alcohol regulations, especially in canada. (is that too easy?)
― symsymsym, Monday, 13 February 2012 03:35 (twelve years ago) link
anything everyone on ilx agrees on is too easy
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 03:36 (twelve years ago) link
'I'm for gay rights and against corporate welfare' = zzzz
maybe smoking? Like I feel that if a pub want to allow smoking, that's ok
― sonderborg, Monday, 13 February 2012 03:36 (twelve years ago) link
that's better
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 03:37 (twelve years ago) link
things you're secretly kinda totalitarian about
― Mordy, Monday, February 13, 2012 3:28 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
can be no absence of a social safety net--i don't care if it's provided by solidarity communities or by strong central government, my conscience can't abide the nonexistence of a net for the least of us.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Monday, 13 February 2012 03:38 (twelve years ago) link
― sonderborg
yeah this too. and i hate smoking and enjoy smoke free pubs. but it just seems wrong that it's illegal to have a pub where people can smoke.
― zverotic discourse (jim in glasgow), Monday, 13 February 2012 03:51 (twelve years ago) link
yeah lots of people thought that before smoking wa known to cause cancer and copd
― ploppawheelie V (k3vin k.), Monday, 13 February 2012 03:54 (twelve years ago) link
xxp: The U.S. Army was 98,000 in 1914 before mobilizing to 3+ million by 1918 and won WWI. It was 175,000 in 1939, mobilizing to 8+ million by 1945 and contributing the the Allied victory. So long as the ability to mobilize is retained, the U.S. could easily secure our own borders with cadre-sized standing forces, and be deterred from the post-WWII succession of foolish interventions.
The Federal Reserve was started as "lender of last resort". Ie, they stood ready to offer loans to banks facing a depositor run, but for short periods and at high rates. Now, they are the "lender of first resort", providing normal operating liquidity and buying trashy assets from member banks.
Arguably, the current economic morass was in large part created by Greenspan's Fed through its interventions after the 1994 Mexican crisis, 1998 Asian/Russian crisis, and 2001 Nasdaq collapse, which reduced risk aversion among lenders, reinflated speculative asset bubbles, and bringing about our decade's cascade of Minsky moments. Perhaps short sharp shocked treatment is useful for keeping the bankers wary.
― Sanpaku, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:00 (twelve years ago) link
that's an argument against bad central banking, not an argument against central banking
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:02 (twelve years ago) link
p. totalitarian about no smoking in bars tbh
― call all destroyer, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:03 (twelve years ago) link
tho cigar bar/hookah places should totally be allowed to exist
xp: Agreed, there are pretty good CBs, like the Deutsche Bundesbank 1948-2002. But any institution that can cause serious harm under the mismanagement of a few bad men (Alan Greenspan, Arthur Burns in the 70s) seriously requires scope reduction.
― Sanpaku, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:09 (twelve years ago) link
^for "bad men" above, read "short-sighted leaders"
― Sanpaku, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:13 (twelve years ago) link
xp cad - i'm also libertariany about the right to die/physician-assisted suicide, so a bar that allows smoking doesn't give me any moral qualms.
― sarahell, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:15 (twelve years ago) link
What about hate speech? I sometimes think the US got this one right.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:16 (twelve years ago) link
Otherwise, I'm not sure I can think of much!
― sarahell, Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:15 PM (56 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
yeah i'm fine with assisted suicide but i'm not really fine with general public health hazards?
― call all destroyer, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:17 (twelve years ago) link
zoning
― lag∞n, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:18 (twelve years ago) link
recycling
bonfires
doin whatever i want (applies only to me)
― lag∞n, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:19 (twelve years ago) link
freedom
― Banaka™ (banaka), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:19 (twelve years ago) link
cad - do you have a problem with people who smoke having a party at their house where they and their guests smoke?
― sarahell, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:20 (twelve years ago) link
Where do libertarians stand on Fair Use and copyright? They take the side of copyright owners, don't they? I bet they do.
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:20 (twelve years ago) link
oh yeah ip for sure I am liberty abt
― lag∞n, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:21 (twelve years ago) link
that's an issue where there's gonna be a p huge divide I think xp
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:22 (twelve years ago) link
― sarahell, Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:20 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
nope!
― call all destroyer, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:23 (twelve years ago) link
children voting
― lag∞n, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:24 (twelve years ago) link
see, i would be okay with a bar that allowed smoking, if everyone who worked there and attended the bar agreed that it was acceptable (assuming there are other bars that people who don't want to be in a smoking-allowed bar can go to).
― sarahell, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:25 (twelve years ago) link
(To be clear, this refers to things that are 'not easy' that I'm libertariany about. There are lots of things that the US got right, especially jazz.)
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:26 (twelve years ago) link
yeah my thing with it is i'm pretty sure the bar smoking ban is an all-or-none proposition and i'll take none
― call all destroyer, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:27 (twelve years ago) link
see, i would be okay with a bar that allowed smoking, if everyone who worked there and attended the bar agreed that it was acceptable (assuming there are other bars that people who don't want to be in a smoking-allowed bar can go to).How many bars like that were there prior to the bans?
And how much leverage do the workers really have in these situations?
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:27 (twelve years ago) link
xp
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:28 (twelve years ago) link
a. public unions *sometimes might not have* the public's welfare in mind w/ their pay and benefit deals and *sometimes* that can be a bad thing.b. environmental review can be counterproductive when it makes things that are pretty clearly 'environmentally good' like public transit or dense housing take longer to build / cost more money
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:29 (twelve years ago) link
in California, there is (or was) an exemption from the smoking ban for owner-operated bars, basically, ones without employees other than the owner(s).
― sarahell, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:29 (twelve years ago) link
Those aren't exactly libertarian positions though.
xp to iatee
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:30 (twelve years ago) link
well they're cases where 'good government' might require fighting w/ interest groups we traditionally side w/
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:34 (twelve years ago) link
There seems a pretty big divide among libertarians on IP law. Here's a lengthy lecture by a libertarian IP attorney entitled Why ‘Intellectual Property’ is not Genuine Property.
― Sanpaku, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:34 (twelve years ago) link
ip law : libertarians :: honey : vegans
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:35 (twelve years ago) link
every time i go into the rare bar or restaurant or coffee place where smoking is allowed i'm kinda glad that the ban exists.
― omar little, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:36 (twelve years ago) link
you know what they say a libertarian is a vegan whos been covered in honey
― lag∞n, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:37 (twelve years ago) link
huh never heard that one
― ploppawheelie V (k3vin k.), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:38 (twelve years ago) link
libertarians are correct to value freedom, but they are incorrect for believing that freedom is found in the rights of the individual. there is a higher form of freedom, and that is in conformity with a greater whole.
― Banaka™ (banaka), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:38 (twelve years ago) link
it must be tough to "bee" a libertarian
― omar little, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:38 (twelve years ago) link
c. flat tax
(everyone making over 200k pays 70%, everyone else pays nothing)
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:43 (twelve years ago) link
I'm torn on smoking in bars. I get the idea that bars should be able to decide whether to allow smoking or not, but at the same time there's not exactly perfect freedom of movement for people in the industry - a lot of times there aren't comparable-income or comparable-hour jobs available to the people stuck working in the smoke.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:44 (twelve years ago) link
sometimes i like to be in a smoky bar, most of the time i prefer not to. otoh i live somewhere with a real mild climate, so going outside to smoke is not that unpleasant.
― sarahell, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:46 (twelve years ago) link
I'm weirdly ambivalent about this one. As profoundly as I enjoyed the bounties to be had in the States, there's a part of me that actually thinks that there's something to be said for alcohol not being as cheap and available.
xp: What I meant by my question upthread was "How many bars were there that chose not to allow smoking before the bans?"
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Monday, 13 February 2012 04:47 (twelve years ago) link
d. people can smoke in bars but they have to give money to everyone around them to make up for the health costs
― iatee, Monday, 13 February 2012 04:48 (twelve years ago) link
Being libertarian doesn't mean not giving a direction for society! It means that specific direction is limited government, subsidies, and intervention
― valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 19:57 (twelve years ago) link
marketing campaign to turn unused NYC subway and sewer tunnels into 21st century artists' loftsart supplies restricted for wastefulness (oops)
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 19:58 (twelve years ago) link
new TV production banned, all citizens have to watch media projected from a central location onto night-time clouds. No clouds, tough shit.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:00 (twelve years ago) link
wow I had no idea raising the gas tax would have so many unforeseen consequences
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:01 (twelve years ago) link
no, this is the libertarian thread, you have to pose it as not subsidizing roads or subsidizing gasoline
― valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:01 (twelve years ago) link
Just spitballing ways to save the planet.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:01 (twelve years ago) link
makes you think
― beware of greek bearer bonds (darraghmac), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:02 (twelve years ago) link
haha
― Critique of Pure Moods (goole), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:02 (twelve years ago) link
I go to a conference call and this place turns venomous. Waaahhh happen?
― drawn to them like a moth toward a spanakopita (Laurel), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:04 (twelve years ago) link
tbh, though, the effects from denying healthcare to the elderly is probably not that far off from designing policies to either uproot people or make living where they do untenable - going to be a lot of holdouts fighting back or dying offand killing off old people would undeniably be good for the environment, whereas herding people together generally hasn't been
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:04 (twelve years ago) link
whereas herding people together generally hasn't been
Do you...have anything to support this or are you just mad now?
― drawn to them like a moth toward a spanakopita (Laurel), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:05 (twelve years ago) link
yeah now that i think about it probably better to just leave things as they are
― max, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:06 (twelve years ago) link
milo
you are continuing on this path as if ppl have been arguing against your ideas to kill off (note- think about a better euphemism for this) nearlydeads, when tbf nobody is fighting you on these vital reforms
― beware of greek bearer bonds (darraghmac), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:06 (twelve years ago) link
Do I have any evidence that urbanization (partic. rapid urbanization) isn't good for the environment?Sure: the Industrial Revolution. Contemporary China.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:06 (twelve years ago) link
I'm not mad, I just think iatee's views - or at least his ways of stating them - are tailor-made for reductio ad absurdum, in that they start off on the absurd continuum.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:08 (twelve years ago) link
'raise taxes on things that cause global warming'?
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:09 (twelve years ago) link
Seriously - if iatee were more serious about needing radical ideas to save the world (rather than, as noted, wanting the NYC he loves), he would be encouraging agrarianism and population reduction. Mankind is never quite so sustainable as when it needs the farmland directly beneath its feet to survive.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:10 (twelve years ago) link
why do people think I love nyc so much
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:10 (twelve years ago) link
killing off old people would undeniably be good for the environment
Wha? Old people don't reproduce. They have few years left to consume resources. They eat like birds. It's you young 'uns who will be vigorously spawning all those ravenous children, demanding ice cream and Gameboys, and ruining the planet for the next century!
― Aimless, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:12 (twelve years ago) link
I don't even own a I <3 ny shirt
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:13 (twelve years ago) link
my vision of the future is locking everyone into densely-packed urban gulag camps where only billionaires can afford to do anything more than 20 blocks away from their residence, including work.
― iatee, Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:31 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― valleys of your mind (mh), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:14 (twelve years ago) link
Do you own a I 8====) NY shirt?
― A Full Torgo Apparition (Phil D.), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:15 (twelve years ago) link
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:20 (twelve years ago) link
well consider the possibility that climate change will make it worse
― Critique of Pure Moods (goole), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:21 (twelve years ago) link
no
― max, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:21 (twelve years ago) link
iatee wants to ruin the yokels' lives... to save them!!!!
― Critique of Pure Moods (goole), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:23 (twelve years ago) link
Set up another round of tornados, floods, hurricanes, and droughts for everyone! They're on the house!
― Aimless, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:23 (twelve years ago) link
Climate change and other human impacts are going to make things worse, and (TMI) combine to be the reason I don't think I ever want to have kids. I don't want to bring people into a world where their kids probably won't get to experience seafood (as a minor example) or maintain a comfortable existence at all. But making life shittier for most people right now - but in a way that won't effect structural change - is kinda dumb and punitive toward people for having the lives they were born into. And is clearly unrealistic to boot, since no one will buy in. Like I said, ideas about sustainability that accept the size of the US and its population (encouraging mass transit in any mid-sized city, better and faster rail networks, governments actively teaching people to grow some of their own food when possible) are a lot more valuable.
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:26 (twelve years ago) link
are you suuuuuuuure that raising taxes on things that contribute to global warming "wont effect structural change"
― max, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:27 (twelve years ago) link
we're having a hell of a time getting buy-in on mass transit in mid-size cities and faster rail networks. i'd hate to see the reaction to the idea of "governments actively teaching people to grow some of their own food when possible"
the whole point of 'making' forms of carbon energy more expensive is that stuff like transit networks, farming and mfging processes, housing sizes, and so on, adjust or retrofit as needed
― Critique of Pure Moods (goole), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:34 (twelve years ago) link
yup, mass-transit is uncompetitive in midsized cities when we build and fund its competition, gas is cheap and transit-oriented neighborhoods are illegal to build. dealing w/ those things are as important as spending more money on transit. making it difficult to drive or own a car is the best way to fund public transit.
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:45 (twelve years ago) link
are as important = is as important
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 20:46 (twelve years ago) link
Iatee, what do you think of cap and trade?
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 21 February 2012 22:50 (twelve years ago) link
humanity's last hope
― iatee, Tuesday, 21 February 2012 23:20 (twelve years ago) link