Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:22:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1343 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes:
> You seem to be changing your tone quite a bit mid stream,
> because I could have sworn you were well aligned with those who landed in
> left field on that little quiz. If I am wrong about that, I can't think of
> much that would please me more to be wrong about.
Well I never claimed to be dogmatic about anything :) I took the
<http://www.self-gov.org/lp-quiz.shtml> 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 farms should operate without govt. subsidies. (M)
I'm not convinced either way, although I am probably M-Y, depending on the
business. Well, I think I've just convinced myself into a yes.. *erk*
* People are better off with free trade than with tariffs (M)
It's a complex issue I'd need to see some figures, or working examples!
* Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them (N)
The recent introduction of the Mininum wage in the UK has not caused
unemployment, and has helped a few people.
* End taxes. Pay for services with user fees. (M)
I find this a bit of a contradiction - how can you end all taxes and still fund
government operation and national defence? I'm thinking about the system I
described for this question (that has an optional mix of tax and fees),
otherwise it would have to be a N.
* All foreign aid should be privately funded. (M)
That answer is for this system, if it were for the system that I described then
the answer would be a Y, and that would then be calling me a Libertarian, and I
couldn't be having with that!
Although I have said before that under the system I RFC'd, Libertopia isn't
that scary as the necessary back-ups would seem to be in place. I'm not
convinced that the courts alone would be the best place to regulate
corperations. Now if there was a power able to optimise and increase the
inefficiency of the courts and make them affordable to individual people then
they might be.
I don't think that courts should be free, but I don't think you should have to
risk bancruptcy defending your rights, or be too poor to seek justice.
Richard
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
209 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
|
|
|
|
