Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook (Read 900 times)
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3116
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #30 - Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:33am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 1:11am:
Why? Is it really okay to violate a core principle of libertarianism, just so more people will live?


Even more people would live if they mandated H harnesses instead of lap and shoulder seat belts.  Even more still if we required car drivers and passengers to wear helmets.  Or simply banned cars altogether in favor of slow-moving, but very safe trains. 

If motorcycles were required to have training wheels, roll cages and governors to prevent them going over thirty miles per hour, many lives would be saved. 

Once we decide to trade freedom for safety, the possibilities for saving lives are endless.


  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6915
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #31 - Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:55am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 2:41am:
No core principles of libertarianism are broken.

Self ownership, limited government and free market are still intact with the FAA.

The FAA has served aviation very well since 1958. 

The US has the busiest airspace on the planet.  Millions of people count on them to manage it.  Which they do. Because they have the funding.

If private sector took over, they would cut corners to maximise profits, and accidents/disasters would be more commonplace. Lives would be lost.

"If it ain't broke, don't 'fix' it."

Same with facebook.  It ain't broke.   It's run by moonbats. They sell personal info to 3rd-party interests. So what.   If anyone is uncomfortable with that, they should log out & use another social media platform.


If it ain't broke, don't fix it? Who determines what "works very well"? The whole point Leftists have about non-regulation is that they dislike the results. To them, there are far more regulations that would work well, because those would be the results they prefer.

I know you're right about the work-safety thing you mentioned before both because investing in safety does not provide an immediate return, and because the dollar value of a human life is simply not high enough to justify the investment. I'm not going to say it's impossible for the government to be right and the free market to be wrong. I think OSHA proves this.

What I think is that it doesn't matter who's right or wrong. Saying the government should be able to force their way, even if it is the right way, is like saying I would be morally justified in beating up stupid people to stop them from drinking or buying lottery tickets. Would I be justified?

It's... For their own good.

Is that enough for the moral justification of force?
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.

Not taking Jeff seriously until he admits this is animal abuse (which he says should be illegal): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-IT7_CaE4
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #32 - Apr 16th, 2018 at 2:31pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:55am:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it? Who determines what "works very well"?
In the theories of liberty, individual people decide what they think will work best for them (or people organized into voluntary cooperative organizations decide what they think will work best for their association) and there are strong arguments for letting that happen because bureaucrats and lawmakers so often do such a bad job, because they are unable to foresee unintended consequences and aren't motivated to make changes when unintended consequences arise.

Just for instance a "Safety Regulation" that sounds wonderful might not work as intended, and will almost never work across an entire industry and will sometimes result in behavior that is even more dangerous than what was supposed to be made safe.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #33 - Apr 16th, 2018 at 2:34pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:55am:
I know you're right about the work-safety thing you mentioned before both because investing in safety does not provide an immediate return, and because the dollar value of a human life is simply not high enough to justify the investment.
Businesses that focus on immediate returns without considering the long term usually go out of business rapidly, and these days, the loss of skilled workers and/or the potential cost of lawsuits can be very costly.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #34 - Apr 16th, 2018 at 2:37pm
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:33am:
Even more people would live if they mandated H harnesses instead of lap and shoulder seat belts.  Even more still if we required car drivers and passengers to wear helmets.  Or simply banned cars altogether in favor of slow-moving, but very safe trains. 

If motorcycles were required to have training wheels, roll cages and governors to prevent them going over thirty miles per hour, many lives would be saved. 

Once we decide to trade freedom for safety, the possibilities for saving lives are endless.


Exactly, and don't forget to ban bicycles entirely.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6605
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #35 - Apr 16th, 2018 at 4:26pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:55am:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it? Who determines what "works very well"?

Anyone who flies planes or flies in planes.

Most people know that flying (in) an aircraft is hundreds of times safer than traveling in a car.  The FAA is doing a fantastic job of keeping us safe in the air.  Most people are aware of this.

The FAA compels pilots to do a lot of repetetive, time-consuming, mundane tasks before granting permission to take off from a runway. Nobody grumbles about it because we know that if our aircraft experiences a mechanical malfunction while in flight, we can't just pull over to the side of the road and call Triple-A.

