things you're secretly kinda libertariany about

Where do libertarians stand on Fair Use and copyright? They take the side of copyright owners, don't they? I bet they do.

oh yeah ip for sure I am liberty abt

that's an issue where there's gonna be a p huge divide I think xp

cad - do you have a problem with people who smoke having a party at their house where they and their guests smoke?

― sarahell, Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:20 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

nope!

children voting

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).

Otherwise, I'm not sure I can think of much!

(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.)

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

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?

xp

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

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).

Those aren't exactly libertarian positions though.

xp to iatee

well they're cases where 'good government' might require fighting w/ interest groups we traditionally side w/

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.

ip law : libertarians :: honey : vegans

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.

you know what they say a libertarian is a vegan whos been covered in honey

huh never heard that one

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.

it must be tough to "bee" a libertarian

c. flat tax

(everyone making over 200k pays 70%, everyone else pays nothing)

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.

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.

alcohol regulations, especially in canada. (is that too easy?)

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?"

d. people can smoke in bars but they have to give money to everyone around them to make up for the health costs

The LCBO is obviously a bit crap though.

xpost

xp - but that's why there's already such an enormous tax on cigarettes though!

is it libertarian of me to wish that my cigarette tax money worked like social security, that it gets repaid to me when i get old?

Ha, that Stephan Kinsella guy is so hardcore against anti-bribery laws!

the beauty of cigarette-social security is that you don't have to worry about getting old

not everyone who smokes dies young!

OK, I read through most of Kinsella's article. Thanks for linking it, Sanpaku. I'm not as hardcore as him. I'm OK with having some copyright and patent laws. I just think I should be able to photocopy handouts and play DVDs and CDs in class without needing to jump through multiple hoops.

d. people can smoke in bars but they have to give money to everyone around them to make up for the health costs

― iatee, Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:48 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

people can smoke in bars but they have to do everyones laundry

it must "sting" sometimes to "bee" a part of the libertarian party w/the trouble they have getting traction on the political landscape.

doin whatever i want (applies only to me)

― lag∞n, Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:19 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

p much

it must "sting" sometimes to "bee" a part of the libertarian party w/the trouble they have getting traction on the political landscape.

― omar little, Monday, February 13, 2012 12:25 AM (2 seconds ago)

honey, you don't know the half of it

not everyone who smokes dies young!

damn straight! smoking ages you something fierce, so it doesn't take very long to become an old smoker.

i feel like techy libertarians have positions weird enough to put them in the vegans covered in honey category

or whatever

"wll, cover me with ip law and throw me to the libertarians"

Answer #7 urgent & key here - Europe has left-identifying Libertarians too.

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.

Or better regulation! <- statist until I die.

fiat currencies.

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.

Not sure why they *should* have "the public welfare" in mind. That's not what unions are for. It's the job of the elected officials dealing with them to keep the public welfare in mind when structuring contracts.

Yes, the bit of the public that's actually employed in the public union doesn't have anyone else on their side, is sort've the point of the unions.

if i knew more about libertarian positions i'd probably agree with some of them

people above who said you're libertarian about guns: are you guys actually anti-regulation? I support gun ownership (and I've always thought this was one of the areas where I was pretty "lol conservative" by ilxor standards), but feel that things like background checks are good for public safety. are you guys really totally hands-off "libertarian" on this?

Why would you support gun ownership?

self-defense and hunting. note that I dont own a gun, but might in the future and have friends who do.

There's times I'm glad I'm not American

8am to midnight, 7/365

i'm not really interested in a "why own guns" convo. more interested in the thoughts of left wingers who support gun rights to the point that they would consider themselves libertarian about it.

no

iatee wants to ruin the yokels' lives... to save them!!!!

Set up another round of tornados, floods, hurricanes, and droughts for everyone! They're on the house!

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.

are you suuuuuuuure that raising taxes on things that contribute to global warming "wont effect structural change"

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

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.

are as important = is as important

Iatee, what do you think of cap and trade?

humanity's last hope