[PAA-Discuss] Climate Reality Bites the Libertarians in the Arse

Fri Apr 11 13:12:28 EDT 2008

Agreed. No one party or political philosophy works. It is necessary to draw
from all of them.

Too bad that's not something that we have been able to do in the U.S. I
think some other countries are doing a far better job of that (and
everything else).

Alyssa Burgin

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Jessica Wilson <jlwilson684 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Can we finally FACE THE DAMN FACTS HERE and admit that there is no ONE
> PERFECT PARTY OR IDEA?  Pull your head out of the clouds PLEASE, you are
> wasting your time arguing over this, how long are we going to piddle around
> and bring this up???  WE ARE IN THE SAME BOAT
> *
> WE ARE IN THE SAME BOAT
>
> Each politician we elect REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATION needs to be
> subjected to EXTREME SCRUTINY
>
> STOP ARGUING OVER THIS NON ISSUE ALREADY
> *
> - jessica
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Alyssa Burgin <aburgin4peace at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Kris in that I have no wish whatsoever to be a libertarian.
> > I have found, though, that the idea that we can expect, for example, that
> > all individuals, or all corporations, will live up to some sort of moral or
> > ethical responsibility, rather naive. I suppose I believed more in that
> > concept when I was much younger, but it's certainly become clear--and ever
> > more clear after almost a decade of Halliburton and KBR and Dick
> > Cheney--that it's everybody for themselves in a loose structure that does
> > not regulate.
> >
> > Look at this society with regulation and without. The last eight years
> > have brought us an utter confounding of what little regulation there was,
> > and all of us have suffered as a result. The rich get richer, the poor get
> > poorer, industry pollutes, the climate worsens, the natural tendency of
> > corporatism to push for cheaper wages becomes the one drive that eclipses
> > all.
> >
> > I'm a communitarian, and proud of it.
> >
> > Alyssa Burgin
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Ron and Kris Graham <
> > graham2639 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> > >  *My last word on this whole subject of libertarianism is this, Ivan:
> > > It is a SELFISH form of government where each man, woman and child looks out
> > > for himself or herself and to hell with everybody else. We share a common
> > > planet and a common humanity. I adhere more to socialist principles and have
> > > no desire whatsoever to be a libertarian. I also believe it is utter crap to
> > > believe the privatizing nature – the Commons – is going to get individual
> > > people to take care of their environment. *
> > >
> > > * *
> > >
> > > *Kris*
> > >
> > > * *
> > >  ------------------------------
> > >
> > > *From:* Ivan Espinosa [mailto:ie3456 at yahoo.com]
> > > *Sent:* Thursday, April 10, 2008 5:50 PM
> > > *To:* graham2639 at mindspring.com; discuss at paa-tx.org
> > > *Subject:* RE: [PAA-Discuss] Climate Reality Bites the Libertarians in
> > > the Arse
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kris,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I believe that mother nature would be better off if the corrupt,
> > > self-seeking government buerucrats weren't in charge of our environmental
> > > policies. China is currently a communist country and Russia was also a
> > > commuist country in the past. Property rights are non-existent in those
> > > countries. *Consequently, their environmental standards are low and
> > > pollution levels are high.*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > If America and the other nations mentioned above adhered to
> > > libertarian principles, the environment would be MUCH better off.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Libertarians would eliminate sovereign immunity so that victims of
> > > the country's greatest polluter -- the government -- would have recourse.
> > > Second, libertarians would privatize our lands to save endangered species,
> > > preserve our parks, protect our national forests, and improve our vast
> > > cattle ranges. In addition, libertarians would couple these powerful reforms
> > > with restitution, to prevent pollution **before** it starts.*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Libertarians reject the initiation of physical force as a means to
> > > their ends. *Restitution is the remedy when someone harms another,
> > > takes their property, or damages it.* While punishment is intended to
> > > hurt the aggressor, restitution restores the victim to the fullest extent
> > > possible. Restitution is "punishment" that fits the crime and therefore
> > > provides a more effective deterrent.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > For example, if your neighbors dumped garbage on your lawn, you would
> > > expect them to clean it up. If they didn't do so when asked, you'd call the
> > > local law enforcement. When your neighbor finally did restore your lawn,
> > > you'd expect them to compensate you for whatever additional costs were
> > > incurred in the enforcement of your claim. Obviously, the expense and hassle
> > > of cleaning up your lawn far outweighs the benefits that your neighbors
> > > might get from dumping garbage on your lawn in the first place. Thus, if
> > > they knew that you were likely to seek restitution, your neighbors would not
> > > pollute your property.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Environmental restoration is costly and difficult.*
> > >
> > > *Restitution therefore becomes an incredibly onerous punishment and
> > > the most effective deterrent known.*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In Britain, individuals have property rights in the rivers that run
> > > through their land. If someone upstream pollutes the water and harms the
> > > fish, the downstream owners don't have to wait for a bureaucratic commission
> > > to study the issue. Instead, they immediately sue the polluters to protect
> > > their valuable property and claim restitution for damages. As a result,
> > > would-be polluters are effectively deterred from damaging the environment.
> > > Waterways that don't have a private protector fare much worse.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Recently, there has been great concern among environmentalists about
> > > businesses dumping toxic chemicals into the Ohio River. *Because the
> > > federal government claims stewardship of this waterway, individuals have NO
> > > ownership rights on which to base a suit. They must wait until bureaucrats
> > > decide to take action.* If the businesses contribute to the campaign
> > > chests of powerful politicians, nothing may ever happen, even if local
> > > authorities are truly protective of the environment.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Even when the government does decide to move against a corporate
> > > polluter, restitution is seldom required. Instead, the business usually pays
> > > a fine. Sometimes the fine is small enough that the business finds it
> > > cheaper to pollute and pay. Private owners would not willing to let their
> > > property polluted for a small sum, because the decrease in property value
> > > would be a devastating financial blow.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Even ocean beds can be protected from pollution when private ownership
> > > of fishing rights is coupled with restitution. In some states, homesteading
> > > of oyster beds is permitted. Private oyster beds are more prolific and
> > > profitable than public ones. The owners have incentive to invest money in
> > > caring for the beds and harvesting them sustainably.
> > >
> > > *Similarly, if a product polluted the air, victims could sue the
> > > product maker, who in turn would pass the costs of restitution onto the
> > > consumer. Higher prices would discourage use and decrease pollution.*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > By privitizing land and beast, bad political policy won't be able to
> > > destroy the 40% of our nation's land and wildlife now controlled by the
> > > federal government. Respect for private property rights is key to sound
> > > environmental policy. After all, those who depend on the land for their
> > > health and livelihood have the greatest incentive to keep it clean and
> > > sustainable.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Respectfully Yours,
> > >
> > > Ivan Espinosa
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------
> > > Progressive Action Alliance  http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
> > > Discuss mailing list   Discuss at paa-tx.org
> > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options
> > > on this list, go to:
> > > http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org
> > >
> > > To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
> > > To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply
> > > All".
> > > Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it
> > > goes to the correct address.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------
> > Progressive Action Alliance  http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
> > Discuss mailing list   Discuss at paa-tx.org
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options
> > on this list, go to:
> > http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org
> >
> > To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
> > To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply
> > All".
> > Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes
> > to the correct address.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Every generation has the obligation to free men's minds for a look at new
> worlds... to look out from a higher plateau than the last generation.
>
> -- Ellison S. Onizuka
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20080411/dfb904c2/attachment.htm>