Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:58 pm
If we kill all Muslims and destroy the religion there won't be any Islamic terrorists.
Why is using gasoline a sin?
Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:03 pm
BigKaboom2 wrote:I shall continue to respond with links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_ ... rtarianism
Wikiepedia wrote:It is often difficult to distinguish between 'Libertarianism' and 'Classical Liberalism'. Those two labels are used almost interchangeably... Libertarians see themselves as sharing many philosophical, political, and economic undertones with classical liberalism, such as the ideas of laissez-faire government, free markets, and individual freedom. Nevertheless, others reject this as a mere superficial resemblance... Those who emphasize the distinction between classical liberalism and libertarianism point out that some of the key thinkers of classical liberalism were far from libertarian... However, such a claim appears to be assuming "libertarianism" as a doctrine of absolute laissez-faire. While there are libertarians who oppose all government intervention, there are libertarians who do make exceptions to allow for government intervention and provision of some public goods such as roads and public utilities. Therefore the claim that libertarianism is not the same as classical liberalism because some classical liberals make exceptions to absolute laissez-faire may only hold for a particular type of libertarianism.
Further, some argue that libertarianism and liberalism are fundamentally incompatible because the checks and balances provided by liberal institutions conflict with the support for complete economic deregulation offered by most libertarians. However, arguments over the similarities are made difficult by the large number of factions in both classical liberalism and libertarianism.
...(I)f one difference remains between modern libertarians and their claimed classical liberal ancestors, it lies in suicide. According to Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative, a person may not take his or her own life, even if it is rational to do so. Modern libertarians believe suicide and assisted suicide should be legal. This singular difference does not necessarily negate the relationship between classical liberalism and libertarianism, especially considering the wide disparity between modern American liberalism and classical liberalism.
Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:17 pm
Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:33 pm
BigKaboom2 wrote:Of course I did. Other than what you bolded it explains the differences pretty well, and what you bolded doesn't diminish the fact there is a difference in the slightest. I'm not going to sit here and defend every Wikipedia edit - I just thought you would benefit from reading something like that if you were going to take up the position that classical liberalism = modern libertarianism.
Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:43 pm
Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:46 pm
BK2 wrote:Prose, with links and quotes.
If the path to authoritarianism is chosen then, in disregard to the Constitution, I would also mandate Fukuyama has to be publicly flogged and wear a placard that says "I was wrong."
Benji, who gets to rewrite the laws in this case? Just you? People you choose? Who's to say that if this took place we wouldn't end up with even more laws then we have now? Part of the purpose of the Constitution is to protect people from having laws about certain issues, so if we eleminated it, it would open up the possibility for more laws couldn't it? (I understand that it is equally likely that just the opposite could happen)
The problem with not having any other laws is that it puts an awful lot of power in the hands of those who enforce them. I believe we do need the three branches of the government in order for checks and balances to occur. Power corrupts, and abosute power corrupts absolutly.
I really don't see tons and tons of laws we have now that we should just do away with
Wiki, because it was the first place I went for a page count wrote:he 2006 Federal Register is 69,428 pages long
If you were to counter with this terrorist BS would that make my argument about my beer less valid? No.
In your example, I don't think that the ends (no Islamic terrorists) justify the means (kill all Muslims).
Do you really think that we wouldn't be better off in the year 2015 if this policy had been put in place?
Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:58 pm
price controls, subsidies of gasoline, massive government apparatus to regulate gasoline
What about my alternative policy proposal, looking for a similar goal, but not imposing mandates and controls?
Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:27 pm
Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:27 am
Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:05 am
I really think that finding a super efficient energy source would solve so many of the world's problems. We could forget so many of the issues we have in the world today if we could just have that energy source.
Christopherson wrote:So you suggest tax breaks, which mean major coporations are not paying as meany taxes, which means that the government is collecting less money, which means they either need to cut spending, increase the deficit, or levy a tax to make up the lost money. What do you propose?
Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:00 am