The Supreme Court May Finally Do Something Right!

[Undertoad]

The very problem with a pyramid scheme: everybody in it believes it's chock-full of mutually beneficial transactions.

Enough people with a broken belief can break a market economy.

So one answer is that we outlaw pyramid schemes... but that fails Radar's test 4 posts up: "it has to do with the reality that capitalism doesn't require force to exist" -- well no, Capitalism requires a system of policing, and courts, and legislation, to determine what is swindle and protect against it.

To this formerly hard-ass libertarian, this realization was a sharp slap in the face.

It also requires good government for its framework of capitalist infrastructure: establishing currency, putting in place a system of deeds of ownership, etc.

A market economy requiring government. Whoda thunk it.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

The very problem with a pyramid scheme: everybody in it believes it's chock-full of mutually beneficial transactions.

Enough people with a broken belief can break a market economy.

So one answer is that we outlaw pyramid schemes... but that fails Radar's test 4 posts up: "it has to do with the reality that capitalism doesn't require force to exist" -- well no, Capitalism requires a system of policing, and courts, and legislation, to determine what is swindle and protect against it.

To this formerly hard-ass libertarian, this realization was a sharp slap in the face.

It also requires good government for its framework of capitalist infrastructure: establishing currency, putting in place a system of deeds of ownership, etc.

A market economy requiring government. Whoda thunk it.

Well stated and well summerized.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Yeah, some of us libertarians acknowledge a place for what I call society's coercive functions -- intended overall to keep a society in good order, and in considerable measure independent of a society's intensity, or amount, of governance.

The coercive functions may often be distinguished by this point: that nobody's found a way to make money or wealth from them, yet they are agreed upon as necessities in support of making money and wealth.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Well, summarized anyway. The other way it's like heavier-grade oil in the crankcase and a new air filter...

[Radar]

Woo Hoo! They finally came out with the decision. The Supreme Court finally did something right!

[jinx]

Originally Posted by Radar

Woo Hoo! They finally came out with the decision. The Supreme Court finally did something right!

Crazy that it was 5-4, but a good decision just the same.

[spudcon]

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
- George Carlin
Guess he's finding out whether he was right or wrong.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by spudcon

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
- George Carlin
Guess he's finding out whether he was right or wrong.

I initially misunderstood this to mean you thought heaven had institutional religion and a State.

[BrianR]

Already Chuck Schumer et al are claiming that the decision does not preclude gun bans by type and the Brady Bill. Sigh. Listen to the mayor for tired, old rhetoric that we've all heard a hundred times before when such laws are repealed or when "shall-issue" permits are instituted.

Blood-baths, shootouts at high noon, the dead piling up in the streets etc. I am tired of it and don't really hear it anymore. Can't the gun grabbers ever think up something new?

[elSicomoro]

I haven't read this thread at all, but I think that the right decision was made. People should be able to own handguns; states should have the right to impose some regulations on them.

I know the right thinks of him as a traitor, but I really like Justice Kennedy...he seems to have a good head on his shoulders.

[spudcon]

Nope, just a random comment about those who are extreme at both ends of the issue. I'm sure ol' George doesn't give a damn about the issue any more.

[Radar]

I'm sure he doesn't care about anything anymore.

[classicman]

OH you mean he's a politician, radar?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Well, BrianR, my impression is no, they can't. Neither their mentalities nor their morals are that good.

Just remember, if you've ever harbored an antigun thought, you've entertained a pro-genocide one. A pro-genocide view strikes me as an immoral one.

In the end, persons unduly afraid of what guns might do to, rather than for, the citizenry ought never to be allowed into office.

[DanaC]

Just remember, if you've ever harbored an antigun thought, you've entertained a pro-genocide one.

Oh purleeease.

In the end, persons unduly afraid of what guns might do to, rather than for, the citizenry ought never to be allowed into office.

And if they are duly afraid ? Given how many of your citizens lose their lives to, or sustain injuries from, gunshots, I would say there is reason for concern, indeed, I'd say there is reason for fear. Whether the answer to that is to limit gun ownership or extend it is a whole other question, but to suggest that politicians should hold no fear of guns and there potential to cause harm is unreasonable.