Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 346
  1. #26
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    It's always interesting seeing which posters piss which posters off.
    The Great Game, writ small.
    _____________________________
    To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- The kind of Republican that would kicked out of the party today.

    "You know what uranium is, right? Its this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things." -President Trump

    Putin has built up their military again and again and again. Their military is much stronger. Hes doing nuclear, were not doing anything. Our nuclear is old and tired and his nuclear is tippy-top from what I hear. Better be careful, folks, okay? You better be careful. -President Trump



    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...16#post9293816

  2. #27
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    you are born free, and you dont owe anyone anything. And when you work to acheive something, its yours unequivocally.
    This is one of my main problems. You cannot seperate an individual from a society, anymore than you can seperate an individual cell from a larger organism.

    When you work to achieve something, you benefit a myriad of things that have nothing to do with your personal efforts.

    If you hire someone, you benefit from their education. If you buy something, you benefit from the road it was shipped to your location on, and a host of other things that went into it.

    Are we not all interconnected?

  3. #28
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    31,948
    RG exemplifies why the left just got hammered in these elections. It's one thing to say those with opposing views are wrong and then expain why. It's quite another to say they are idiots, bigots, deniers, etc.

  4. #29
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    RG exemplifies why the left just got hammered in these elections. It's one thing to say those with opposing views are wrong and then expain why. It's quite another to say they are idiots, bigots, deniers, etc.
    ???

    I have outlined why those with opposing views are wrong and have started explaining why.

    Are you saying this is what lost the election?

    Or are you saying that the left lost the election because they sling insults around to those who disagree?

    Your statement is somewhat incoherent.

  5. #30
    Believe. admiralsnackbar's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    4,010
    That's funny... I thought the Dems lost because they were such ineffective and polite pussies. Live and learn.

  6. #31
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    1.0 Personal Liberty

    Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.
    We can start here.

    Sounds good in theory.

    Let's put it to a practical example, to show what I think are the ultimate limitations of the theory.

    Assume you are a large corporation, and you decide to build a fertilizer processing plant. You consume a huge amount of water, and decide that it is cheaper to dump the waste into a nearby lake. This lake feeds a lot of streams and so forth in the area, as well as provides water for local crop irrigation. Your waste is now lowering the quality of life, and stealing "clean" water from those affected.

    Without "using force" or government, how do you stop this? Do you stop this? Do you simply accept that the company will pollute without restriction?

  7. #32
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    That's funny... I thought the Dems lost because they were such ineffective and polite pussies. Live and learn.
    Yeah, we need our own demogogues.

    Ick.

    I would LOVE for Libertarians to get their own state. Pick one, and let them all move there to try their own social experiment, just to see if it works.

  8. #33
    Believe. admiralsnackbar's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    4,010
    Yeah, we need our own demogogues.

    Ick.

    I would LOVE for Libertarians to get their own state. Pick one, and let them all move there to try their own social experiment, just to see if it works.
    The Dems didn't need demagogues, just the courage (or, more likely, desire) to deliver the policy reforms they ran on. They had opposition from the GOP, sure, but they had the majority, and they had the political capital to do a good job of finance reform, or at very least reverse ed-up, vestigial neo-con policies regarding privacy and endless money-pit wars. Ah... don't get me started.

    As for the thought experiment, I take your drift, but it also smacks of the polarized zealotry you're mocking. While there are babbling morons who conceive of libertarianism in the most cartoonish, economically oblivious terms, so are there "libtards," and "republican tards," and on, who fare no better. Pure libertarianism would almost necessarily cause a state to recede into the stone age in some ways, but it would have a balanced budget and individual liberty and might just suit them fine. Certainly no more utopian than the Progressive agenda or whatever it is that the GOP stands for nowadays. Go pluralism, I say. To quote Wino: "burp."

  9. #34
    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0 MannyIsGod's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    55,453
    I don't know how financial libertarianism doesn't lead directly to corporate control of everything.
    _____________________________


  10. #35
    Believe. admiralsnackbar's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    4,010
    I don't know how financial libertarianism doesn't lead directly to corporate control of everything.
    Well, it doesn't flat-out give them infrastructure for free, for one thing. Might not even allow for providing them tax-breaks. That would be entertaining.

  11. #36
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,110
    1.0 Personal Liberty

    Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.
    We can start here.

    Sounds good in theory.

    Let's put it to a practical example, to show what I think are the ultimate limitations of the theory.

    Assume you are a large corporation, and you decide to build a fertilizer processing plant. You consume a huge amount of water, and decide that it is cheaper to dump the waste into a nearby lake. This lake feeds a lot of streams and so forth in the area, as well as provides water for local crop irrigation. Your waste is now lowering the quality of life, and stealing "clean" water from those affected.

    Without "using force" or government, how do you stop this? Do you stop this? Do you simply accept that the company will pollute without restriction?
    Single items do not stand alone. Look especially at 2.1:
    1.5 Crime and Justice

    Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
    2.1 Property and Contract

    Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.
    2.2 Environment

    We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
    _____________________________
    If you like building things, like this Parts Changer does:

    https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/en/


  12. #37
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    I don't know how financial libertarianism doesn't lead directly to corporate control of everything.
    Exactly.

    Remove government from the picture, and you get a HUGE disparity in resources between large corporations and individuals or even groups of individuals.

