck, let's admit that they'll never amount to anything and put them in factories at age 6. Let's (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) My point was that I agree absolutely that it is foolish to contribute to charity without some sense of where one's money will wind up but I don't feel I can trust a corporation or a single wealthy individual to fund an educational system (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) Who says a single individual or corporation is going to be running most schools? Currently the government gets most of its money from the middle class. These people will still have this money to spend on services. I know that I would be at (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) A very convenient piece of gerrymandering. (...) Okay, now it's my turn to have painted with too broad a brush, and you point out some powerful counterexamples. The unifying factor I see in your cases is some natural catastrophe or extremity (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) My point is that since we aren't perfect, there will always be a few jerks. Constraining the whole society for a few jerks seems irrational. Look at how the current "zero tolerance" of weapons is working in the schools. Kids are getting (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Hmm. The riots in Seattle were from WTO disagreements, wasn't it? People, no matter what they believe in, sometimes do evil things. I think some the riots were caused by the civil unrest of the country, which have ironed out somewhat. I think (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) I don't want to go out on a limb, but just because it happened in a fairly conservative town doesn't mean idiots, rioters, evil and corrupt people won't do things. I know a few conservative people that I can't stand sometimes. Doing these (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

Scott: (...) restrictions (...) True enough--I was just trying to illustrate that State College isn't typically some crazy town of hoodlums (or is that hoodla?). (...) Some were, because they were caught on video. I don't know what the final count (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Dave, (...) Hmm... going in Ann Arbor (MI), Lansing (MI), and Ohio State (Columbus), there were a lot of hoodlums, trying to pick on the college people. The worst was Ohio State, the East side of the campus, right on the border, were some of the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Frank Filz

(...) Your comment about a lack of respect for property is a good one. To those opposed to the Libertarian ideal, think about the effect that government not respecting property rights transforms the populace into not respecting property rights (or (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Scott E. Sanburn wrote in message <387E4253.33A064C2@c...eb.net>... (...) these (...) fullest (...) final (...) <rant against people> And they write on the walls, too!! </rap> -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been dreaming of... (URL) weird Lego (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Yes, that as well! Grr.... >:( Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator/CAD Operator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) Hmm. (19 years ago, 2-Sep-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —David Koudys

(...) What were those tests done with rats in a cage-- a few rats in a large cage with lots of food and water, no problem many rats in a small cage with hardly any food and water--mass pandemonium We've seriously not evolved that far from the other (...) (19 years ago, 2-Sep-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Dave Schuler

(...) That’s discussed at some length in “Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors” by Ann Druyan and the late Carl Sagan. They stress that one can’t always predict human crisis-response based on the behavior of rats, but real-world examples make one wonder (...) (19 years ago, 2-Sep-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —David Koudys

(...) I wouldn't directly correlate humans and rats, either. Rats turning on each other in bad situations is an 'instinctive defense mechanism' that they can't consiously do anything about. Humans, on the other hand, even though we have 'instinctive (...) (19 years ago, 2-Sep-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —John DiRienzo

Frank Filz wrote in message <387DFF2B.5B98@minds...ng.com>... (...) Thank you Frank! -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been dreaming of... (URL) weird Lego site: (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) You say this as if it is necessarily true. I haven't yet seen even Larry produce any evidence that this is in fact the case. So replace "will" with "may" for the moment, please. (...) Prisoner's dilemma. If you're the _one_ not paying when (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks

(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Game Theory and the like... —Dave Schuler

(...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) Sad as it is, I see neither of these things occur very regularly in bog cities. Both break down in the context of millions of teeming ants. (...) Honours, no less? Congratulations... Summa Cum Laude. Jasper (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Richard Franks

(...) Agreed - I guess that's why the whole a-ism thing has very much an emphasis at a low community level. (...) Heh - thanks! I'm still studying for it, so save the congrats for about 5 months until I get it :) Richard (24 years ago, 17-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]) —Jasper Janssen

(...) Yes. The problem is complex, though: If you go back to a small community (say, max cities out at 100k inhabitants.), can you still sustain technology at out current level, and rise beyond that? Are million-plus-inhabitant cities a necessary (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)