Subject:
|
Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Jan 2000 23:08:38 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera./AvoidSpam/com
|
Viewed:
|
2594 times
|
| |
|
|
<Foyq1t.BEt@lugnet.com> <FoysHv.tu@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
> All true. All undisputed. Too bad ya can't prove it. :-)
Mostly, I just can't FOLLOW it.
> Alright. I made up the toll walkway, but I figured that in a Libertarian
> society you had to have some way of getting about not provided by a centralized
> tax-driven body.
Yes. Toll walkways may well exist. And, property owners may choose to
provide free walkways as well, either because they find strollers
aesthetically pleasing, or because they want to give access to their
stores, or because the value of that walkway is low enough to make it
uneconomical to collect tolls, or because the property association
decided to fund the walkway collectively (as condos now do to pay for
sidewalks or common area driveways) or any of a number of other reasons.
But I'm not sure what point you're making here. Were you looking for
someone to claim that toll walkways would not exist? Not me! Is the toll
germane to the example? Please elaborate.
Note that if one pays a toll for a toll walkway, one is bound by the
terms and conditions the walkway owner imposes, as is the walkway owner.
If one voluntarily uses a free walkway, one again is bound by terms and
conditions. If one feels one is not bound, then one is trespassing and
subject to ejection.
I'd have a tendency to presume that a reasonable condition might be that
if I happen to die on your walkway after paying the toll I can expect
that your workers will collect my body and present it to my next of kin,
if any, for proper disposal.
--
Larry Pieniazek - larryp@novera.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| (...) centralized (...) Why in the world are you running on about it? I don't understand. It was just the shortest-to-explain-example that the guy was walking on some public area. Mountain out of a molehill. (...) Mountain. Molehill. (...) I can't (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| (...) Yup. There are very good reasons not to let economic refugees cross into your country freely. Most especially if you are richer than your neighbours. (...) The problem isn't that the market wouldn't provide food. It's that the market would not (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
