Join Ricochet or renew and get 1 yearof National Review/Digital as a bonus!
Wow, only on page two and I think I have seen about every fallacious, snide, and ignorant type of comment. Shame on you Ricochetti. Ms. Lu has the right answer in my opinion. Contracting out law enforcement for cash reward is just asking for it. The red light camera scams have been proving this for over a decade as they inevitably lead to endangering lives and rigging the game to improve incomes.
Maggie, I would disagree with Jonah if he said what you seem to think he said. Seems to me he is stating two important defenses of libertarianism. First, beating up on an idea because its utopian ideals seem like unrealistic dreams is a worthless exercise. It's especially stupid to rank a failed utopia against an untried one. Second, he points out the success of America was largely because the founding principles were so much libertarian, not that it accomplished the goal of founding a libertarian state. My opinion is that libertarianism should be practiced as well as possible. Each great empire started out as being more libertarian than its peers, expands to greatness, and then declines only to have a far flung outpost reboot with even greater libertarian roots. Lastly, I think you confused the chicken and the egg. The state didn't just fill space of an eroding culture, it malevolently attacked that culture in order to expand.
SParker, I am confused by your contras to the Fair Tax. I thought the things you say are negatives are the positives. It's not only cheaper for compliance overall, it's cheaper on the businesses than all the reporting compliance for their employees earnings to the IRS. And, it was designed to counter the non progressive argument against other consumption taxes. It IS progressive on balance because of the monthly (p)rebate .
Every appointed official in this administration is a Jay Carney. They were appointed because of who they are, and they deliver fabulously. The President has no grounds to say he isn't responsible for their actions. It's like appointing a fox to guard the hen house and then saying you can't be expected to know where every hen is.
I suppose it could be lack of faith, but I am not sure there is a big difference in faithfulness all of a sudden. I read about a couple out of money and work and tired of being on the dole the other day. I think all this well intentioned nanny state nonsense has added up to a nightmare. When I was a kid, my dad hired people as a kind of charity. Guys who needed work could get work and the company went along with it. He knew many were drunks, ex cons, and whatever, but he would take them on for a little while until they either screwed up or something. Occasionally, one would stick. Now, no one wants the risk. They pay ridiculous taxes and give to charity and try not to do anything that will get them hauled in front of a judge - like hiring the wrong person.
The rhetoric in Texas wasn't just anti mandate. Much of it was of the my kids are too young to be having sex - only your scum of the earth kids will be having sex before marriage type of nonsense. Our governor backed down even though there was supposedly an opt out provision.
I can tell you why people are likely upset about the conversation and its not really the language. The SoCons have no leg to stand on in this issue. So they try to shut it down and/or runaway. This HPV thing can kill you even if you don't have sex outside of marriage. Now they have been caught on the wrong side of the issue and are waiting for someone they trust to tell them how to proceed.
Not sure you even need monetary reward for many hackers. Just give them legal cover. Similar treatment could be used with terrorist exporting states. Give citizens a pass on the Logan Act and other applicable restrictions and let'em go. "Dear so called leader of country A, we the people of country B having tired of the actions of your people and agents have decided to fight fre with fire. Ya'll yell when you have had enough, okay?"
I'm not so sure it's that simple though. If we have more to lose, why accept them continuously getting away with taking it? And, while they do it, they get better and better at it. Furthermore, we aren't going to beat them in the hacking wars state vs state. OTOH, show what happens when you let a few freelancers loose, and threaten to let them all loose, what will they do? The end game is shutting them out almost completely from the web. Who is worse off then?
Are there any people in that list that actually produce anything?
As i understand it, HPV can get be passed to children from mothers. The vaccine is helpful to the infected and prevents transmission to others as well as preventing infection from sexual partners who have a virus you don't already have. IOW, your virgin saint child may have got it from mommy and you virgin saint child in law may already have it as well. While everyone should have a right to decide for themselves and their children, this is pretty much exercising a right to be stupid as far as I can tell.
Misthiocracy, Did you actually want to have a conversation about immunization vs education? I never really understood the anti immunization stance.
This stuff is so incredible. I can't get over it. It's tempting to become a conspiracy nut. I can't wait for some statist to get all condescending and poopoo some response to proposed legislation or action like thy always do. "Does any one really believe that will happen? That's just crazy." Response, "Ahem, Holder, IRS, Bengazi..."
I think the American People are tuning into WIFM and getting convinced Syria is a bad idea. I don't believe we are naturally isolationists or even pragmatists, but after a couple of not so feel good, not so much accomplished wars in the Middle East, most folks just aren't seeing anything good from getting involved. It's kind of a shame sense we should do more to help those who actively rebel against tyranny.
Well, we could start a big government program to fight the cyber wars, or we could write letters of marque and let slip the acne covered, Cheetos eating dogs of war.
It is great because it works. It wouldn't be great if it didn't work (even Kant and Mill would agree). Just because it works doesn't make it great. I actually agree with Jonah, but not the way the OP does. I think Williamson sounds like he is belittling trade. I think the idea that trade is great a priori is just silly too. Grapes are naturally good, but trade is more like wine.
Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:
Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place. Join today!
Already a Member? Sign In