|
DrProsek posted:So how does Libertopia handle advances in technology that weren't even a thing back when the vehicle of oppression known as the State was abolished? Like in 100 years, I buy myself a comet, jrod buys himself a gas giant. Through no effort on my part, as a part of my comet's natural flight path, it goes through jrod's gas giant. Did I trespass on jrod's property? Who decides whether my comet naturally flying through jrod's gas giant counts as trespassing? Who decides how we calculate damages awarded to jrod in the event that my comet passing through his gas giant is trespassing? What if my Dispute Resolution Organization is a member of a different association of DROs than jrod's and has a different view on how comet/gas giant interactions work? What if in my DRO's view, jrod had an obligation to move his gas giant out of the flight path of my comet, and needs to pay me a fee for putting my comet in danger from having flown straight through a gas giant containing God knows what? I really want to read a short story with this as a premise. It would make really good satire/comedy.
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
jrodefeld posted:They can adopt and many do. But on average, gay people don't have children. For those gay couples that adopt, we can assume that their time preference would be the same as a married heterosexual couple. I assume you mean a married white heterosexual couple, since blacks would still have lower time preference.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:It is literally impossible for you all to be that dense. SA was not an example of a society, but of what individuals within a society are capable of doing without force. i'm gay
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
I like how thinking a government is a good idea means that everything must be run by the government. Even the most hardcore socialist would think having the government run something like SA directly would be retarded.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:27
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Nobody in government is ever greedy. But being greedy is not a requirement of being in government, and flawed though it is, at least current western democracies give at least some power to the people. Edit: God drat this thread moves fast. I am trying to write an effortpost/not-shitpost but I keep needing to refresh the page.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
Well, I was too slow to catch Socrates, but I am not wasting the I suppose I will put it in more concrete terms. Just because one thinks a government is necessary does not mean everything needs to be run by a government, or that the current government they reside under is particularly good. You seem to keep thinking that all Government is an American Bourgeois Democracy. Believe it or not, there are different forms of government. It's true! Even then, I would take Western Democracy over what Libertarians seem to support, because at least voters have a small amount of power they can use to defend themselves against the interests of the powerful and the capitalists. Also. This may be completely off topic (and/or retarded. As I am sure you have noticed, I am terribly self conscious about posting in D&D), but I have thought a lot on the subject of libertarianism and charity. I believe that all things being equal, the least charitable will be most likely to succeed in such an environment. If you have however many individuals, all with the same amount of capital, anyone who does not spend money on charity will get a step ahead of the rest. Capitalism is a system that selects for greed. At least with the system used now, people get some of the money back via tax breaks. However, even that isn't all that important, because private charity is a terrible idea. Most of the services provided by charity would be better provided by the government, and funded by taxes. In a market of charities, donations are not just used to provide a service. They are wasted on CEO incentives. They are wasted on advertising wars as pet shelters compete with hospitals who compete with soup kitchens for who gets the money. And in the end, while you claim that the government makes the poor poorer, statistically, charity acts as a regressive tax. The poorest 20% of Americans gives 3.2% of their income to charity, despite rarely even being able to get the tax benefits. The richest 20%, on the other hand, give a whole 1.7%, usually to schools rather than soup kitchens or relief for the poor. Controlled by a government, the waste on advertising funds could be removed. Controlled by a government that wasn't entirely in the pocket of capitalist interests, the services would be provided at a lower expense to the poor, those than need them most.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
fibblins posted:How would the radio spectrum not become an overlapping clusterfuck of interference in a libertarian society? Oh! This actually reminds me of a fun piece of Libertarian Fanfic I read a while back. One of the plot points was that radio ended up being completely unusable due to interference, so everything had to run via wires, or terrible lovely IR transmitters.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
CrazyTolradi posted:And we can totally trust the company issuing those tags, right? Because they could never, ever have an agenda or conflict of interest. No, that'd be immoral and against the libertarian code. Ironically, assuming anyone reading this doesn't get what the scammer tags are a reference to, that is exactly what happened on the bitcoin forums. Odd, how a group made up almost entirely of libertarians can't even manage to pull off the libertarian ideal.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Well, in the terms we're discussing, socialism has its roots in Christianity. That such a major figure in it's development as Marx was an atheist who wrote at a time when logical positivism was ascendent has tended to mask the degree to which the values Marx was attempting to fulfill are inherently Christian. This might be slightly off topic, but I don't know how one can say any set of values is inherently Christian (except, I suppose, valuing belief in Jesus as the son of the Judeo-Christian God). That isn't to say socialism doesn't have roots (not all roots) in Christianity, but it seems a little odd to say that the values of socialism are inherently Christian.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
I have a bit of a question. Why is it that Libertarians so often seem to overlap with obnoxious internet atheists?
Tiberius Thyben fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 08:32
|
|