So we do our pre-flight inspections knowing that it will be exactly the same as the last one, and the one before it, and so on....

Although one day I found a spider had built a nest in the pitot tube and would have resulted in inaccurate airspeed indication had I not noticed it. That could be fatal when flying at low speeds.

The Opposition wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 11:55am:
Saying the government should be able to force their way, even if it is the right way, is like saying I would be morally justified in beating up stupid people to stop them from drinking or buying lottery tickets. Would I be justified?

It's... For their own good.
I think you would be morally justified, but not legally justified.

(Im being facetious, of course.  You would be legally justified, too. LoL)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6915
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #36 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:16am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 4:26pm:
Anyone who flies planes or flies in planes.

Most people know that flying (in) an aircraft is hundreds of times safer than traveling in a car.


Alright, so following this logic, we should make car drivers do the same thing?

Anyone who drives a car should decide, right?

I am NOT for this in reality, but just selfishly I would be. I'm one of the safer drivers. Regulating car drivers would allow me to pass and get the maniacs off the road who cause accidents. I wouldn't even care except that on the highway, the maniacs tend to splat a few other people with them.

154 deaths this year to traffic, a highway sign boasts. It asks that I not text and drive. Well, I won't. Now regulate everyone else so they can't.

I might freak out and crash if spiders start falling on my head, though. Don't let the Vulcans see how I act around crawly things. They'll take away my Kohlinar certificate.
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.

Not taking Jeff seriously until he admits this is animal abuse (which he says should be illegal): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-IT7_CaE4
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #37 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 9:28am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Apr 16th, 2018 at 4:26pm:
Anyone who flies planes or flies in planes.

Most people know that flying (in) an aircraft is hundreds of times safer than traveling in a car.  The FAA is doing a fantastic job of keeping us safe in the air.  Most people are aware of this.
You are correct that flying is incredibly safe. Even military planes are incredibly safe, and the FAA has nothing to do with how military aircraft are designed or maintained or how military pilots are trained. Flying in foreign countries is also incredibly safe. So is flying in foreign built airplanes, even Russian airplanes, which are only slightly more dangerous.

Attributing the safety record of flying to the FAA is not something that you can do simply by making a statement to that effect.

Aircraft manufacturers are very highly motivated to build safe airplanes. Airlines aren't going to buy $100 million + airplanes if the wings are going to break off and kill hundreds of people and their highly trained pilots too.

Airlines are also highly motivated to keep up with good maintenance, because an airplane that is broken, even if it doesn't crash, is a very expensive asset that usually costs money even sitting on the ground, and certainly isn't making any money if it isn't flying.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6605
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #38 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 12:35pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:16am:
Alright, so following this logic, we should make car drivers do the same thing?

Anyone who drives a car should decide, right?

No. I only pointed that out because I wanted to illustrate how the FAA (although very costly) is achieving their prime objective - to make civil aviation safe.

A car driver doesn't need to be as proficient at operating his/her vehicle as a pilot does.

It would be silly hold car drivers to the same proficiency standards as pilots, IMO.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Reply #39 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:59pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 12:35pm:
No. I only pointed that out because I wanted to illustrate how the FAA (although very costly) is achieving their prime objective - to make civil aviation safe.

A car driver doesn't need to be as proficient at operating his/her vehicle as a pilot does.

It would be silly hold car drivers to the same proficiency standards as pilots, IMO.
Drivers kill far more people than do pilots.

Lots of things are dangerous and can be made more safe, but aviation is not somehow "special" and neither is workplace safety. The FAA and OSHA and the NHTSA are all one-size-fits-all top down "solutions" that are expensive bureaucracies whose often arbitrary rules can actually prevent innovation that would actually make things better and safer.

You can be certain that people will find ways to get hurt and to hurt others no matter how many rules you pile on them. Bureaucracies have not proven to be good solutions to such problems.

Workplace safety, as I mentioned previously, was improving before OSHA. Aviation safety was also improving rapidly before the FAA.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Three EDIT: Four Reasons Congress Won't Change Facebook
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy