Subject:
|
Re: Trying to understand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 21 Mar 2000 19:23:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
499 times
|
| |
|
|
<snip>
>
> I agree I personally would always wear belts and I would want all my friends
> and family to do so. And while medical costs are not completely privatized
> (that is, I pay for the lapses in judgement of others), I support, to a
> limited extent, forcing others to do what is safe.
>
> Further, I'd of course consider a parent who didn't put his or her children in
> safety seats as negligent and liable.
Definitely agree here. And if you think I've got an opinion on this, you should
hear my wife's comments when she sees someone else's unbelted kids in a moving
car. In some ways I'm glad the other car is moving, so she can't completely
give them a piece of her mind.
>
> But you can already hear the shoe dropping.
>
> I'd prefer that people not get subsidized medical care and at that point I'd
> support them taking whatever silly risks they chose to (think of it as
> evolution in action) as long as in so doing they did not endanger others.
OK Larry, I'm slowly coming around to this line of thinking (on the subsidized
medical care). Don't call me a Libertarian just yet though :-).
>
> ++lar
-Duane
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Trying to understand
|
| (...) It is mandatory, on pain of losing federal highway funds (a case of using the purse power to get a state to pass a law instead of passing a federal law. I personally feel it's wrong to do that, but I digress). What is not mandatory is the (...) (25 years ago, 21-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
139 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
|
|
|
|