    Hell, some of the larger corporations, especially the larger banks that Parker is not fond of, could easily almost buy some state governments.

    The same goes for large multi-national criminal organizations, something completely unimagined by our founding fathers.

    How would a Libertarian nation handle such a criminal cartel?

  13. #38
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    Single items do not stand alone. Look especially at 2.1:
    Without "using force" or government, how do you stop this? Do you stop this? Do you simply accept that the company will pollute without restriction?


    Now what?

    You have not given me a concrete policy answer, based on these tenets? What is the mechanism of redress here? Lawsuit? Armed Posse? Bake Sale?

    I read the other sections. I am merely asking for a solution within the proposed framework. I understand pollution is bad, and against what Libertarians stand for.

  14. #39
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,110
    Random, sorry you don't understand that a legal system will still be in place. I'm not going to explain it farther. It's there if you read and comprehend.

  15. #40
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
    ... and if it fails?

    "effective" does not equate to "guaranteed not to". A boat is an effective way to cross an ocean, but they occasionally sink.

    What is the fall back if a company ignores "social pressure"? What if they effectively surpress "social pressure" and keep polluting?

  16. #41
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    Random, sorry you don't understand that a legal system will still be in place. I'm not going to explain it farther. It's there if you read and comprehend.
    So you have a lawsuit, that is what I was asking.

    What if they ignore the result? It happens all the time in civil cases.

  17. #42
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    Random, sorry you don't understand that a legal system will still be in place. I'm not going to explain it farther. It's there if you read and comprehend.
    I understand all too well. Claiming I don't does not absolve you of providing simple explanations.

    That is a dodge, and you know it.

  18. #43
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,110
    I understand all too well. Claiming I don't does not absolve you of providing simple explanations.

    That is a dodge, and you know it.
    I'm not playing your game. It clearly states freedom until it interferes with others, and wrongdoers pay. If you refuse to see the protections of one persons freedoms from another persons freedom in there, then I will not take the time playing your games.

  19. #44
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    I'm not playing your game. It clearly states freedom until it interferes with others, and wrongdoers pay. If you refuse to see the protections of one persons freedoms from another persons freedom in there, then I will not take the time playing your games.
    This isn't "my game".

    If you institute this form of government, it will happen.

    Either you can tell me what will happen if polluters ignore courts or "public pressure", or you can't.

    If you can't spell it out simply, then we MUST assume you can't do it at all.

    Are you saying you can't explain your own belief system?

  20. #45
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,110
    This isn't "my game".

    If you institute this form of government, it will happen.

    Either you can tell me what will happen if polluters ignore courts or "public pressure", or you can't.

    If you can't spell it out simply, then we MUST assume you can't do it at all.

    Are you saying you can't explain your own belief system?
    Laws would be based on those beliefs. To pollute public waters would be a clear violation of others rights. It would be actionable, like today.

    You have the same concerns I did about it becoming anarchy. The language was cleaned up slightly to prevent that, forcible by legal rights.

    What stops polluters today? Are you asking how it will correct an existing problem? It has recourse applied in principle, enforceable in the courts.

    Please read those sections again.

  21. #46
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    Laws would be based on those beliefs. To pollute public waters would be a clear violation of others rights. It would be actionable, like today.

    You have the same concerns I did about it becoming anarchy. The language was cleaned up slightly to prevent that, forcible by legal rights.

    What stops polluters today? Are you asking how it will correct an existing problem? It has recourse applied in principle, enforceable in the courts.

    Please read those sections again.
    Once again, I will ask:

    How do you enforce the court orders? The company is ignoring the court judgment against it, as happens sometimes in civil cases.

    Please state your proposed mechanism for enforcing court judgments consistant in a manner with the principles of Libertarianism as you understand it.

    The conventional mechanism would be to use the police, and their guns. Police paid for by taxes and working for the government. This seems to not be feasible.

    Would you use the police? Or something else? Private security?

  22. #47
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,110
    Once again, I will ask:

    How do you enforce the court orders? The company is ignoring the court judgment against it, as happens sometimes in civil cases.

    Please state your proposed mechanism for enforcing court judgments consistant in a manner with the principles of Libertarianism as you understand it.

    The conventional mechanism would be to use the police, and their guns. Police paid for by taxes and working for the government. This seems to not be feasible.

    Would you use the police? Or something else? Private security?
    Bye . It's explained in my earlier post. I don't have time for these idiotic three threads you guys are baiting me on.

  23. #48
    i hunt fenced animals clambake's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    21,691
    this dumbass thinks a civil ruling guarantees payment.

  24. #49
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    Bye . It's explained in my earlier post. I don't have time for these idiotic three threads you guys are baiting me on.
    So you cannot spell out a method for enforcing court orders consistant with your beliefs.

    I must then conclude that if, given the form of government you want, court orders are unenforcable againt people or entities that ignore them, negating the justice system entirely.

    That is, by any reasonable account, anarchy. No government of any measure, and no functioning legal system.

  25. #50
    Prince of Whales RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    37,442
    this dumbass thinks a civil ruling guarantees payment.
    It doesn't. Even with todays big bad government, it is hard to enforce civil judgments.

    If you de-criminalize pollution in order to remove intrusive government from the process, then you force that into the area of civil actions.

    QED

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •