Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

All liberatarians are derailing assholes

TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
edited April 2007 in Debate and/or Discourse
Ok not all Liberatarian are idealistic wack-jobs, so how about an intelligent discussion about this topic? Personally, I'm very much in favor of the idea of self-ownership. I could easily do without all the legislated morality bullshit. I really don't need the government to save me from myself. And I really don't see why anyone would object to less government intrusion into our personal lives. Someone tell me why I'm wrong without being a total douche about it.

TheCanMan on
«13456715

Posts

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Speaking seriously though, why do libertarians get such a bad rap? It seems, in my experience, that it's largely liberals, rather than conservatives, talking like libertarians (or Libertarians, depending on the day) are either batshit insane, or out to destroy life as we know it.

    Why is that? And why do the conservatives largely seem to have no problem with them?

    Do we have a consensus on the goals of the Libertarian party? It seems as though most discussions disgress further and further into the hypothetical, and rarely touch on what might be the realistic goals of the party.

    Personally, I don't know jack shit about the party itself. I've been told on numerous occasions that many of my beliefs line up with theirs, but most of my beliefs are based on an ideal situation, rather than anything actually feasible in the world we all live in.

    I'd like to see (realistically speaking) less government programs (especially social security, which is going nowhere fast), less barriers to trade (honestly, is there a good reason to fuck over poor countries that'd be happy to sell stuff to us, and keep subsidies of things like farms running?), and a better immigration program (more workers is good. We need to streamline the process of admitting people who want to work, and refine the process of legitimizing the ones who're already here)

    Thoughts?

  • KNYTEKNYTE Registered User
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    Ok not all Liberatarian are idealistic wack-jobs....

    Here's the only thing I can say without starting a flame war: I disagree.

    The best defense is a good offense.

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
    - Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
  • imbalancedimbalanced Registered User
    edited April 2007
    I want to post in a libertarian thread but I don't know which one. Somebody choose that for me.

    idc-sig.png
    Wii Code: 1040-1320-0724-3613 :!!:
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Perhaps it's because the people who speak loudest for libertarians are usually the stupidest, most crazy ones (as this posts predessesor illustrated).

    That, and a lot of libertarians seem to get a little confused when it comes to issues that they care about, which can undermine the whole structure. Like, No Government! But, I don't want gays to marry... so, government is okay there...

    Edit: Imbalanced, the other one is locked. There, choice made.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • MrMisterMrMister 7 cards in hand Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Speaking seriously though, why do libertarians get such a bad rap?

    Selfishness and naivete, mostly.

    Valuing scholarship above all else, the inhabitants of the Ivory Tower reward those who sacrifice power for knowledge.
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Perhaps it's because the people who speak loudest for libertarians are usually the stupides, most crazy ones (as this posts predessesor illustrated).

    That, and a lot of libertarians seem to get a little confused when it comes to issues that they care about, which can undermine the whole structure. Like, No Government! But, I don't want gays to marry... so, government is okay there...

    Edit: Imbalanced, the other one is locked. There, choice made.

    I was not aware of libertarians that were all "no gay marriage". That runs pretty counter to a large part of the idea behind libertarianism, no?

  • TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    imbalanced wrote: »
    I want to post in a libertarian thread but I don't know which one. Somebody choose that for me.

    This one got the first "real" response, so I'm fine with mine being locked.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    tea-1.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    imbalanced wrote: »
    I want to post in a libertarian thread but I don't know which one. Somebody choose that for me.

    This one got the first "real" response, so I'm fine with mine being locked.

    Booo.

    tea-1.jpg
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Perhaps it's because the people who speak loudest for libertarians are usually the stupides, most crazy ones (as this posts predessesor illustrated).

    That, and a lot of libertarians seem to get a little confused when it comes to issues that they care about, which can undermine the whole structure. Like, No Government! But, I don't want gays to marry... so, government is okay there...

    Edit: Imbalanced, the other one is locked. There, choice made.

    I was not aware of libertarians that were all "no gay marriage". That runs pretty counter to a large part of the idea behind libertarianism, no?

    You would think. Like I said, there are a lot of different voices that claim to speak for Libertarians, but the loudest ones are usually not the ones you would want representing your group.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • GooeyGooey Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    This is like watching two pitbulls circling each other before a fight...who will come out on top?! The suspense is killing me.

    919UOwT.png
  • TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    *see the other thread*

  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    One of the problems associated with not "saving people from themselves" is that a huge portion of Americans don't have health insurance. Seatbelt laws keep you and I from paying for the other guy's health care when he goes through his windshield, since "let him die" is not an acceptable option.

  • GodGod Registered User
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Perhaps it's because the people who speak loudest for libertarians are usually the stupides, most crazy ones (as this posts predessesor illustrated).

    That, and a lot of libertarians seem to get a little confused when it comes to issues that they care about, which can undermine the whole structure. Like, No Government! But, I don't want gays to marry... so, government is okay there...

    Edit: Imbalanced, the other one is locked. There, choice made.

    I was not aware of libertarians that were all "no gay marriage". That runs pretty counter to a large part of the idea behind libertarianism, no?

    Yeah, those guys are just conservatives. It doesn't help that "Libertarian" is becoming a new hip label for certain members of the right. See: Joe Scarborough. Then you have guys like Bill Maher further muddying the waters.

    sky.JPG
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    God wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Perhaps it's because the people who speak loudest for libertarians are usually the stupides, most crazy ones (as this posts predessesor illustrated).

    That, and a lot of libertarians seem to get a little confused when it comes to issues that they care about, which can undermine the whole structure. Like, No Government! But, I don't want gays to marry... so, government is okay there...

    Edit: Imbalanced, the other one is locked. There, choice made.

    I was not aware of libertarians that were all "no gay marriage". That runs pretty counter to a large part of the idea behind libertarianism, no?

    Yeah, those guys are just conservatives. It doesn't help that "Libertarian" is becoming a new hip label for certain members of the right. See: Joe Scarborough. Then you have guys like Bill Maher further muddying the waters.

    Bill Maher, as best I can tell, is just a tool.

  • TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    God wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Perhaps it's because the people who speak loudest for libertarians are usually the stupides, most crazy ones (as this posts predessesor illustrated).

    That, and a lot of libertarians seem to get a little confused when it comes to issues that they care about, which can undermine the whole structure. Like, No Government! But, I don't want gays to marry... so, government is okay there...

    Edit: Imbalanced, the other one is locked. There, choice made.

    I was not aware of libertarians that were all "no gay marriage". That runs pretty counter to a large part of the idea behind libertarianism, no?

    Yeah, those guys are just conservatives. It doesn't help that "Libertarian" is becoming a new hip label for certain members of the right. See: Joe Scarborough. Then you have guys like Bill Maher further muddying the waters.

    Well there are civil libertarians and fiscal libertarians. When their powers combine Captain Anarchy comes forth to talk about Libertarians with a capital L.

    tea-1.jpg
  • GodGod Registered User
    edited April 2007
    Bill Maher, as best I can tell, is just a tool.

    You are correct. He's a funny guy though.

    sky.JPG
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    I think that's part of the problem. The bulk of reasonable liberatarians realize, even if they *feel* that we'd be better off with no government at all, that it's simply not feasible, and would rather just roll back a number of (in their, and my, minds) incidences of government far overstepping their role.

  • TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Doc wrote: »
    One of the problems associated with not "saving people from themselves" is that a huge portion of Americans don't have health insurance. Seatbelt laws keep you and I from paying for the other guy's health care when he goes through his windshield, since "let him die" is not an acceptable option.

    Maybe that's not an acceptable option for you. If I'm too stupid to wear a helmet while I'm on a motorcycle, I'd be perfectly accepting of the fact that when my head bounced off the street that I'm basically done.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    It impacts others in the terms of health care costs being increased across the board in order to help all the people flying through windshields, getting cancer, and spliting their heads open since letting them die isn't a good solution.

    What are you views towards building codes, the FDA, EPA, &c.?

    tea-1.jpg
  • Me Too!Me Too! __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    I think that's part of the problem. The bulk of reasonable liberatarians realize, even if they *feel* that we'd be better off with no government at all, that it's simply not feasible, and would rather just roll back a number of (in their, and my, minds) incidences of government far overstepping their role.

    Unfortunately, the only ones we ever hear from are the ones like EM, who make all the others look bad by association.

  • GooeyGooey Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    2 threads enter, 1 thread leaves!

    919UOwT.png
  • ÆthelredÆthelred Registered User
    edited April 2007
    We had a huge thread on why you not using a seatbelt does affect other people.

    pokes: 1505 8032 8399
  • FunkyWaltDoggFunkyWaltDogg Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    *see the other thread*

    If we're discussing it in this thread, let's discuss it in this thread.

    EDIT: Or in the other thread. Whatever.

    Burnage wrote:
    FWD is very good at this game.
  • KNYTEKNYTE Registered User
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    Doc wrote: »
    One of the problems associated with not "saving people from themselves" is that a huge portion of Americans don't have health insurance. Seatbelt laws keep you and I from paying for the other guy's health care when he goes through his windshield, since "let him die" is not an acceptable option.

    Maybe that's not an acceptable option for you. If I'm too stupid to wear a helmet while I'm on a motorcycle, I'd be perfectly accepting of the fact that when my head bounced off the street that I'm basically done.

    Were that to actually occur I'm inclined to think that your feelings on the matter would change.

    The best defense is a good offense.

    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
    - Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Doc wrote: »
    One of the problems associated with not "saving people from themselves" is that a huge portion of Americans don't have health insurance. Seatbelt laws keep you and I from paying for the other guy's health care when he goes through his windshield, since "let him die" is not an acceptable option.

    Of course manditory seatbelt laws manage to protect drivers at the expense of more accidents, and increased danger to pedestrians...so they're not exactly all that helpful.

  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Is this including only Libertarians who identify themselves as such, or does it include more moderate groups which have libertarian tendencies but refuse to go the whole nine yards? I think I heard the term Classical Liberal used around here somewhere for that.

  • DocDoc Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2007
    Doc wrote: »
    One of the problems associated with not "saving people from themselves" is that a huge portion of Americans don't have health insurance. Seatbelt laws keep you and I from paying for the other guy's health care when he goes through his windshield, since "let him die" is not an acceptable option.

    Of course manditory seatbelt laws manage to protect drivers at the expense of more accidents, and increased danger to pedestrians...so they're not exactly all that helpful.

    I've not heard this before. Cite?

  • GodGod Registered User
    edited April 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    It impacts others in the terms of health care costs being increased across the board in order to help all the people flying through windshields, getting cancer, and spliting their heads open since letting them die isn't a good solution.

    What are you views towards building codes, the FDA &c.?

    When costs get that indirect, I think a lot of us go eh, whatever. It's your same reasoning that created fines for parking your car on the lawn. Of course, most people don't really give a shit about seat belt laws, even if they're against them. If you really don't want to wear one, you won't. And if you're not wearing one and get pulled over, you'll put it on real quick if you're smart. I'm shocked that people actually get ticketed for that.

    sky.JPG
  • TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    I think that's part of the problem. The bulk of reasonable liberatarians realize, even if they *feel* that we'd be better off with no government at all, that it's simply not feasible, and would rather just roll back a number of (in their, and my, minds) incidences of government far overstepping their role.

    Exactly. My political ideology is pretty much all over the map. I stongly support alot of the conservative ideals, but I'm also so fundamentally against pretty much every single aspect of the Religious Right that I almost without fail vote Democratic. But then I also feel pretty strongly for some of the Liberatarian ideals. So I very strongly agree with bits and pieces of everyone which makes taking sided in the election process a bit tricky for me.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    I think that's part of the problem. The bulk of reasonable liberatarians realize, even if they *feel* that we'd be better off with no government at all, that it's simply not feasible, and would rather just roll back a number of (in their, and my, minds) incidences of government far overstepping their role.

    Unfortunately, the only ones we ever hear from are the ones like EM, who make all the others look bad by association.

    No, they don't. The others aren't actually libertarian, they're civil libertarians, or they're fiscal libertarians, or they're libertarian on certain and some issues because they do understand that there needs to be some governmental interference for a society to function or to address the fact that other people have externalities that do impact everybody else. It might be situational, it might not, but it's a collective action problem which is what governments exist to address.

    tea-1.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2007
    Hey, waddaya know - a non-joke use of the Merge feature.

    [While watching popcorn in the microwave]
    Maddie: "Look Riley, the bag's as big as your head now!"
    Riley: "Hahaha, yeah!"
    Maddie: "Look, now it's as big as your butt!"
    Riley: "Omigosh, it looks just like my butt!"
  • electronicmajielectronicmaji __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2007
    I am not a troll I just got sick of being trolled myself. Moderators clearly overstepping their boundaries just tries to incite me to anger and in response to their unserious, flaming response ill only give unserious flaming responses.


    at least I know who im voting for come election time

    http://www.kubby2008.com

    Top Weekly Artists
    Electronicmaji.gif
  • imbalancedimbalanced Registered User
    edited April 2007
    I've been waiting for this thread my entire life.

    When I was growing up in Arkansas, I was a little bit jarred as to where I belonged on the political hierarchy. Bill Clinton looked cool when I was a "kid" so I thought I agreed with his point of view, bridge to the 21st century! Neat! Then I started listening more and more to things other than economy and I found out *shock* I am not a Democrat.

    Several years pass and I had been clinging onto the Republican party (loosely) because it was closer to my own moral upbringings. My parents vote Republican, they are not rich and are considered "new money" -- my dad went to medical school while in the Navy, retiring after 15 years of service. I agree with many things they do: abortion, free market economy, lower taxes/government spending, etc. But there are some things that they miss completely that I can't stand, such as invasion of privacy, security over rights, overreaching law and governance, patent/copyright law to name a few.

    I took one of those political spectrum tests and I was strongly libertarian, so much so I was very close to anarchy (man, I think that could be a sign). I don't like the mentality that everyone should go to college no matter what, I don't like all the programs we spend money on that actually raise taxes and help a few individuals. I want tax law to be simple.

    I want my rights to be god given, and nobody to infringe on them for the sake of whatever. As long as my rights do not infringe on your own rights, leave me alone.

    The Libertarian Party is supposed to follow most if not all these ideals, the problem is you got wack jobs running it. Hill people that don't seem "normal." Think Pat Buchanan.

    Not to say that there are not NORMAL libertarians out there, here's a list of people you may or may not have known who are libertarian: Dave Barry, Drew Carey, Penn Jillette, John Larroquette, Denis Leary, Howard Stern, Kurt Russell, Tom Selleck.

    I think if most people stepped back from the whole thing and looked at the political landscape today, they would find they are neither Democrat nor Republican. Might just be a libertarian, I know I was shocked when I figured it out. Now I just gotta figure out who should be the figurehead to make the party seem a little more... genuine....

    idc-sig.png
    Wii Code: 1040-1320-0724-3613 :!!:
  • TheCanManTheCanMan Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    It impacts others in the terms of health care costs being increased across the board in order to help all the people flying through windshields, getting cancer, and spliting their heads open since letting them die isn't a good solution.

    What are you views towards building codes, the FDA, EPA, &c.?

    Why isn't just letting them die not a good solution. If I'm too stupid to put my seatbelt on then I'll accept the consequences.

  • GodGod Registered User
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    It impacts others in the terms of health care costs being increased across the board in order to help all the people flying through windshields, getting cancer, and spliting their heads open since letting them die isn't a good solution.

    What are you views towards building codes, the FDA, EPA, &c.?

    Why isn't just letting them die not a good solution. If I'm too stupid to put my seatbelt on then I'll accept the consequences.

    You're a cold, heartless prick. The reason we shouldn't let them die is because then our insurance premiums will go up.

    sky.JPG
  • SentrySentry Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Imbalanced, your list of "famous" libertarians is precisely the problem with libertarians. The whole thing is one big joke.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    wrote:
    When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
    'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    This is from my thread:
    moniker wrote: »
    TheCanMan wrote: »
    I really don't need the government to save me from myself.

    How about others? I'm going to assume you aren't insane enough to propose the privatization of police and fire departments, so what about the products and externalities that others produce. Also, governmental intervention to provide services and means to rural areas. Services like electricity, or roads.

    I'm not so much talking about stuff like the privatizing the police force. I'm more talking about all the stupid ass laws that tell me how to run my life even though the actions they are legislating don't directly effect other people. Stuff like seat-belt laws (except for minors), and helmet laws, and laws against smoking pot, or all the taxes on cigarettes in a attempt to force people to stop smoking.

    It impacts others in the terms of health care costs being increased across the board in order to help all the people flying through windshields, getting cancer, and spliting their heads open since letting them die isn't a good solution.

    What are you views towards building codes, the FDA, EPA, &c.?

    Why isn't just letting them die not a good solution. If I'm too stupid to put my seatbelt on then I'll accept the consequences.

    I doubt that point of view would stick around when you're laying on the ground writhing. Not to mention the societal and emotional cost that your corpse would produce.

    tea-1.jpg
  • GodGod Registered User
    edited April 2007
    Sentry wrote: »
    Your list of "famous" libertarians is precisely the problem with libertarians. The whole thing is one big joke.

    You're right, it's just as stupid as trotting out the Hollywood types for "famous liberals". Most libertarians just vote republican.

    sky.JPG
«13456715
Sign In or Register to comment.