Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts (Read 827 times)
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10525
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #10 - Feb 10th, 2019 at 5:46pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 3:13pm:
Again you want only victims of crimes to pay for it.


kaz wrote on Jan 1st, 2019 at 4:12pm:
Not what I said.  I said if you are going to drive legally on roads, you should provide minimum protection for other drivers from you on ... government ... roads.  You're turning that around into that I'm demanding you protect yourself from others, which is a strawman with a completely different meaning.

So for uninsured drivers, it's your choice what insurance to buy.  Apparently you choice not to buy it.  But that you draw a parallel between that you should be protected from lawbreakers for free because you're required to protect others from you is bogus.


I already conceded that I shouldn't be protected from lawbreakers for free.

Should I take that back?
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #11 - Feb 10th, 2019 at 5:49pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 5:46pm:
I already conceded that I shouldn't be protected from lawbreakers for free.

Should I take that back?


Certainly the quotes are related, but you're mixing discussions and it's a little funktified.  I'm not quite clear what you're arguing exactly.

My point to burnsred was that with roads, if we have a gas tax then the more you drive the more you pay for the roads, which is pretty fair.  It's a use tax.

Crime isn't quite the same.  With crime, that police come and arrest criminals protects future victims.  Locking them up in jail protects future victims.  Why should only direct crime victims pay for law enforcement?  It's not equivalent to roads.  Why should victims be screwed again and be the only ones who have to pay for law enforcement?

I know you're trying to relate that to our insurance discussion, but I need you to be more specific what you're arguing
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45221
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #12 - Feb 10th, 2019 at 6:27pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 5:46pm:
I already conceded that I shouldn't be protected from lawbreakers for free.

Who said that (if you actually are human) you should not share in the equal protection of the law? That's a very unlibertarian idea... Say, you're not some sort of elitist are you? Grin
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10934
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #13 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 2:14pm
Print Post  
Curt Doolittle offers a completely different perspective on Propertarianism.

"It's the completion of the scientific method...But perhaps more important, is the reason westerner's developed science: the art of truthful speech. "


WUT?   Huh

(13 minute video)

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45221
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #14 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:12pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 9th, 2019 at 3:00pm:
After some poking around, it's difficult to pin down exactly what this actually is.

The best (simplest) explanation so far:   Propertarianism is the exact opposite of parasitism.

So what is parasitism?  That's basically when one person exploits another person's property for his own benefit.

For example: (hypothetical)

My property is only large enough for my house, my garage, and the hangar where I park my plane.

My neighbor has a farm with 320 acres.  The service road on his farm serves as a perfect airstrip for my plane - its just long enough and just wide enough.

So, I build a path which connects my hangar to the service road, and conduct my flight operations using his service road as a runway.

I don't ask my neighbor's permission to use the service road because I'm never on it for more than 15 seconds.
What was your question?
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45221
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #15 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:15pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 22nd, 2019 at 2:14pm:
Curt Doolittle offers a completely different perspective on Propertarianism.
Does he demonstrate that Propertarianism is the opposite of parasitism?

Thanks for the chuckle. Grin Grin Grin
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10934
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #16 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:51pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:15pm:
Does he demonstrate that Propertarianism is the opposite of parasitism?

Thanks for the chuckle. Grin Grin Grin

Doolittle is an odd bird.   He seeks to make empirical arguments for the existence of property (as opposed to normative ones).  I see this as problematic. 

abstract:

If some soda vendor were to market a soda as Pepsi, but it’s actually Coca-Cola, that’s a property violation that both of those companies could sue that vendor over. 

Pepsi has damages because the buyer of the soda doesn't like Coke (for whatever reason). He figures that Pepsi changed their formula, and he decides he will no longer purchase Pepsi because the new formula tastes bad.

Coca-Cola has damages  because they lost a (potential) sale of their product.  Mr. Sodabuyer didn't buy the (fake) Pepsi because he doesn't like Pepsi (for whatever reason), but he would have bought it had he known it was actually Coke.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45221
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #17 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:58pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:51pm:
If some soda vendor were to market a soda as Pepsi, but it’s actually Coca-Cola, that’s a property violation that both of those companies could sue that vendor over. 

Pepsi has damages because the buyer of the soda doesn't like Coke...
Pepsi could claim that Coke was ruining it's reputation by allowing an inferior product to be sold as Pepsi...?

It that the essence of Propertarianism?
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45221
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #18 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 5:00pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:51pm:
Coca-Cola has damages  because they lost a (potential) sale of their product.
You said that the vendor was selling Coke products by calling them Pepsi and leading people to believe they were better than they actually were? That would be a fraud perpetuated on the buyer and a potential blow to Pepsi's reputation... Shocked

Edit: Disclaimer: I own Pepsi stock.
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10934
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Reply #19 - Feb 22nd, 2019 at 5:03pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Feb 22nd, 2019 at 4:58pm:
Pepsi could claim that Coke was ruining it's reputation by allowing an inferior product to be sold as Pepsi...?

It that the essence of Propertarianism?

No.  There's no tort between Pepsi and Coca-Cola.

The torts (to both Pepsi AND Coca-Cola) occurred as a result of the VENDOR deliberately mis-labeling the product he sold.

this is an abstract demonstration of the Truthful Speech aspect of Doolittle's philosophy. (contracts)

Confused?     So am I!!       Grin    Grin      Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Propertarianism - Private Property And Contracts
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy