 
|
This board is closed to new users and new posts. Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years. Details here.
|
|
The Free Talk Live BBS
Profile of Pizzly
Show Posts Topics
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
16
General / I could care less if cops are evil thugs...
« on: July 02, 2011, 11:18:12 PM »
I often hear the case against the police that claims they are thugs. They are evil men who do evil things. While I believe that is true, isn't it also more obvious cops are bitches? What kind of pussy shoots a puppy or person holding a camera due to "fear for their safety." Only a bitch needs a squad of armored men to accompany him on a search of a house in the middle of the night. Only a bitch get's terrified by a threatening puppy in a cage. Only a bitch arrests people for filming them.
Yes, cops are evil thugs, but they are also spineless wimps. Where's the courage? The honor? The service?
Yes, cops are evil thugs, but they are also spineless wimps. Where's the courage? The honor? The service?
17
General / Holy Fuck, I'm a Men's Rights Advocate
« on: June 30, 2011, 11:57:11 PM »
I happened across http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/ and I can't help but agree with the sentiment. I never knew men were so discriminated against in our society, or the fact it's so socially acceptable to discriminate against men.
18
General / I don't understand tipping.
« on: June 06, 2011, 02:46:08 PM »
When you go to a restaurant there is a contract created where you pay for food and services. You pay the restaurant owner, the owner in turn pays his employees. Why on earth are you expected to tip? I have no problem giving a little bit of money to a person for service beyond what is expected, here I consider it out of their good will and not part of the trade, but there is no implicit contract here. The trade is between you and the owner, not between you and the servers.
I understand the basic social norm as reason enough to tip, but there surely is no ethical reason to do so? You pay the restaurant owner for the meal and such, not the server. There is no contractual agreement between you and the server, they are simply a median of exchange on part of the owners. Thoughts?
I understand the basic social norm as reason enough to tip, but there surely is no ethical reason to do so? You pay the restaurant owner for the meal and such, not the server. There is no contractual agreement between you and the server, they are simply a median of exchange on part of the owners. Thoughts?
19
General / Quick collapse or slow transition?
« on: June 03, 2011, 07:09:49 AM »
Which do you think is the best course towards a free society? A slow transition over generations, or the rapid acceleration towards within a few decades?
I suppose the argument for a slow transition is something along the lines of ensuring that people adopt the ideology of liberty, and to limit the chaos of a rapid change, but I ultimately must say that the sooner the better.
That's why I believe we cannot compromise on principles, we cannot argue for "lower taxes," "school vouchers," "legalizing marijuana and taxing it", etc. We must remain consistent and principled. Half assed libertarian principles only hurt us.
I suppose the argument for a slow transition is something along the lines of ensuring that people adopt the ideology of liberty, and to limit the chaos of a rapid change, but I ultimately must say that the sooner the better.
That's why I believe we cannot compromise on principles, we cannot argue for "lower taxes," "school vouchers," "legalizing marijuana and taxing it", etc. We must remain consistent and principled. Half assed libertarian principles only hurt us.
20
General / Military defense and free riders.
« on: May 30, 2011, 11:38:24 PM »
This individual attempts to address the free rider problem of military defense in anarchy.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1ON-L9UR-o&feature=feedu[/youtube]
I don't really see a free rider problem. I expect the places under the most threat of some violent act would be under some specialized insurance, places like airports, sea ports, borders to dangerous areas, nuclear facilities, etc.
The main difference I see is that I don't see a need for maintaining an army. The market allows for firms to quickly change production to meet demands. If an area under ground invasion, or under immediate threat, the local law enforcement agencies would respond. I expect the property owners to have some form of law insurance, so to maintain the safety the insurance companies would buy the services of law enforcement from other areas not under immediate threat (price signals would allocate the soldiers/police to where needed).
The same with military equipment. Most military technology can be produced easily by most firms, factories that make non-military goods could shift their production to equivalent military goods. War is costly, and instead of a state, the market would ensure the capital goods and individuals would allocate most efficiently to meet individuals demand.
There's also the fact that I imagine the sky will be owned by the homesteading principle, airplane industries will own the legal rights to airspace. Given the threat to their planes, planes contracted from other firms to fly in that airspace, and the individuals on the planes (who will most likely be assures some level of safety), an air firm would probably want some sort of safety precaution. There's also the fact that planes create pollution and noise pollution, so to prevent any legal threats from land owners against the sky owners, trespassers would have to be dealt with. I imagine some companies that respond to foreign trespassers by shooting them down. But given the benefits of other air firms using this airspace to travel, there is an incentive to be very sure before shooting anything down.
So basically, I don't see a free rider problem. Not all individuals in a society are under the same threats. If troops invade my half of Pennsylvania, individuals on the other half of PA would not be in as much harm, so I don't see how they are really a free rider. I assume my direct neighbors already pay for some form of law insurance, and I imagine their law insurance would react similar to mine. Instead of a strong static blanket of protection, I see military defense as more of a smart net, responding to the areas of intrusion. The areas under the most threat of invasion would have a greater demand for military defense, so capital would naturally allocate to where it's most profitable.
Sound about right?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1ON-L9UR-o&feature=feedu[/youtube]
I don't really see a free rider problem. I expect the places under the most threat of some violent act would be under some specialized insurance, places like airports, sea ports, borders to dangerous areas, nuclear facilities, etc.
The main difference I see is that I don't see a need for maintaining an army. The market allows for firms to quickly change production to meet demands. If an area under ground invasion, or under immediate threat, the local law enforcement agencies would respond. I expect the property owners to have some form of law insurance, so to maintain the safety the insurance companies would buy the services of law enforcement from other areas not under immediate threat (price signals would allocate the soldiers/police to where needed).
The same with military equipment. Most military technology can be produced easily by most firms, factories that make non-military goods could shift their production to equivalent military goods. War is costly, and instead of a state, the market would ensure the capital goods and individuals would allocate most efficiently to meet individuals demand.
There's also the fact that I imagine the sky will be owned by the homesteading principle, airplane industries will own the legal rights to airspace. Given the threat to their planes, planes contracted from other firms to fly in that airspace, and the individuals on the planes (who will most likely be assures some level of safety), an air firm would probably want some sort of safety precaution. There's also the fact that planes create pollution and noise pollution, so to prevent any legal threats from land owners against the sky owners, trespassers would have to be dealt with. I imagine some companies that respond to foreign trespassers by shooting them down. But given the benefits of other air firms using this airspace to travel, there is an incentive to be very sure before shooting anything down.
So basically, I don't see a free rider problem. Not all individuals in a society are under the same threats. If troops invade my half of Pennsylvania, individuals on the other half of PA would not be in as much harm, so I don't see how they are really a free rider. I assume my direct neighbors already pay for some form of law insurance, and I imagine their law insurance would react similar to mine. Instead of a strong static blanket of protection, I see military defense as more of a smart net, responding to the areas of intrusion. The areas under the most threat of invasion would have a greater demand for military defense, so capital would naturally allocate to where it's most profitable.
Sound about right?
21
General / How can people justify mandatory vaccination?
« on: May 23, 2011, 07:21:43 PM »
I support a voluntary form of mandatory vaccination by schools, hospitals, insurance companies, businesses, etc., but recently I've been getting opposition from supposed supporters of liberty. I don't know how a person can call themselves a libertarian and support violent force to require someone to get a vaccine, I don't see how not getting a vaccine violates the NAP. I can maybe understand how having an active infection while associating with others may be an initiation of force, but how can inaction be an initiation of force?
22
General / Small dogs = Evil
« on: May 18, 2011, 09:49:54 PM »
As a large dog owner, I can't help but notice how evil small breeds are. I've met my share of dogs, and the small ones are always louder, more needy, more aggressive and uglier. In comparison, the larger breeds always seem more friendly, more giving, more obedient and are much cuter. My husky/lab mut is the friendliest most loving dog I ever met, while the pit bull terrier we had before would often act aggressive towards him and even towards the family, even though he was much smaller. I see the same behavior with my neighbors and familes dogs, I can't help but wonder if there is a reason for this.
23
General / Idea for a website or app or somethin'
« on: April 12, 2011, 06:07:36 AM »
How about a website or maybe an iphone app that has a database of cops near you. I would love to be able to just go on my phone and look at a list of pictures of undercover cops in my cities police department. I don't know if something like this exists right now, but I'm sure there are enough people who would find a use for something like this.
24
General / Sweatshop labor, compatible with liberty?
« on: April 07, 2011, 02:32:40 AM »
Some recent articles from the Center for a Stateless Society have made the attempt to show how sweatshop labor is incompatable with liberty. I have to disagree.
Both articles attempt to use the concept of "wage slavery," and compare workers making the voluntary decision to work a shitty job over some other alternatives. The alternatives are almost always worse, and if it is a voluntary decision, must be worse. Not only does sweatshop labor provide the workers with a better alternative, usually healthier and less intensive labor, it tends to provide the workers with additional time, additional capital, and skills. There also exists an incentive for a capital owner to provide better working conditions, dangerous and unhealthy working conditions is a threat to the owners future production.
I am of the opinion a peaceful society must accept sweatshop labor, voluntary slavery, and other disgusting, but voluntary, actions.
http://c4ss.org/content/6454
http://c4ss.org/content/6489
Both articles attempt to use the concept of "wage slavery," and compare workers making the voluntary decision to work a shitty job over some other alternatives. The alternatives are almost always worse, and if it is a voluntary decision, must be worse. Not only does sweatshop labor provide the workers with a better alternative, usually healthier and less intensive labor, it tends to provide the workers with additional time, additional capital, and skills. There also exists an incentive for a capital owner to provide better working conditions, dangerous and unhealthy working conditions is a threat to the owners future production.
I am of the opinion a peaceful society must accept sweatshop labor, voluntary slavery, and other disgusting, but voluntary, actions.
http://c4ss.org/content/6454
http://c4ss.org/content/6489
25
General / Who are we in Star Trek?
« on: April 05, 2011, 06:45:36 PM »
Star Trek is a horrible, awful show for libertarianism, but I love it. I can't help but wonder what species embodies us most though, it's hard. Right away the big ones are thrown out, humans, Vulcans, Klingons, Romulan, Cardassian, Borg. The center of each society is a powerful, worldwide government. There are elements of the humans, Vulcans and Klingons that may seem attractive (like the Klngons need to hold even their leaders accountable to the law by killing them in combat), I think they aren't on a whole very freedom loving.
The obvious choice seems to be Ferengi, but they have a pretty powerful regulatiory organization, and they are extremely misogynist.
The obvious choice seems to be Ferengi, but they have a pretty powerful regulatiory organization, and they are extremely misogynist.
26
General / The Stanford Prison Experiment
« on: April 02, 2011, 12:15:28 AM »
Yesterday i watched this great movie called The Experiment. It's inspired by the real life psychological experminet performed, where individuals were placed in the guard and prisoner role. The experiment had to be ended because the guards took on an abusive role and subjected prisoners to torture and psychological abuse. When it was over, some prisoners did not immediately accept it due to the passive role they took on. I'm always skeptical of attempts to experiment within the social sciences, but this does contribute to the theory that institutions are the source of corruption, not people.
Movie Information:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0997152/
Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
Movie Information:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0997152/
27
General / Most Shocking and similar television shows.
« on: March 24, 2011, 10:06:44 PM »
My parents tend to watch a lot of Tru tv and it seems there are a lot of different shows that show mostly cop footage. What bothers me is that I have yet to see a single episode with bad cops (ones normal people would consider bad). A quick google clearly shows many available clips of cops threatening, or harming innocent people, but these never make it on the television.
Are these shows subsidized by the government like how video games and movies get aid from the military? It would make sense, but I figure it also makes sense to just assume that the producers don't want to show how cops truly are.
Are these shows subsidized by the government like how video games and movies get aid from the military? It would make sense, but I figure it also makes sense to just assume that the producers don't want to show how cops truly are.
28
General / When do you know to eat a person?
« on: March 17, 2011, 08:38:12 AM »
I am often amused by strange, pointless questions. Recently I started to think about cannibalism in survival situations., like the crash in the Andes or the Donner party. I know that I would have no problem eating human meat, but when do you make the decision?
Do you wait until you are almost starved and don't have much energy, because you may still die if you wait too long until eating the meat. I also would hate to let perfectly good meat go bad because I waited too long. Do you start choppin' up the bodies that died in the plane crash right away? I'd hate for rescue to discover me eating the fallen within a day, it would look weird. I figure there might be too many variables to make a generic answer, but I figure overall sooner is better than later.
Do you wait until you are almost starved and don't have much energy, because you may still die if you wait too long until eating the meat. I also would hate to let perfectly good meat go bad because I waited too long. Do you start choppin' up the bodies that died in the plane crash right away? I'd hate for rescue to discover me eating the fallen within a day, it would look weird. I figure there might be too many variables to make a generic answer, but I figure overall sooner is better than later.
29
General / College costs going to kill us students.
« on: March 16, 2011, 04:37:37 PM »
My professor went to a senate meeting for Penn State, and it seems the government wants to cut state appropriations by 52%! From what I understand the university will try to sustan their own economic failures for a few more years, but tuitions will most likely rise at least 30%. I think I'm not going to be able to complete my education if the cost goes up as much as it seems it will, which sucks. As it is, my campus in Berks is busy putting in a whole new building, and just last year they spent 12,000 dollars on moving trees. I remember reading some articles from the Mises Institute on how the next economic bubble is in post secondary education, guess this was coming.
30
General / Libertarians must love science fiction.
« on: February 14, 2011, 07:25:27 PM »
I think this is a rule. Science fiction is the perfect platform to experiment with the infinite possibilities at a free society. It also is the perfect place to use political satire to the extreme. Agree?