Libertarian Discussion Thread

[Elwher]

Thoughts on the potential lost of Net Neutrality? Don't take NN as 'Government-regulated' Internet. Net Neutrality is suppose to prevent predatory ISPs from screwing over consumers, not control the internet itself.

Now I believe in a Free Market, with perhaps the exception of healthcare, but should there be a difference between a Free market and a rigged market in this discussion?

The answer, in my opinion, is not more regulation but more competition. If people have choices of which ISP's they will use, then if one is screwing over consumers it will lose business to the ones that do not.

[Fanosolia]

Thoughts on the potential lost of Net Neutrality? Don't take NN as 'Government-regulated' Internet. Net Neutrality is suppose to prevent predatory ISPs from screwing over consumers, not control the internet itself.

Now I believe in a Free Market, with perhaps the exception of healthcare, but should there be a difference between a Free market and a rigged market in this discussion?

The answer, in my opinion, is not more regulation but more competition. If people have choices of which ISP's they will use, then if one is screwing over consumers it will lose business to the ones that do not.

I'm not oppose to that concept (up here I like teksavvy despite not using it, So with or without it I can see the possibility of what you're getting at). However I do have my skepticism if only due to the fact that newer ISPs don't necessarily own the cables they use to provide internet connection.

[USS Monitor]

What is everyone's opinions on intellectual property?

Personally I wouldn't care too much if people decided to use my "intellectual property" (if I had any). I would probably be flattered more than anything unless they tried to pass it off as theirs and then accuse me of plagiarism. Though I could understand why a successful author like, say, George R. R. Martin, would be miffed at the idea of someone publishing a novel about Jon Snow becoming King of Westeros and feeding Joffrey to the dragons he got from marrying Daenerys Targaryen.

It's not ideal, but it's the lesser of two evils.

Right... The people arguing against intellectual property are generally the ones who want to use others' property, not the ones who have the rights to something valuable.

I do think some people are overzealous in enforcing their copyrights or patents, and such things should have a time limit, but I also think that people like George R. R. Martin who produce something that a lot of people enjoy should be able to profit from that. Writing a novel or making a movie or recording a song or drawing an image takes time and resources. If everyone is allowed to copy it without paying for it, then the person who made it never gets paid back for the work they did or the materials they bought/rented to help them produce the product.

I may be biased because my dad is a professional novelist, but he wouldn't have had the time to write as much if he was busy with a day job because he couldn't make money off the rights to his books. Something of value would be lost because some of those stories would never get written.

The anti-copyright people don't get that abolishing copyright wouldn't give you all the same stuff, just without paying for it. You'd have a lot fewer people dedicating their life to art, writing, music, etc. because they'd be too busy working to pay their bills. I used to have a coworker who was a pretty talented musician, but he was from Nepal and he sang in Nepali, and he couldn't earn a living off his music career because of the rampant piracy in Nepal. His stuff was played on the radio, but it was near-impossible to collect royalties. So he wound up working for an insurance company in Massachusetts and only rarely finding time to make new music.

If people WANT to make something and release it into the public domain, that's fine, but it should be a choice. Stuff like Kickstarter is fine to have as an option for people that want to try to get paid for the process of creating something rather than selling the rights after the work is done, but again, that should be a choice -- especially since there are some creative endeavors like novels that are exceedingly difficult to fund via Kickstarter if you don't have an established reputation already. Relying on that without having copyright would basically mean writers don't get paid for their first few stories -- not just the crap they write while they're learning, but even the first few that are professional-quality published work.

People should get paid for their work. It's not about selling property. It's about getting paid for your labor.

[War Gears]

Personally I wouldn't care too much if people decided to use my "intellectual property" (if I had any). I would probably be flattered more than anything unless they tried to pass it off as theirs and then accuse me of plagiarism. Though I could understand why a successful author like, say, George R. R. Martin, would be miffed at the idea of someone publishing a novel about Jon Snow becoming King of Westeros and feeding Joffrey to the dragons he got from marrying Daenerys Targaryen.

It's not ideal, but it's the lesser of two evils.

Right... The people arguing against intellectual property are generally the ones who want to use others' property, not the ones who have the rights to something valuable.

I do think some people are overzealous in enforcing their copyrights or patents, and such things should have a time limit, but I also think that people like George R. R. Martin who produce something that a lot of people enjoy should be able to profit from that. Writing a novel or making a movie or recording a song or drawing an image takes time and resources. If everyone is allowed to copy it without paying for it, then the person who made it never gets paid back for the work they did or the materials they bought/rented to help them produce the product.

I may be biased because my dad is a professional novelist, but he wouldn't have had the time to write as much if he was busy with a day job because he couldn't make money off the rights to his books. Something of value would be lost because some of those stories would never get written.

The anti-copyright people don't get that abolishing copyright wouldn't give you all the same stuff, just without paying for it. You'd have a lot fewer people dedicating their life to art, writing, music, etc. because they'd be too busy working to pay their bills. I used to have a coworker who was a pretty talented musician, but he was from Nepal and he sang in Nepali, and he couldn't earn a living off his music career because of the rampant piracy in Nepal. His stuff was played on the radio, but it was near-impossible to collect royalties. So he wound up working for an insurance company in Massachusetts and only rarely finding time to make new music.

If people WANT to make something and release it into the public domain, that's fine, but it should be a choice. Stuff like Kickstarter is fine to have as an option for people that want to try to get paid for the process of creating something rather than selling the rights after the work is done, but again, that should be a choice -- especially since there are some creative endeavors like novels that are exceedingly difficult to fund via Kickstarter if you don't have an established reputation already. Relying on that without having copyright would basically mean writers don't get paid for their first few stories -- not just the crap they write while they're learning, but even the first few that are professional-quality published work.

People should get paid for their work. It's not about selling property. It's about getting paid for your labor.

Oh, I agree entirely. I'm sorry I didn't convey my opinion very well.

[USS Monitor]

Right... The people arguing against intellectual property are generally the ones who want to use others' property, not the ones who have the rights to something valuable.

I do think some people are overzealous in enforcing their copyrights or patents, and such things should have a time limit, but I also think that people like George R. R. Martin who produce something that a lot of people enjoy should be able to profit from that. Writing a novel or making a movie or recording a song or drawing an image takes time and resources. If everyone is allowed to copy it without paying for it, then the person who made it never gets paid back for the work they did or the materials they bought/rented to help them produce the product.

I may be biased because my dad is a professional novelist, but he wouldn't have had the time to write as much if he was busy with a day job because he couldn't make money off the rights to his books. Something of value would be lost because some of those stories would never get written.

The anti-copyright people don't get that abolishing copyright wouldn't give you all the same stuff, just without paying for it. You'd have a lot fewer people dedicating their life to art, writing, music, etc. because they'd be too busy working to pay their bills. I used to have a coworker who was a pretty talented musician, but he was from Nepal and he sang in Nepali, and he couldn't earn a living off his music career because of the rampant piracy in Nepal. His stuff was played on the radio, but it was near-impossible to collect royalties. So he wound up working for an insurance company in Massachusetts and only rarely finding time to make new music.

If people WANT to make something and release it into the public domain, that's fine, but it should be a choice. Stuff like Kickstarter is fine to have as an option for people that want to try to get paid for the process of creating something rather than selling the rights after the work is done, but again, that should be a choice -- especially since there are some creative endeavors like novels that are exceedingly difficult to fund via Kickstarter if you don't have an established reputation already. Relying on that without having copyright would basically mean writers don't get paid for their first few stories -- not just the crap they write while they're learning, but even the first few that are professional-quality published work.

People should get paid for their work. It's not about selling property. It's about getting paid for your labor.

Oh, I agree entirely. I'm sorry I didn't convey my opinion very well.

That was more of a building off what you said post, not a "You're wrong and you should feel bad" post.

[Liberated Territories]

TIL the only reason that Bernier lost was because of the Milk Lobby.

[Northern Davincia]

TIL the only reason that Bernier lost was because of the Milk Lobby.

That exists?

[Liberated Territories]

TIL the only reason that Bernier lost was because of the Milk Lobby.

That exists?

http://www.dairyinfo.gc.ca/index_e.php? ... &s2=canada
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/yan-robert ... 53432.html

Very much so. These rules and regulations only exist to benefit the dairy industry, which has considerable clout. Unfortunately the liberals, while good at being against subsidies, seem to ignore the fact that regulations can destroy competition and keep the big guys afloat.

[Zurkerx]

That exists?

http://www.dairyinfo.gc.ca/index_e.php? ... &s2=canada
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/yan-robert ... 53432.html

Very much so. These rules and regulations only exist to benefit the dairy industry, which has considerable clout. Unfortunately the liberals, while good at being against subsidies, seem to ignore the fact that regulations can destroy competition and keep the big guys afloat.

Can't believe Bernier lost. We were so close. In any case, it seems this party leader is more conservative.

[The Liberated Territories]

New poll.

[Cuprum]

Israel and Palestine are basically the same thing, ones are muslim fanatics and the others are jewish fanatics. There is no separation of religion and state in both nations, if they were secular, the two states solution wouldn't be needed, of course they would have to change the flag of Israel and kick out the rabbis and mullahs from the goverment.

[Zurkerx]

Shouldn't there be a "both" option? There are some that advocate for equal representation.

[Kibbutz Unions]

Israel and Palestine are basically the same thing, ones are muslim fanatics and the others are jewish fanatics. There is no separation of religion and state in both nations, if they were secular, the two states solution wouldn't be needed, of course they would have to change the flag of Israel and kick out the rabbis and mullahs from the goverment.

It's actually much more complicated than that.
The argument isn't about religion, but about the narrative, land ownership, and competing national movements.
If Israelis and Palestinians as they are right now lived under a single, neutral country it would most likely to end in a civil war/massacres/and maybe even ethnic cleansing and genocide.

[Cuprum]

Israel and Palestine are basically the same thing, ones are muslim fanatics and the others are jewish fanatics. There is no separation of religion and state in both nations, if they were secular, the two states solution wouldn't be needed, of course they would have to change the flag of Israel and kick out the rabbis and mullahs from the goverment.

It's actually much more complicated than that.
The argument isn't about religion, but about the narrative, land ownership, and competing national movements.
If Israelis and Palestinians as they are right now lived under a single, neutral country it would most likely to end in a civil war/massacres/and maybe even ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Not really, if you exterminate the fanatics like Turkey did during Kemalism. The Hagia Sophia was a catholic cathedral, an orthodox cathedral, a mosque and now a museum, the same can happen with the Holy Sites. That place needs a Chinese communist style purge to end with the power of religion, if not they will end like India and its faux secularism.

And sooner or later muslims will end being a majority in Israel due to their high birth rates and lack of sexual education so better start now before the worst arrives.

[Len Hyet]

It's actually much more complicated than that.
The argument isn't about religion, but about the narrative, land ownership, and competing national movements.
If Israelis and Palestinians as they are right now lived under a single, neutral country it would most likely to end in a civil war/massacres/and maybe even ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Not really, if you exterminate the fanatics like Turkey did during Kemalism. The Hagia Sophia was a catholic cathedral, an orthodox cathedral, a mosque and now a museum, the same can happen with the Holy Sites. That place needs a Chinese communist style purge to end with the power of religion, if not they will end like India and its faux secularism.

And sooner or later muslims will end being a majority in Israel due to their high birth rates and lack of sexual education so better start now before the worst arrives.

...
I vote for ignoring the casual advocacy for millions of deaths because that is a stupid argument for reasons that have already been enumerated, namely the millions of deaths.

[Kibbutz Unions]

It's actually much more complicated than that.
The argument isn't about religion, but about the narrative, land ownership, and competing national movements.
If Israelis and Palestinians as they are right now lived under a single, neutral country it would most likely to end in a civil war/massacres/and maybe even ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Not really, if you exterminate the fanatics like Turkey did during Kemalism. The Hagia Sophia was a catholic cathedral, an orthodox cathedral, a mosque and now a museum, the same can happen with the Holy Sites. That place needs a Chinese communist style purge to end with the power of religion, if not they will end like India and its faux secularism.

And sooner or later muslims will end being a majority in Israel due to their high birth rates and lack of sexual education so better start now before the worst arrives.

A very big minority (Or even a slight majority) of those populations are fanatic in their hatred of the other side, and honestly each person has their own reasons, they all have the loved one they lost because of the actions of the other side.
And the thing is that, the extremism is constantly on the rise.
You want to "exterminate" people? Doesn't that make you a fanatic as well? And if you would have done so you would have created new 'fanatics' until nearly nobody is left.

I am an Israeli, I know what the situation is like, and I can't see any other solution but two-states- but it might be too late, it is possible that both populations are too hateful by now to do anything.
I wish the two peoples could live together, unfortunately, knowing my people, and knowing (the more limited amount that I know) about the Palestinians they will not ever get along peaceful in the same state, both peoples are nationalist and demand to have their "national identities" in their states.

[Improved werpland]

Did anyone here read this? Seems likely.

https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/pdf/McCloskey_ManifestoForANewAmericanLiberalism.pdf

[Cuprum]

You want to "exterminate" people? Doesn't that make you a fanatic as well? And if you would have done so you would have created new 'fanatics' until nearly nobody is left.

By counsel or by the sword, counsel is useless since the Oslo agreements failed miserably and by the sword Is cheaper than building walls, checkpoints, sending soldiers to kidnap people for interrogation, bombing cities, blockade supplies and money for infrastructure to other provinces and building illegal settlements in private property.

Leaving massacres and purges aside...

Israel could use an Indian model, federal entities with a strong center but that would mean that the arabs will have half of the Knesset or more which would impossible to deal under the haredis and the right wing sectors. They will end in a partition like Pakistan and India with their Kashmir Issue (Jerusalem)

And new fanatics... Yes, though fanatism and cheap chauvinism is destroyed with education so if you have those issues, it means you have an issue in the classroom.

[Elwher]

Israel and Palestine are basically the same thing, ones are muslim fanatics and the others are jewish fanatics. There is no separation of religion and state in both nations, if they were secular, the two states solution wouldn't be needed, of course they would have to change the flag of Israel and kick out the rabbis and mullahs from the goverment.

One difference is that it has never been an official Israeli position that the Palestinian state, nor any Arab state, needs to be driven into the sea or totally eliminated. That is enough of a difference to warrant my support for them.

[Liberated Territories]

Calling it now: in 20 years the internet is going to be in be in the same place as healthcare or college tuition is today: regulated, expensive, and inaccessible to the poor.

[Northern Davincia]

Calling it now: in 20 years the internet is going to be in be in the same place as healthcare or college tuition is today: regulated, expensive, and inaccessible to the poor.

What factor would push the internet into those conditions?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Larry Sharpe is running for governor in NY, here's hoping he has some success.

[Northern Davincia]

Larry Sharpe is running for governor in NY, here's hoping he has some success.

New York is the gulag state. He needs all the help he can get.

[Liberated Territories]

Larry Sharpe is running for governor in NY, here's hoping he has some success.

New York is the least libertarian state of the entire effing US, and there is data from CATO and co to back it up. I applaud his efforts, but it is extremely futile.

Calling it now: in 20 years the internet is going to be in be in the same place as healthcare or college tuition is today: regulated, expensive, and inaccessible to the poor.

What factor would push the internet into those conditions?

Regulatory capture by internet service providers

[Washington Resistance Army]

Larry Sharpe is running for governor in NY, here's hoping he has some success.

New York is the least libertarian state of the entire effing US, and there is data from CATO and co to back it up. I applaud his efforts, but it is extremely futile.

I do agree that it is, but it's still nice to see him try. Maybe something truly insane will happen and he'll win.

Larry Sharpe is running for governor in NY, here's hoping he has some success.

New York is the gulag state. He needs all the help he can get.

California would like a word.