Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 35664
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/04/28 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
4/28    

2005/1/11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:35664 Activity:high
1/11    What's the libertarian/conservative repsonse to the mudslide
        in SoCal?  Should be be forcing Ilya, at gunpoint, to pay to
        try to rescue people who *choose* to live downhill from, um,
        anything?  Should surivors be able to sue the owner of the
        mud for damages?
        \_ I am no libertarian or conservative, but I think aid for people
           who built million dollar houses in obviously idiotic places is
           bullshit.  When a once in a hundred years tsunami floods your whole
           town, you can call it an act of God, but when you build your
           house in a fucking flood plane and it gets flooded you deserve
           what you get.
           \_ I don't mean extra aid, I mean digging bodies out of the
              mud.  And suppose the mudslide was caused because the owner
              of the land uphill cleared out the vegetation?  Lastly, calling
              the little bit of rain they're getting a tsunami is a stretch,
              given the widespread destruction of the real one.
              \_ [ bitch. ]
           \_ La Chonchita was hardly a place of million dollar homes, fyi.
        \_ If I remember correctly from yesterday's hate fest, ilyas would
           deny such basic assistance as food stamps to poor people.  Why
           would he want to waste money rescuing anyone?
           \_ It's not a waste to spend money to rescue people, but if I were
              in charge of the country, I wouldn't consider it my money to
              spend.  I would encourage people to not be fucktards and help,
              but I will not be a fucktard in return and make them help if
              they do not wish. -- ilyas
              \_ And while you're taking your time gathering support, real
                 people are dying buried beneath the mud.
                 \_ I think the libertarian solution would be to have people
                    donate in advance to a relief group which would help out
                    when necessary. --not libertarian, but trying to understand
                    \_ Or it could work kind of how home owner associations
                       work. Places have their own local organisations
                       responsible for providing or contracting private
                       emergency services. --also non-libertarian
                 \_ I will not force people to do good.  If you want to go
                    down that path, why have free will at all?  Just lobotomize
                    them into some sort of drone-saint and be done with it.
                    Of course, drone-saints are not moral agents, but that
                    probably doesn't bother you.  If you ever wondered why
                    Christians tend to not be liberal, it might be because
                    they have this intuitive notion that God considered free
                    will important as far as doing good.  Otherwise, he wouldn't
                    have bothered with it, and just made everyone act as they
                    should act.  Liberals ignore the issue of human goodness
                    entirely using the machine of government. -- ilyas
                    \_ Hmm, libertarians seem to take the notion of human
                       goodness for granted, and conveniently ignore the fact
                       that expensive life saving equipment and training is
                       usually outside of the range of affordability for me
                       and neighbor Joe.  That money's gotta come from
                       somewhere, and if that means through taxes, then so
                       be it.  Saying that this 'ignoring the issue of human
                       goodness' seems, at best, non sequitur.  Perhaps you can
                       give clarification.
                       \_ Eh, rescue stuff is sort of a gray area.  In
                          principle libertarians tend to not fund stuff other
                          than police/army.  On the other hand, rescue
                          operations are often done _by_ the army, since they
                          tend to be very qualified for this kind of work
                          (see the tsunami thing for example).  Personally,
                          I don't consider rescue efforts, and general
                          'good samaritan' stuff to be the province of the
                          government, though I recognize government agencies,
                          even in limited government, tend to be good at it.
                          Anyways lifesaving equipment/training maybe outside
                          the scope of the average Joe, but so are blood
                          transfusions, or AIDS research.  This does not mean
                          average Joe would not contribute, and that effective,
                          fast acting charity based rescue orgs cannot exist
                          (in fact they exist now).
                          I ll modify my original claim somewhat, and say that
                          short term crises of any kind can be reasonably
                          claimed to be the province of the army/law
                          enforcement agencies, which are tax-funded.
                          Or they may not (also reasonable).
                          The 'human goodness' comment is more of a general
                          comment on how libertarians view acts of charity
                          and decency.  -- ilyas
                    \_ Eh, rescuing people in need of immediate disaster
                       response is part of the reason IMO we have government.
                       Long-term aid should be through private groups, etc.
                       Rebuilding should be done (if at all) via funds from
                       private insurance. -emarkp
                       \_ This mostly makes sense to me.  I don't understand
                          why this would be 'ignoring the issue of human
                          goodness', though.           -mice (a moderate)
                 \_ Haven't you been keeping up with motd?  God punishes the
                    unworthy (esp if they're poor and ideologically unsound).
                    It's their fault, so sit back and enjoy yer stuff and feel
                    no conscience about (or need to participate in) society.
           \_ Dig them out and then mail them a bill.
        \_ Rescuing people is a reasonable government action.  Paying them
           relief money so they can rebuild in the same spot isn't.  Morons who
           drive around barricades to cross a river which was a road should be
           charged the cost of the rescue.
2025/04/28 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
4/28    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2010/1/21-29 [Reference/Religion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53653 Activity:nil
1/20    So I want to give some money to Haiti relief funds and my employer
        \_ SOCIALISM
        is willing to match it, but I am not really that big a fan of
        The Red Cross (they take your donations and then spend them
        however they like, not neccessarily on what you gave it to them for).
        Who else is a good charity? UNICEF?
	...
2010/1/20-21 [Reference/Religion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53642 Activity:very high
1/20    So I want to give some money to Haiti relief funds and my employer
        is willing to match it, but I am not really that big a fan of
        The Red Cross (they take your donations and then spend them
        however they like, not neccessarily on what you gave it to them for).
        Who else is a good charity? UNICEF?
        \- I believe after some criticism the Red Cross is better about
	...
2010/1/4-19 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:53611 Activity:moderate
1/4     Why the fascination with blowing up airplanes? Airports have tight
        security. It doesn't seem worth it. It's far easier to derail a
        train or set off explosives in a crowded place like a theater or
        sporting event. As many or more people will be killed and it will
        still make the news. I don't get why all of our security, and
        apprently much of the terrorist's resources, is focused on airplanes.
	...
2009/2/25-3/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:52635 Activity:nil
2/25    Thank you Obama for pledging to reverse much of Reagan's economic
        mess. Thank you!
        http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/24/analysis.obama.reagan
        http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-219640
        \_ About time. The last 25 years have been a disaster for the middle
           class.
	...
2009/2/9-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:52538 Activity:low
2/9     GOP may be "winning" stimulus debate on TeeVee, but they're losing quite
        badly with the public:
        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/another-poll-shows-public-approving-obama-disapproving-gop-on-stimulus.php
        http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/poll-obama-way-ahead-of-gop-on-stimulus.php
        \_ Uh, the support for the pork package is falling, and now the CBO
           says we'll get out of the recession without a stimulus.
	...

	...