Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 19 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations (Read 873 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49721
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #40 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 5:49pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 5:40pm:
Do your taxes support the train?
I hope not.

How would I know?
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6110
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #41 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:01pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 5:49pm:
I hope not.

How would I know?


Ok, well since you have started drinking early, yes.  Your taxes support the train.

Why should you be excluded?

I presume you know that your taxes support the school bus?  Do you oppose wheelchair lifts on school buses or does this question go on the pile?

  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Industry
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 397
Joined: Jun 14th, 2019
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #42 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:03pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:01pm:
Ok, well since you have started drinking early, yes.  Your taxes support the train.


No they don't he is a leech doesn't pay any taxes.

I am a leech too but I at least am trying to go to school get good grades and get a good job so I can work for myself.

Lots of people say Jeff has never had a job I think they are right.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49721
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #43 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:41pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:01pm:
Your taxes support the train.



A Kalifornia commuter train? Shocked That's supposed to be of general benefit to the nation? Cheesy

Yes, I know. Some of the money I pay to the U.S. Treasury gets sent to Kalifornia for commuter trains that serve a few Kalifornians who should be supporting free market solutions, but aren't.
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49721
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #44 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:44pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 6:01pm:
I presume you know that your taxes support the school bus?  Do you oppose wheelchair lifts on school buses or does this question go on the pile?
Around here, they have wheelchair capable vans. They are probably cheaper and safer and more convenient for everybody, and yes, I know my taxes help pay for them and their drivers. (Edit: and their maintenance and repair.)

Edit: Nobody around here would pay extra to cart around companion horses.

If you feel insecure without My Little Pony, probably you aren't ready for school yet.


  

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

Minarchist

Posts: 8727
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #45 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 8:20pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 5:10pm:
I said roads are possible without government building them...    Obviously government roads are not optional, they exist and are ubiquitous.  So much so, that it would be impossible for me to get from my house to my job without at least crossing them


Right, because people like you wouldn't block building roads on your property just because you can.   This is a childish, retarded argument.  Roads are not possible without the citizens working together, and the name for that is government.  No one could ever build a meaningful road based on voluntary association only.

Go to work the way you advocate, through people's yards.  Let them shoot at you and sic their dogs on you.  Feel free to cross roads, just don't go down them.  Write when you get to work.

Finally, you destroyed your own argument.  You said it would not be possible for you to get to your work without crossing them.  That's why roads make a minarchists government list.  It would be exactly the same as if they were private.  You can't have two sets of roads.  There can be only one.  It's not like say PCs where you can go to a store and pick from among different brands.  No matter who builds the roads, there can be only one set of them.

Again, you obliterated your own argument by pointing that out.  By not having them government, you pit citizens against each other and enable nothing but the pursuit of power and greed controlling and blocking the roads.  You'd spend your entire life within a half mile of where you were born because people would never cooperate to get beyond that.

That aint freedom.  I'm a libertarian for my freedom
« Last Edit: Nov 8th, 2019 at 7:14am by kaz »  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11686
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #46 - Nov 7th, 2019 at 9:16pm
Print Post  
I'm going to be fair to both sides in this debate. Watch the rotten fruit fly, because being fair doesn't win anyone any friends; tribalism and thinking of everyone as friend or enemy does.

Little Big Man wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 5:10pm:
I said roads are possible without government building them...    Obviously government roads are not optional, they exist and are ubiquitous.  So much so, that it would be impossible for me to get from my house to my job without at least crossing them.

You cannot say that I should be hemmed in by roads and that I am a freeloader if I cross them to get to my job.  We you can, but a logical person would not.


A logical person who believed in property rights would. What would be your objection if you lived on a totally free market, AnCap planet, and someone bought Shylon Pass, which was the only way through the Desakar Mountain Range, and you could no longer go to the desert to meditate?

Just to be clear, they properly homesteaded the whole shabang and they're using every inch of it. It's a condominium now, and no one wants you on their property.

kaz wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 8:20pm:
Right, because people like you wouldn't block building roads on your property just because you can.   This is a childish, retarded argument.  Roads are not possible without the citizens working together, and the name for that is government.  No one could ever build a meaningful road based on voluntary association only.

Go to work the way you advocate, through people's yards.  Let them shoot at you and sic their dogs on you.  Feel free to cross roads, just don't go down them.  Write when you get to work


My question to your side would be in the vein of your idea that taxes must benefit everyone. Roads, yes, but taxation for a private helicopter for Johnny B. Awesome would be a no.

And I do see that Burnsy is being a bit childish here. The logical thing for him to do is simply use the roads built with his tax money because that is a greater benefit than he could have possibly bought with the tax money he himself could withhold.

My question is: What if, for some reason, he couldn't use those roads? What if he wasn't just being childish and he was unable to benefit, at all, and the fact that roads were there did hem him in, whereas, without the roads, he would be free to travel?

In the past, most roads were not considered to be owned by anyone, and no one was trespassing to use them. If, in a very short span of time, someone had simply declared they owned the roads, and bricked them just for the fun of it, but now kept people they didn't like off them, would you consider that to be legitimate ownership?

kaz wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 11:06am:
You're right, you are a fictional character.  But it isn't Spock, it's Gollum


At least you can admit now that I'm all in your head.

You really are making great strides, Kaz. I want you to know that.

But I think the real question we're all asking is, "Where's Indy's elephant?"
  

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: 8727
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #47 - Nov 8th, 2019 at 7:18am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Nov 7th, 2019 at 9:16pm:
My question is: What if, for some reason, he couldn't use those roads? What if he wasn't just being childish and he was unable to benefit, at all, and the fact that roads were there did hem him in, whereas, without the roads, he would be free to travel?


I'm going to toss that back to you because you missed a piece in your scenario.  That has to be the case ... and ... he has to still be paying taxes and funding the roads.  Give me a scenario where he lives, shops, works and pays taxes, but doesn't need roads at all ever?

And the part about not needing roads but being hemmed in makes no sense at all.  The roads keep him from being hemmed in.  Explain how that part of the scenario makes sense in any way
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49721
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #48 - Nov 8th, 2019 at 8:40am
Print Post  
New York man arrested by feds for not allowing an emotional support horse on his bus:

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2019/11/06/ice-immigration-and-customs...

"QUEENS, N.Y. - A large armored personnel carrier operated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security rumbled into a Queens neighborhood Wednesday morning, alarming local residents."

Now we begin to see what creating the DHS was really all about! Shocked
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 49721
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Reply #49 - Nov 8th, 2019 at 9:23am
Print Post  
So, I was wondering if commuter trains could brake hard enough to make a horse lose it's footing and get out of control in the aisle...

I thought to look here:

https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/APTA-PR-M-S-020-17_Rev1.pdf

Then I found this:

http://toughstem.com/problem-answer-solution/3987/light-rail-commuter-train-acce...

Which requires some calculating to determine it's emergency deceleration rate...

Once you figure that out, you can plug it in here:

https://www.convertunits.com/from/meters+per+(second+squared)/to/g-unit

and see how many 'g's are involved...

Anyway, where do they put the horses on the train? I assume they have to be close to the poor human they are supporting emotionally...

Also, what if the horse pees all over the floor in the train? Is the human responsible for cleanup costs?

Maybe they make the horses wear diapers?
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 19
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Emotional Support Horses Must be Allowed on Public Accommodations
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy