America is Held Hostage By Global Private Bankers

[Parker2112]

LP Platform



Inconsisent

Edit: I'll expand on this. Courts are a government en y ...

you dont know jack. end of story.

[MannyIsGod]

you dont know jack. end of story.

Cato ins utes stance on the environment

Science can inform individual preferences but cannot resolve environmental
conflicts. Environmental goods and services, to the greatest extent
possible, should be treated like other goods and services in the marketplace.
People should be free to secure their preferences about the consumption
of environmental goods such as clean air or clean water regardless of
whether some scientists think such preferences are legitimate or not. Likewise,
people should be free, to the greatest extent possible, to make
decisions consistent with their own risk tolerances regardless of scientific
or even public opinion.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb111/hb111-44.pdf

Yeah, I don't know jack.

[MannyIsGod]

been reading it for years eh?

The lynchpin of the libertarian approach is protecting private rights in court, rather than through a bloated administrative agency.

Evidently you dont know about libertarian platform, manny. Keeping deluding yourself.

Sure, direct me to the part of the libertarian platform that says this. The lynchpin in the libertarian approach is an educated and informed public which is able to make appropriate decisions in the free market according to their preference.

The fact that the libertarian party wants a government with preference neutrality completely counters the idea of courts imposing what they see as fair.

[Parker2112]

I'm not interested in looking further back, but as I said Parker there is a reason you clash with everyone and considering most here bear little or no allegiance to either party you trying to say its because you bash both parties is laughable.

Considering you've named yourself a recent libertarian (unless I'm mistaken?) many here have been discussing the pros and cons of libertarianism for almost a decade in this forum I really don't think that has even the slightest bit of merit.

there are more reasons than just my calling out the right and the left. I have said some really cross since Ive been posting here, and rubbed many the wrong way. Even those who I have never insulted or ridiculed take offesne to the way I have gone after other posters. Im not here to make friends.

Also: My main goal posting here is solely to put the third party views at the table. Otherwise I dont do my homework. I am here solely to secure airtime for an alternative message. And to bash the trash that got us into this predicament in the first place (the two party paradigm). And you need to open your eyes to the fact that MOST posters here are hopelessly invested in leaning one way or the other. Whats more, most posters here are hopelessly invested in buying the status quo as the only way that will work. Yourself included ("we are incapable of making libertarianism work. We must keep the status quo").

[Parker2112]

Sure, direct me to the part of the libertarian platform that says this. The lynchpin in the libertarian approach is an educated and informed public which is able to make appropriate decisions in the free market according to their preference.

The fact that the libertarian party wants a government with preference neutrality completely counters the idea of courts imposing what they see as fair.

if you know anything about libertarian philosophy, property rights of the individual are of paramount importance. how do you think property rights are protected?

[MannyIsGod]

Dude, the alternative message was here before you had even heard about it.

You really think highly of yourself, informer of the masses.

[Parker2112]

We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life -- accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; (2) the right to liberty of speech and action -- accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and (3) the right to property -- accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.

Since governments, when ins uted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

http://www.lp.org/platform

[MannyIsGod]

if you know anything about libertarian philosophy, property rights of the individual are of paramount importance. how do you think property rights are protected?

Public goods are not covered by property rights of the individual. The environment is a public good.

Unless of course you can tell me who owns the Gulf of Mexico? Who owns our atmosphere? Who owns the national parks? Who owns the Mississippi Rivers? Who owns our aquifers?

Then again I don't know jack!

[MannyIsGod]

BRB bidding on the atmosphere on Ebay so my property rights protect it.

[Parker2112]

factories and corps never pollute private property?

[Parker2112]

you know dude. Do you understand how standing in a court of law works? Do you understand how citizen watchdog groups can sue over public resources? how riparian landowners have rights to sue over a body of water?

educate yourself, your in the stoneages. I cant even believe you want to argue libertarianism with any authority. you dont even understand property rights.

[MannyIsGod]

factories and corps never pollute private property?

Don't backtrack now please. The post I pulled from wasn't addressing public property. It was addressing all environmental regulation which is primary directed at protecting public property.

You asked me to provide where you were inconsistent with libertarian viewpoints so please don't backtrack now.

[MannyIsGod]

you know dude. Do you understand how standing in a court of law works? Do you understand how citizen watchdog groups can sue over public resources? how riparian landowners have rights to sue over a body of water?

educate yourself, your in the stoneages. I cant even believe you want to argue libertarianism with any authority. you dont even understand property rights.

You apparently can't get it through your head that this view you keep spouting is completely contrary to the libertarian platform.

Please provide me to something that backs that up.

[MannyIsGod]

you know dude. Do you understand how standing in a court of law works? Do you understand how citizen watchdog groups can sue over public resources? how riparian landowners have rights to sue over a body of water?

educate yourself, your in the stoneages. I cant even believe you want to argue libertarianism with any authority. you dont even understand property rights.

There are no property rights for public goods such as the atmosphere or the ocean, public lands, or our water sources. You can't seem to understand this.

[Parker2112]

not a chance. my is still totally consistent. I am simply pointing out the holes in your logic

[Parker2112]

dude, the ing game is on.

[Parker2112]

As a free-market environmentalist, he asserts private property rights in relation to environmental protection and pollution prevention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_paul

[MannyIsGod]

I can mul ask. If you can't feel free to go watch it. When you come back, feel free to post some links to do entation backing up what you say as I have used the libertarian party and the largest libertarian think tanks publications to do.

Thanks.

[MannyIsGod]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_paul

Did you see the word private in your Wikipedia sentence? Thanks.

[Parker2112]

There are no property rights for public goods such as the atmosphere or the ocean, public lands, or our water sources. You can't seem to understand this.

then explain how like this happens:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/...n-1020195.html

[MannyIsGod]

then explain how like this happens:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/...n-1020195.html

Really? I mean really?

BECAUSE THATS NOT A LIBERTARIAN SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT.

[Parker2112]

private groups sue over public resources all the time.

Environmental Defense has sued the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), alleging that the agency has not complied with state law including its own rules

The Otter Project and the Environmental Defense Center (EDC) filed a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today, in response to the Service’s failure to issue a final decision repealing the no otter zone--an outdated rule prohibiting southern sea otters from reestablishing historic populations in California waters south of Point Conception

The Northwest Environmental Defense Center is suing two federal agencies over a controversial gravel mining proposal for Oregon’s Chetco River.

Four environmental groups and a Montgomery County couple filed lawsuits yesterday arguing that federal transportation officials approved the intercounty connector project before adequately studying the highway's effects on wildlife and public health.

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah no , Parker. Thats because we're not in a libertarian form of government.



I'm literally LOLing right now.

[Parker2112]

those laws that permit suit can exist in a libertarian system BECAUSE THEY DONT NECESSARILY REQUIRE AGENCIES TO ENFORCE! JUST AS IS THE CASE HERE, PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT IS TOTALLY A-OK!!!!

ARE YOU GETTING THE GIST YET?

[Parker2112]

you can downsize govt and put enforcement into the hands of private citizens (contrary to what you implied, which you are now backing away from), which is how libertarians would do it.