Now It's Progressives Who Don't Believe in Public Firefighting, Because Global Warming

Interesting to see in a recent Rolling Stone how some of the hoariest complaints about how wackadoo crazy and antisocial libertarians are, for example that we don't believe in public firefighting services, are coming full circle and being embraced by the left, maddened by how they think global warming is making fires worse and saddened to think anyone would ever be hurt over anything as insignificant as private property.

Denis Collette...!!! / Foter / CC BY-NC-NDDenis Collette...!!! / Foter / CC BY-NC-ND

Osha Gray Davidson in a long article, "The Great Burning," about serious wildfires in the west this year wrote about how the fires "raise....weighty questions. The most immediate, following the deaths on Yarnell Hill, concerns the wisdom of sending young men and women to risk death battling wildfires to protect private property." (Libertarians, in my experience, are also the types who often raise interesting questions about bad forest management decisions on the part of the feds that exacerbate the fire problem in the west.)

A letter in the September 12 issue of Rolling Stone from Paula Del of Los Angeles reinforces this: "No firefighters' lives should be lost protecting private property." This I guess leaves open the idea that a publicly supported fire service should exist, but only to stop fires on government land?

Now, libertarians, to the extent its true they obsess over quashing publicly funded firefighting, question whether this necessary and important service needs to be imposed by force and paid for by money taken via taxation--that is, they see it as such an important function that, like all important social functions, free markets and insurance will likely sort it out and provide it. (And if the risk proves too high to insure, then maybe people should reconsider their actions.) Government, to libertarians, should function strictly to protect life and property, and even then only in cases where no other non-governmental method could possibly or reasonably be imagined to perform that service.

These progressives seem to be saying that, whatever government is good for, such as changing everyone's energy consumption behavior to quash global warming, it certainly should not sully itself to actually directly protecting people's property and/or lives when it comes to fires--that government is necessary and proper for everything but a jointly funded project of protecting property. Libertarians, I suppose, are just being anti-social. Progressives are saying that we can and should count on government for ordering us to do whatever it sees as necessary, but not to count on it to protect anything as banal or insignificant as private property.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Individuals shouldn't be "owning" property, anyway. That's basically theft of public enjoyment.

  • Brian D||

    Farnsworth: "HEY! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!"
    Free Waterfall, Jr.: "You can't own property, man!"
    Farnsworth: "I can, but that's because I'm not a penniless hippie!"

  • Mr Whipple||

    The first time I saw that, I almost pissed myself.

  • ||

    People who own property are rich.

    QED

  • Marshall Gill||

    Rich? They are EVIL.

  • buybuydandavis||

    No one who supports ever expanding government power is evil.

  • Mr Whipple||

    Wait. You don't know the difference between "property" and "possession"? What are you, one of those "vulgar libertarians"?

  • Dweebston||

    I never did distill that comment. Was the hipster douchebag trying to say that property applies only to land and capital, whereas possessions are transient, portable things worthy of being secure against public appropriation?

  • mr lizard||

    I pay, you spray. Same goes for any porn actors, ninjas, or painters on my payroll. Don't like it? find another job.

  • Ted S.||

    This is the sort of issue that shows that any idea, no matter how nonsensical or evil it is, will be given a fair hearing by much of the media and establishment if it's portrayed as being "green".

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Nonsensical and evil are tautologous to "Green".

  • Pelosi's Accommodator||

    I must be an exceptionally wacko libertarian, since I don't even consider private firefighting to be one of our crazier ideas. So your insurance goes up $5 a month--madness!

  • Ken Shultz||

    "No firefighters' lives should be lost protecting private property."

    They're basically saying that government services shouldn't benefit...um...people.

    That's the 800 lbs gorilla sitting in the background, here.

    It's the flip side of their argument that libertarians complaining about how our money is squandered is hypocritical--since we use the roads.

    They're basically saying that...um...people shouldn't get to use the roads.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Yeah, but those people are living out in the wilderness away from the urban centers.

    That's a grave insult to government, society, and the notion of a Collective.

  • Ken Shultz||

    It's just absurd. They're looking for ways to make their weird worldview relevant given whatever's in the news.

    And it just doesn't make sense.

    You charge private people property taxes to fund a fire department, and then you say that the fire department shouldn't be used to protect the property of private people...

    Meanwhile, in October of 2007, a million people in San Diego County were evacuated due to wildfires.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....ewsarchive

    You're a liberal/progressive, and you're gonna leave a million people homeless like that?

    How'd they feel about Katrina? Did they want to leave the people trapped in New Orleans becasue of Katrina to die, too, because, after all, most of that was private property?

    Their logic is senseless. They've invested so much in their Messiah, and now that he's limping like a duck, they can't make much sense of what they think or why anymore--so they're flailing at anything in the news that gets in their range.

    They're pathetic.

  • SweatingGin||

    "You're a liberal/progressive, and you're gonna leave a million people homeless like that?"

    Move them in to public housing?

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    There's no problem centralized planning can't solve!

  • CE||

    It's not logic.

  • Irish||

    Adam Weinstein at Gawker throws a hissy fit over that "Why People in Generation Y are miserable Cartoon." The article is artfully titled "Fuck You. I'm Gen Y, and I Don't Feel Special or Entitled, Just Poor."

    Let's take a look.

    You have no idea about student debt, underemployment, life-long renting. “Stop feeling special” is some shitty advice. I don’t feel special or entitled, just poor. The only thing that makes me special is I have more ballooning debt than you. I’ve tempered the hell out of my expectations of work, and I’ve exceeded those expectations crazily to have one interesting, exciting damned career that’s culminated in some leadership roles for national publications. And I’m still poor and in debt and worked beyond the point where it can be managed with my health and my desire to actually see the son I’m helping to raise.

    I don't feel special, I just have an awesome career, a history of leadership roles in national publications, and I'm far more of a victim than you are.

    With humility, logic, and a grasp of English like this, I can't understand how Adam Weinstein is poor. Who wouldn't want to give gobs of money to a writer with such a weak vocabulary that he can't seem go a sentence without swearing?

    Honestly, Adam Weinstein's prose style reads like a literary hate crime.

  • Marc F Cheney||

    worked beyond the point where it can be managed with my health and my desire to actually see the son I’m helping to raise.

    My God. This is the first generation of men who feels like their work was affecting their health and family life. They ARE special snowflakes!

  • ||

    GENERATION WAR is stupid, but it's hilarious that his reaction to the cartoon is...to be exactly like what the cartoon is saying he's like. Self-awareness is really going out if style, isn't it?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I used to think so too, but then my daughter started taking college classes.

    Mustangs in the school parking lot, and morons in the school's auditoriums. This truly is the most spoiled generation.

  • ||

    Your generation raised us! See how retarded it is?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I wasn't "raised" much at all; in fact I was expected to help raise my younger brothers and sisters. My two girls both have full-ride scholarships to top schools in the fields of engineering and medicine, respectively. That is almost entirely on account of their own hard work, but insofar as our parenting was a factor, it didn't produce entitled whiners. (Third she-spawn is still in production, but she's not an entitled whiner, either.)

    As for the piss-poor parenting of the brats who've gone through more top-line cars than jobs, I'd definitely agree that producing the worst generation of Americans ever was a team effort.

  • Irish||

    I call bullshit. When I watch the news or see political discussions carried out by middle aged men and women, one of the first thing I notice is how childish it all is. Washington is run by people who act like teenagers, the media is run by people who act like children, and college students behave like infants.

    It's not the fault of Gen Y or the Millenials or any other generation. Our entire culture has become completely infantile and without any substance or merit, and this has occurred across the entire age spectrum.

    It's like the adults just vanished from the universe and got replaced by grey haired 15 year olds.

    Boom! Got it right this time.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Young Americans are both a product of past bad trends and a driver of current bad trends. Past bad trends aren't the fault of college-age Americans; current bad trends, on the other hand, can certainly be examined for their use -- and frankly, your generation is just horrible.

    Unfortunately all of the flaws of my generation have been passed down to yours and then some -- I see very little that is redeeming about the politics and lifestyles of the current generation, or any area in which it is improved. There is nothing ennobling about spending the formative years of one's life in low-pressure pseudo-academic environments -- accumulating debt or passing on the costs to one's parents -- only to leave those environs and complain about having to work hard in the real world. Conformism and lack of entrepreneurship are diminished in this demographic; communitarianism and false activism seem to be ascendant.

    All of these are generalities, of course -- but not unfounded ones, unfortunately. Hopefully a dose of reality will upset these trends.

  • ||

    Continue on with your collectivism bullshit. You clearly don't see how retarded it is.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    ...observing trends is retarded? I'm open to hearing how the current batch of young Americans in the aggregate has improved on its predecessors.

  • Cytotoxic||

    This isn't 'collectivism' you idiot. Generations are different and that's a reality of culture. The reality is that my generation sucks.

  • Irish||

    When you consider that the generation before Weinstein had late 70's stagflation and had their men conscripted to go to Vietnam, I find it hard to weep over Weinstein's whining.

    Hell, the generation before them had the Great Depression, WWII and Korea. Every generation's had their struggles, and I find the current whining by gainfully employed journalists about the fact that they aren't as well off as they'd hoped to be absolutely abhorrent.

    Weinstein isn't poor by American standards, much less global standards, and his protestations to the contrary don't change the fact that his claims to poverty are evidence that he has the exact sort of entitlement complex that he spends that post denying.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Besides, no one forced him to go to college -- where as a journalism major, he probably spent most of his time drinking and shooting the shit.

    You reap what you sow, and young Americans writ large have spent most of their lives producing nothing of value, with palms stretched out expecting everything their parents had as soon as they graduated.

    Sorry, but that's not how the world works.

  • Irish||

    I call bullshit. When I watch the news or see political discussions carried out by middle aged men and women, one of the first thing I notice is how childish it all is. Washington is run by people who act like teenagers, the media is run by people who act like children, and college students behave like infants.

    It's not the fault of Gen Y or the Millenials or any other generation. Our entire culture has become completely infantile and without any substance or merit, and this has occurred across the entire age spectrum.

    It's like the adults just vanished from the universe and got replaced by grey haired 15 year olds.

  • Irish||

    I meant to place this on your other comment about generations. Copying and pasting now.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    What is Generation Y, again? What years? I can't keep track of these stupid labels.

  • SweatingGin||

    Post '80 'til... What, early 90's?

  • ||

    I'm not Gen Y goddamnit (01/83)!

    Half of that generation didn't experience this ad or shows like Clarissa Explains it All.

  • ||

  • ||

    1983-2001 - New Boomers
    1965-1982 - Generation X

    Ugh, Population Reference Bureau can suck it. I'm a "New Boomer" by less than a month in their counting. Not that I particularly want to be associated with Gen X.

    Burn the system to the ground!

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    I'm 11/91. So in addition to Gen Y and Millennial I'm also a New Boomer?

  • ||

    Some of the other generational names seem a bit new agey in that counting.

    1929-1945 - Lucky Few
    1909-1928 - Good Warriors
    1890-1908 - Hard Timers
    1871-1889 - New Worlders

  • ||

    This one is even worse. It bounces me out of Gen X into the Baby Boomers.

    Please don't hate me for ruining the nation.

  • ||

    I could handle being in a '77-'95 group.

    That list is officially the correct one, because it is my personal preference.

  • Pelosi's Accommodator||

    Gen X is often characterized by high levels of skepticism, “what’s in it for me” attitudes and a reputation for some of the worst music to ever gain popularity.

    Fuck you, don't blame me for disco.

  • crashland||

    Gen x rocks. We had banana seats on our schwin bike, experienced punk rock and the birth of heavy metal. Not to mention Saturday morning's in the land of the lost.

  • ||

    Whatevs crashland, we had our own Land of the Lost (which was terrible and I watched religiously).

    I think the same guy did both.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    We also had Nintendo 64, Nicktoons, Cartoon Network, and the rise of the internet.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    We also had Nintendo 64, Nicktoons, Cartoon Network, and the rise of the internet.

    All of that is negated by this.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    We also had this

    The 90s-early 00s represent a golden age of cartoons. I remember having a Batmobile bed when I was a kid.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Batman and Batman Beyond were excellent.

  • ||

    Well we had bad-ass cartoons like THIS!

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    I maintain this is probably the greatest cartoon in the last 25 years

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No, This was the best cartoon.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    You...you MONSTER!

  • ||

    Samurai Jack was indeed excellent, but clearly you meant to say THIS was the greatest cartoon in the last 25 years.

    AND it's Canadian!

  • Cytotoxic||

    Samurai Jack was indeed excellent, but clearly you meant to say THIS was the greatest cartoon in the last 25 years.

    You just won the thread.

  • Juice||

    My vote goes to Rocko's Modern Life.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Rocko had some pretty adult humor

  • ||

    The 90s-early 00s represent a golden age of cartoons. I remember having a Batmobile bed when I was a kid.

    A huge chunk of that was because of Genndy Tartakovsky.

    It was also great that there was a ton of stylistic experimentation. Batman was drawn on black paper, in Samurai Jack they didn't use lines to make clear demarcations of objects. Powerpuff girls had look that was both Japanese and distinctly American.

  • Cytotoxic||

    The 90s-early 00s represent a golden age of cartoons.

    THIS. Western civilization started ending as soon as Toonami entered decline and was then cancelled.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No, that's negated by the fact that my college girlfriend (who got her nickname Dee-Dee from the show) and I would watch that in my dorm room.

    Then we would have sex.

  • ||

    That shit ain't right.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • ||

    I think Cha-Ka was snakin' Aurry.

  • JW||

    1965-1982 - Generation X

    Sorry, but no. The baby boom peaked in 1959 and sloped downwards after that.

    Boom over. Say hello to your Gen X elder.

  • Drake||

    Pretty soon it will be like a spreadsheet with too many columns. Gen AB is going to be awesome.

  • ||

    Can't we just quit with Gen Z?

  • Sevo||

    ..."underemployment,"...

    Go flip burgers, Weinstein; that's all you're worth.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    He feels "poor"? Let me tell you something Whine-stein*, poverty is not having enough food to stuff your face so that your head looks like a giant blob of fat, like yours does.

    *Low hanging fruit, I know.

  • Rich||

    Is that a "class ring"?

  • SweatingGin||

    The student loans were all to pay for the class ring.

  • playa manhattan||

    And look at that shack that he is dinning in!

  • playa manhattan||

    dining

  • CE||

    What's a leadership role in a national publication? Is he the editor or publisher? Or just a columnist?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    The one thing I'm sure of is that he's "leading" me to want to pummel some sense into him.

    Those of us who actually grew up poor and wanted to get out aren't whining about it to the news.

  • Irish||

    But TIT. Don't you understand? He's not entitled, he just thinks he should be guaranteed a quality living by writing for Gawker and Mother Jones.

    What's entitled about thinking that you deserve a certain amount of money regardless of what work you do?

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I have heard of that philosophy before...

  • Ken Shultz||

    Incidentally, if you look at the following link, under the heading "Department Type" it says that 71 percent of the fire departments in this country are volunteer.

    http://apps.usfa.fema.gov/census/summary.cfm

  • Ken Shultz||

    This may be hard for progressives to understand, but there really are people in this country who do things on a voluntary basis. Why, did you know there are even people who volunteer for military service?

    I've met and known people who've volunteered for things like animal control and feeding homeless people, too. In fact, I've volunteered for those things myself!

    I mean, what kind of disgracefully selfish ideology is progressivism, when so many progressives can't even imagine people volunteering to help each other becasue they care?

    Yeah, out of one side of their mouths, they're saying that taxpayer money shouldn't be spent to help...um...taxpayers, and out of the other side of their mouths, they're saying that if it wasn't for things like government fire departments, no one would care enough to do anything about stuff like fires...

    Yet another reason why progressives are America's most horrible people.

  • hotsy totsy||

    Which is why I recoil at the language of "sending young men and women to risk their lives".

    As though police were driving through the streets, grabbing up anyone between 18 and 30, and sending them off to put out fires on rich peoples' property. Because the rich guys told them so.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -when so many progressives can't even imagine people volunteering to help each other

    Why make that conclusion? Perhaps they are thinking of the other 29%, or of government efforts to support/supplement volunteer efforts.

  • Rich||

    "No firefighters' lives should be lost protecting private property."

    1) This apparently already holds true for police officers, so why not for other "first responders" as well?

    2) Of course, no lives should be lost doing anything.

    3) CAN I HAS ROBOTZ?

  • CE||

    They're really second responders. The first responders are always the nearby civilians.

  • Marshall Gill||

    Of the four planes that were highjacked on 9/11 only one one stopped from hitting something with people inside. It wasn't a government entity that stopped it, either.

    And don't forget Liviu.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liviu_Librescu

  • JW||

    "No firefighters' lives should be lost protecting private property."

    I'm actually OK with this, as long as we keep extending it to all other gubmint services. No public money should protect any private whatever.

    That sounds like a very good start.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Student at Smith College, an all-female liberal arts school, getting flak for wanting to form a sorority of straight girls

    That IS a crazy idea, [person]! I know I am not the intended recipient of your email, but I will tell you what I honestly think (you’re welcome!).

    I think women of all sexual persuasions are equally likely to run screaming from Lily Pulitzer sorority apparel.

    I think gay women probably enjoy mingling with male friends, having dinner, participating in photoshoots, dressing up, and baking as much as straight ones.

    I think straight girls probably still outnumber gay girls at Smith College, so your plaint that you “feel marginalized and…like the minority” sounds like a veiled protest against the acceptance of a subgroup, not a cry of persecution.

    I think if you reaallllly want to look out for other straight women, you can start by not assuming that they are all ultra-feminine creatures who love baking, socializing with big strong basketball players, and wearing pink every Wednesday.

    I actually sympathize with the girl in question. A college like Smith is filled with women and gender studies majors who literally talk about nothing other than the Patriarchy, gender norms, and their oppression. It's the kind of place where a straight girl with normal interests would be marginalized.

  • hotsy totsy||

    "I think gay women probably enjoy mingling with male friends, having dinner, participating in photoshoots, dressing up, and baking as much as straight ones."

    Mingling with male friends? Not like the straight women like to mingle with them.

  • ||

    Man, what a bunch of miserable, insular people.

  • ||

    Let the fires come close to any of these joker's vacation houses in the hills, and they'll be screaming for fire protection before you can say "hypocrite". Except they don't have vacation houses, rich people do (in their minds), so this is just another facet of their class war.

  • CE||

    Plenty of rich liberals in the mountains of Colorado.

  • Rich||

    an all-female liberal arts school

    Let the lawsuits begin.

  • playa manhattan||

    Utah dad wears short shorts to shame his teenage daughter:
    http://www.people.com/people/a.....80,00.html

  • Sidd Finch||

    That's awesome.

  • Killazontherun||

    Leaning forward, competing with one another to find new ways to be assholes, that's the progressive mentality in a buttring.

  • Drake||

    I skimmed the link and still couldn't follow the article.

    Do they think fires only burn when it's warm so "global warming" makes more fires? If so, shouldn't Central America be on fire permanently?

    Or do they think that the polar ice caps melting would make the world dryer?

    Or, are the fires themselves and resulting CO2 heating up the globe?

    I seriously don't know what they are talking about.

  • Killazontherun||

    Don't feel bad, they don't know on what basis they make their assertions either.

  • Zeb||

    Well, changing weather patterns and more hot days certainly could make some areas more fire prone. Still, it seems most likely that if fires are indeed becoming a bigger problem it is because of past fire suppression efforts and because more people live in areas that are likely to burn now.

  • Hyperion||

    "No firefighters' lives should be lost protecting private property." This I guess leaves open the idea that a publicly supported fire service should exist, but only to stop fires on government land?

    Well, I guess they aren't getting anymore of that tax payer funding then, are they? Time to start looking for new jobs.

  • DH||

    Most fire departments in the U.S. have or are taking over the Emergency Medical Services of their area because the relative lack of fires. It's hard to justify a large budget when you just don't have the runs. EMS, makes an attractive pick up for the departments because then they can say that they're budget is neccessary no matter what, And if you cut funds people will die blah blah blah. So they'll still be getting money even if there aren't fires. I think this lady went full retard. Does Paula Del not understand the point of a city providing services to it's residents through taxation. My head hurts now.

  • Hyperion||

    Progressives are not even capable of thinking at an adult level. They're basically bratty children. There is no reason to discuss anything with them, ever. Just make them powerless and ignore them, that is the only solution.

  • Brandon||

    Shouldn't Tuccille have been the one addressing this?

  • benji||

    Rasmussen latest poll, Biden = dominant:

    General Election: Paul vs. Biden: Biden 44, Paul 36 (Biden +8)
    General Election: Rubio vs. Biden: Biden 44, Rubio 34 (Biden +10)
    General Election: Cruz vs. Biden: Biden 43, Cruz 32 (Biden +11)
    General Election: Christie vs. Biden: Christie 39, Biden 35 (Christie +4)

  • Irish||

    Exhibit 800,000 why polls three years out are idiotic. The instant Biden is required to debate Paul or Cruz he will do something royally idiotic and fuck it up.

    He was pretty bad in the VP debate as well, but no one really cares about VP so it didn't hurt Obama any. People aren't going to want a president who's incapable of stringing words together, which is what Biden will be once the dementia becomes more pronounced.

  • ||

    I don't care Irish. That Biden leads at any time is SCARY.

    You mean to tell me people are more scared of Rubio and Paul? Those guys have it together next to that gaffe ball.

    Just scary.

  • benji||

    Biden has normally been tied or behind or within the margin with most Republicans in these polls. The fact he's now up around ten points means Hillary will probably be up 20+ when they release that poll.

  • ||

    Scary.

  • ||

    Goes to show how far libertarian candidates are from achieving power if polls are accurate.

    For crying out loud, Biden is ahead!!

  • Winston||

    Yes, it really undermines the whole "libertarian moment" doesn't it?

  • Irish||

    Biden has normally been tied or behind or within the margin with most Republicans in these polls.

    Doesn't that sort of imply that this poll is an outlier and not necessarily to be trusted? I don't know what in the hell could have happened in the last week or two that would have rocketed Biden up in the polls.

  • entropy||

    Well his advice on weaponry seems to be validated amongst the new generation of psycho mass shooters. Shotgun beats AR. Sheriff Joe knows his shit.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    You mean to tell me people are more scared of Rubio and Paul?

    No, it just means that more people have heard the name Biden than the other two.

  • Robert||

    So then leave Biden out of it and just look at the Republicans:
    Christie
    ...V
    Paul
    ...V
    Rubio
    ...V
    Cruz

  • buybuydandavis||

    Private property bad. Government property good.
    Private schools bad. Government schools good.
    Private guns bad. Government guns good.
    Private monopoly bad. Government monopoly good.
    ...

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -the wisdom of sending young men and women to risk death battling wildfires to protect private property

    I must be missing something, because that does not sound wrong to me. Property is important. We have a moral and natural right to it. But human life is more important than property. That is an old common law principle, and one I do not necessarily see any libertarian objection to.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    risk death

    If there's a certainty of death, then I would agree: life [greater than] property.

    If it's a voluntary risk of such undertaken by the job holder -- and far from a certain one at that -- then fuck it: firefighers signed on to their job and knew what they were getting into. When I was in the military, I knew that I could end up as cannon fodder. Risk of death is not the same as death itself; certainly not when this risk is evaluated and deemed worthy of whatever compensation is being offered the jobholder in exchange for their undertaking of risk.

  • ||

    Yes. You are missing something.

    Fighting a fire is not a death sentence. Are you saying life should include NO risk?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    What is the appropriate amount of risk that makes it acceptable to risk human life and safety for property?

  • ||

    What is the appropriate amount of risk that makes it acceptable to risk human life and safety for property?

    As with all things. Whatever the person doing such a job decides is equitable.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    In a free society, whatever risk a job applicant is willing to expose him or herself to in exchange for compensation.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Of course. But this does not prevent one from giving their opinion on how government (or even non-government for that matter) efforts should be spent, and expressing such opinion is not contrary to libertarianism.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Yeah, but it's rather paternalistic for a libertarian to pretend that a voluntary exchange between two parties must be stopped for the sake of one of the participants.

    Whether one of the participants is participating in the exchange with stolen goods is immaterial to the point.

    Arguing that the *taxpayer* shouldn't be forced to pick up the tab for firefighters is one thing; arguing that those poor firefighters are being victimized when asked to do something that is part of their job description is quite another.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I do not think it is about assuming victimization, it is about voicing your opinion on what would be an appropriate and morally correct course of action for your government to take.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Right, so you agree that fire figheters shouldn't actually fight fires, because it's too dangerous.

    Instead they should sit in their club house collecting six figure salaries and play cards all day.

    For fairness, or something.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Not all firefighting activities are equally dangerous.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Bo Cara Esq.| 9.18.13 @ 11:16PM |#

    I do not think

    First thing I can agree with from this guy.

  • ||

    Seriously, why does anybody give this disingenuous piece of shit any more credibility than shreeeky or Tony?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Seems like a nerve has been touched here!

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    You really do come off as a 2L (the "Esq" affectation does makes me chuckle, well, actually it is more like sneer) - this isn't a law school classroom and thus your disingenuous manner is quite grating. Try being simple, direct and actually address the points being made. If you do that, then the derision you draw should lessen.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Depends on the human and the property.

  • ||

    So why do our taxes support them, then? No one actually forces them to go, they're there to do a job. If they aren't going to do that job, then why should any of our money go to firefighters?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    If we are talking about a law that would prevent voluntary efforts to fight dangerous fires then of course I am against that.

    I am pretty sure the author is talking about either publicly funded firefighters or the general wisdom of risking lives to protect property. If I have read that wrong then I concede the point.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Why would the source of funding be relevant to this question?

    It is not like a person's reservation wage is likely to change just because it is the government offering that wage; if the argument being made is on the basis of concern for the jobholder, the source of funding for the job isn't relevant.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    The source of funding entitles the criticizer more leeway. Taxpayers, or citizens, have a more solid foundation upon which to criticize the way government acts. 'I do not think my government should be engaged in efforts which put human lives at risk to protect property' is a legitimate stance to take.

  • ||

    'I do not think my government should be engaged in efforts which put human lives at risk to protect property' is a legitimate stance to take.

    So, no military?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Does the military exist to put human lives at risk to protect property?

  • ||

    I would fucking hope so. The ONLY legitimate function of government is to protect the rights of the individual. That most certainly includes property rights.

  • Higginsbottom||

    What exactly privileges state enforcement of property rights as rightful and good over every other form of coercion libertarians hate?

  • Agammamon||

    Well, basically - human loves of course, but also property.

  • Agammamon||

    or, rather, *lives*.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Does the military exist to put human lives at risk to protect property?

    No, it exists so Iraqis can have purple thumbs and some dipshit law student at a 4th tier school can play intellectual on the internet.

  • Libertymike||

    What if he was matriculating at a first tier school? Would that make a difference?

  • Sidd Finch||

    Dood, the buildings fell, like, straight down! What falls straight down without the Joos fixin it, huh ...huh! Wut?!

  • ||

    No offense minge, but that is a fucking retarded stance to take.

    If government has any legitimate function at all it's to protect rights and property.

  • ||

    Surviving Whole Foods

    Whole Foods is like Vegas. You go there to feel good but you leave broke, disoriented, and with the newfound knowledge that you have a vaginal disease.

    Unlike Vegas, Whole Foods' clientele are all about mindfulness and compassion... until they get to the parking lot. Then it's war. As I pull up this morning, I see a pregnant lady on the crosswalk holding a baby and groceries. This driver swerves around her and honks. As he speeds off I catch his bumper sticker, which says 'NAMASTE'. Poor lady didn't even hear him approaching because he was driving a Prius. He crept up on her like a panther.

    I laughed reading this (parents are health nuts, which may have contributed) and for those of you who like men, you should probably watch the video afterward because the interviewer is dreamy.

  • ||

    SF'd, but easily fixed.

  • ||

    I've been doing that a lot lately, and I've been using the little link button too. Sigh.

  • ||

    Heard on the radio about a guy who headed to a town meeting somewhere in Mass. to prevent a Subway from opening.

    He went to the meeting with...a Starbuck's coffee in hand.

    Are liberals that disconnected from themselves?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Why did he oppose a Subway?

  • ||

    Didn't say but if past shows are any indication, it's just a reactionary Mass. liberal fetish. Menino refuses to allow Wal-mart in. Need you ask?

    Profits, greedy, killing mom and pop - insert usual libby reasons.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    This really infuriates me.

    Many liberals talk a great deal about how people do not have healthy choices in eating.

    The market answers this with enterprises such as Subway and, to include another post above, Whole Foods.

    And then they complain about the alternatives that the market has generated. They will move to get government to use coercion to block these. Later they will, with a straight face, cite 'market failure' in this area.

    As I said, infuriating.

  • Agammamon||

    Just a wild guess - he doesn't eat at Subway.

    Personally I'm for getting rid of Subway's - sub-par sandwiches at expensive prices, but the proles have spoken and our Quiznos (we only had one) closed down.

  • ||

    Subway isn't terrible. Quiznos sucks ass. But Jimmy John's...that's teh shit!

  • Sidd Finch||

    The Cleveland Browns are better evaluators of talent.

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    How about pallbearers?

  • Agammamon||

    No, Subway isn't terrible, just not great and expensive for what you get.

    And Quiznos is motherfucking mm toasty.

    Anyone know anything about Firehouse Subs - apparently they just opened one up here.

  • ||

    Toasting hoagies is implicitly wrong, which is probably why they went out of business. ;-)

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    Subway toasts subs now because of Quiznos. At least in Canada.

  • ||

    Subway toasts subs now

    Here too. And it's still wrong.

    Every time they ask me if I want that toasted I ask them if I mistakenly walked into Quiznos.

  • Zeb||

    What about toasting grinders? Is that OK?

  • Sidd Finch||

    I had a few a decade ago. I remember them being on par with Quiznos. Bunch of different sauces IIRC.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Memory Brought to You By 7 to 9 Yuenglings:

    I was eating a sammy with the secretaries with that thing where dead presidents are driven around town (Reagan, in this case) on the TeeVee. I remember thinking, "I wish these harpies would shut up so I could enjoy this delicious sammich." No memories regarding the deliciousness, or the existence really, of the many sauces.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    sub-par sandwiches at expensive prices

    +5 dollar foot long

    So expensive

  • Chouder||

    The thing they don't want you to know about this privatization gimmick is that capital isn't free. If you privatize something you will still be paying for it, and for the interest on the capital. Good for capitalists, bad for workers.

  • Irish||

    Hey guys, a crazy Marxist showed up.

    Hey, crazy Marxist. What's it like to espouse an economic theory that murdered 100 million people last century?

  • Chouder||

    Straw man's gotta straw!

  • Irish||

    It's not a strawman. You're actively espousing an economic theory that has caused privation, starvation, death and decay everywhere it's been tried.

    If you don't want to be called a Nazi, don't goosestep. If you don't want to be called a Marxist, don't espouse Karl Marx's disproven theories of capital and labor.

  • Higginsbottom||

    For all its faults, the Soviet Union did manage to feed, house, educate, and provide health care for its people. Not lavishly, no.
    But it was a vast improvement on the situation before the revolution. And this was in spite of the unfailing efforts of the capitalist world to destroy it, together with the errors and (all too often) appalling actions of its government, as well as several devastating wars fought in its territory.

  • Irish||

    For all its faults, the Soviet Union did manage to feed, house, educate, and provide health care for its people. Not lavishly, no.

    Yeah, this is a blatant lie.

    You're spitting on the corpses of the Soviet dead. You're also spitting on the corpses of Mao's Chinese dead and those just now rotting in North Korea. The poor in America in the 1980s would have been middle class in the USSR and to claim otherwise is a blatant lie that shows two things about you (presuming you are not a sockpuppet):

    1. You know nothing about history

    2. You are willing to advocate in favor of an economic system that would kill millions of Americans were it implemented.

    At best you're wrong, at worst you're grotesque.

  • ||

    At best you're wrong, at worst you're grotesque.

    My bet is both.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    LOL, the good Marxists don't argue anything near this level of stupidity anymore -- I should know; I was one.

    1) Just about every economic indicator went South prior to the institution of New Economic Policy -- and in a big way.

    2) As any good Marxist knows, NEP was a revisionist policy which had nothing to do with Marxism; this capitalist aberration was in fact the opposite of Communism and is why Marxists are pure as the driven snow and the system hasn't yet been tried, comrade.

    3) Make that claim to the Ukrainians, Siberian Russians, Mongolians, or anyone living on the Central Steppe, and listen to them laugh bitterly.

    The USSR was an absolute economic failure in almost every way, and in point of fact from 1908-1912 the economic growth and industrialization of Russia proceeded at a greater pace than during any of the Stalinist years.

  • Agammamon||

    Uh no, just no.

    Look at the history of the Soviet Union - 70 years of absolutely no increase in economic efficiency. Every bit of the expansion of their economy was due solely to an increase in inputs.

    They didn't manage to feed their people better - remember that whole thing about Kulak's and wreckers that we joke about now? That's a historical in-joke referencing the mass starvation during the '20's when the SU collectivized the farms and found they *couldn't feed everyone and ran around trying to find scapegoats.

    So no, I don't accept that the soviet peasant's lot was even slightly improved over the lot of the tsarist peasant due to any action of the soviet government.

  • Agammamon||

    ". . .as well as several devastating wars fought in its territory."

    Wait, which wars are these? I'm only aware of *one* war fought inside the Soviet Union - though it *was* devastating.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Those who died simply weren't worthy of becoming New Soviet Man.

    Sacrifice yourself for utopia, comrade!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    We're all capitalists. Human capital is no less an investment than any other.

  • Chouder||

    In the real world we call that work.

  • Agammamon||

    And capitalists don't *work*? How'd they get the money to buy the capital then?

    Shall we say that Bill Gates deserves not one penny of the money ha has because he didn't earn it laboring in a field?

  • Irish||

    A long time instapundit reader emailed the following to Reynolds just now:

    Through serendipity I’ve ended up working in HIT (health information technology). I take 50 calls a day with independent insurance agents/brokers to navigate the hoops to qualify to sell on the FFM (Federal Facilitated Marketplaces). The Government websites they need to access to register are riddled with random error messages, and simply attempting to log in to complete this process routinely fails. The agents/brokers are, to a person, terrified. If they cannot complete this process by October 1st (the deadline) they are hosed. Nobody knows what to do, and this will only get worse when millions of consumers join the fray of the marketplace. It appears nobody scaled the back end to accommodate this exponential growth. And now?, It’s too late. It’s like the owner of the White Star line getting a telegram about the Titanic sinking and saying “We need to order more lifeboats.” And these are the smartest guys in the room? #soscrewed. For obvious reasons, don’t use my name please..

    Well. We're fucked.

  • benji||

    Market failure.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Sounds plausible. OTOH hashtag.

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    HEY NOW! Shriek told us we have to wait before judging you teathuglican reichwingerz! We have to implement it BEFORE we blame RETHUGLICANSEKWESTERBOOOOSH!

  • Higginsbottom||

    Libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky: “a consistent libertarian must oppose private ownership of the means of production and the wage slavery which is a component of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer”.

    Chomsky is correct. Right wing libertarians are sellouts of true libertarianism

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    ...why would private ownership of production be inconsistent with free labor?

    They coincided quite well in the US.

  • Irish||

    Because someone is running multiple brainless Marxist sockpuppets at the same time and they're making nonsensical statements in favor of already disproven economic theories.

  • ||

    Oh, what are the other ones? Higgabe is the only one I know to track at the moment.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Way to misquote, asshole:

    A consistent anarchist must oppose private ownership of the means of production and the wage slavery which is a component of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer.

    -"Notes on Anarchism" in For Reasons of State
    Noam Chomsky, 1970

    Want to lie some more?

  • Irish||

    Not since it matters since Chomsky is hardly an authority on economics.

  • Agammamon||

    Not even much of an authority on linguistics either.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Ipse dixit is fallacious to begin with, but ipse dixit combined with purposeful misquoting ought to be hangin' offense.

    Bo Cara, if you caught my comment in the last thread about Progs arguing in bad faith, there's a prime example.

  • Irish||

    Assuming it's actually a prog and not a regular trolling.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Sometimes, I think the interns are hazed by coming up with troll personas to rile up the commentators.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Maybe that's just the interns, no troll intended.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Weigel looms large...

  • Sidd Finch||

    whoa

  • Agammamon||

    "Ipse dixit is fallacious to begin with, but ipse dixit combined with purposeful misquoting ought to be hangin' offense."

    There should be an even worse punishment for people who use Ipse Dixit, purposefully misquote their 'expert', *and* purposefully misquote someone who is recognized worldwide as *not* an expert in the subject being discussed.

  • ||

    Death by Oonga Boonga?

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    Oh Gawd - I read that as "Death by Bunga Bunga"... I thought you meant having them rogered to death by Silvio Berlusconi.

  • Agammamon||

    In either case - who is the producer?

    The guy screwing stuff in on the factory line? The line foreman? The factory manager? How about the guy who designed the product? Or what about the guy who got the money together to pay someone to design the product, pay for the factory and pay the guys working the line to assemble the product? What's he - chickenshit?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Yes. You see, he's an evil capitalist, and all of these things would have come together on their own without this evil capitalist manipulating the screw-turner, the foreman, the manager, the construction crews, product designer, etc.

    Sort of like if you put 100 monkeys in a room with 100 typewriters, they'll write Shakespeare.

    These things will just spontaneously happen when enough New Soviet Men gather.

  • Agammamon||

    Its just amazing how these people can't see labor as being anything other than physical work.

    They completely miss the evidence that actually *producing* an item is basically the least costly part of getting it into the hands of the consumer, that most of the cost of something is the management of the supply chain and getting it in front of the consumer.

  • Agammamon||

    "Libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky"

    I don't know why I'm argueing with a hit and run troll but:

    1. Chomsky is not a libertarian, no matter how you stretch the definintion.

    2. There are no such thing as libertarian socialists. The two concepts are pretty much polar opposites of each other. If you say you're a libertarian socialist you just expose your ignorance.

  • Libertymike||

    You should see Bleeding Heart Libertarians.

  • Agammamon||

    Oh, I have - and anyone who uses the term 'social justice' earnestly is no libertarian.

  • Libertymike||

    One thing about the commenters (based upon my occasional visits), you will not find a tony among them.

  • ||

    I like bleeding heart libertarians. But I agree about the "social justice" stupidity.

    A)Whatever BHL means by the term isn't what the general population that uses the term (i.e. leftists) mean by that term.

    B) Using that term just makes you look like some sort of sycophantic suckup lap-dog tearfully begging for progressive collective blessing for your shameful pro-market beliefs.

  • Emmerson Biggins||

    Fuck off slaver.

  • Chouder||

  • Sidd Finch||

    sounds like Pippa Bacca

  • Sidd Finch||

    ESPN is apparently doing some Hispanic Thing, at the moment focusing on Hispanic shortstops. Two of the four are Andrelton Simmons and Didi Gregorius, both from Curacao. Intriguing ....

  • Agammamon||

    Are the announcers calling them 'firecrackers'?

  • Sidd Finch||

  • KDN||

    Papiamento is a creole language derived from African and Iberian Romance languages[4] with some influences from Amerindian languages, English and Dutch.[5] Papiamento has two main dialects: Papiamento, spoken primarily on Aruba; and Papiamentu, spoken primarily on Bonaire and Curaçao.

    I wouldn't lump Curaçaoans into the "Hispanic" catchall, but I can see the argument for doing so.

  • Agammamon||

    Quick computer question.

    Does anyone know what Load.JS from Loadm.Exelator.com is for.

    When I load this site (and a couple of others) I get a browser warning asking me if I want to install it - I don't, but I'm curious as to what its supposed to do since Google doesn't give a whole lot of useful info on it.

  • entropy||

    Don't know but sounds like malware honestly.

  • Agammamon||

    The best info I can find says its an analytics program geared towards market research.

    Personally, if Reason is slipping this stuff into their webpage then they should give us a heads-up.

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    Did we get an article crossposted at the daily worker? what the hell just happened?

  • Goldwin Smith||

    A commie from Antiwar.com? Howard Zinn or Gore Vidal fans? Left-libertarian?

  • ||

    Reason is engaged in a new Troll Exchange program. At this moment PB is off trolling TVGuide's comments section (assignments were drawn from a fishbowl).

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    *golf clap*

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I don't know, but apparently they were mailed their talking points 50 years too late. No communist would argue any of the completely discredited nonsense stated above about the USSR; at least pick something slightly less suck like Cuba.

  • Agammamon||

    They can't - all the other communist countries are as bad and most are worse.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Agreed, but they could dissemble a bit better if they stuck to something less well-documented than the USSR.

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

  • OldMexican||

    Pot calling the Kettle swarthy.

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    At Sir Patrick Stewart's wedding, TNG cast get properly drunk

  • ||

    I thought Jean-Luc was gay.

  • Agammamon||

    He might be bi, but if you ever saw him eying Dr Crusher when he thought no-one was looking . . .

  • ||

    I caught him looking at Wesley's ass a few times.

  • Agammamon||

    Well, Picard *is* French - they're not known for discriminating and have special categories for rape and rape-rape.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    I thought pederasty was standard procedure in Starfleet.

  • ||

    He's hilarious when he's playing at it.

    Patrick Stewart can do no wrong.

  • ||

    THAT was fucking awesome! What's that from?

  • Agammamon||

    'Jeffery'

  • ||

    It was in 1995, so right in the middle of TNG.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    He also played a gay man in an episode of Frasier

    But his best guest role was as himself on Extras.

  • ||

  • Jon Lester||

    As I commented on the Mother Jones story about Georgia's "war on trees," a managed forest is a healthy forest, and trees are a renewable resource. Wherever I've been on the political map over the years, my family's business has been firmly rooted in forestry, and there are some things I just can't "unlearn."

  • Agammamon||

    Uhm, thanks? But only our most masochistic commenters read Mother Jones.

  • Jon Lester||

    It was in Peach Pundit's morning reads.

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

  • OldMexican||

    Oh, not again...

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Higginsbottom,

    Libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky: “a consistent libertarian [sic] must oppose private ownership of the means of production and the wage slavery which is a component of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer”.


    People who think that the "means of production" should be owned collectively by the laborers themselves completely ignore the fact that you can't pay your rent and food until you fucking SELL the production that comes from the means of production to SOMEONE, whenever that happens. In other words, socialists and communists like Chomsky ignore Time Preference.

    Chomsky is correct. Right wing libertarians are sellouts of true libertarianism


    I think you meant "true acid trip."

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    what are these fancy double quote bars all the cool kids are using?

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    It's OldMexican having his midlife crisis.

  • OldMexican||

    I simply use blockquote and /blockquote twice (don't forget to add the less than/greater than symbols)

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    I simply use blockquote and /blockquote twice (don't forget to add the less than/greater than symbols

    fascinating

  • ||

    fascinating
    /blockquote/blockquote

    Very.
  • ||

    Dammit.

  • OldMexican||

    I told you not to forget the less than/greater than symbols that surround the HTML tags,

    Gee, do I have to spell it to you every time? Sheesh!

  • ||

    fascinating
  • ||

    fascinating
  • ||

    fascinating
  • ||

    fascinating
  • ||

    fascinating
  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    how


    deep


    can



    we

    go
  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    a cage so deep not even warty can break free?
  • Snark Plissken||

    UNPOSSIBLE!
  • Higginsbottom||

    no, you're a towel!

  • OldMexican||

    No, I'm your daddy.

  • Agammamon||

    Hey, Higginsbottom, why don't you go back and answer some of the questions/accusations leveled in reply to your earlier posts?

  • ||

    The key flaw in Marxism is that it ignores the role of risk. Laborers accept a fixed wage in exchange for their work instead of taking the risk of making a product that doesn't sell.

    By comparison, a freelander or a self-employer person, or a small business owner all have to assume the risk that what they choose to produce isn't going to sell and they will wind up worse off.

    Some people prefer to be told what to do and have someone just give them a fixed price for thier work. That's the deal. You get paid whether the product sells or not, and the capitalist gets the profit/loss potential.

  • ||

    The key flaw in Marxism is that it ignores the role of risk. Laborers accept a fixed wage in exchange for their work instead of taking the risk of making a product that doesn't sell.

    By comparison, a freelander or a self-employer person, or a small business owner all have to assume the risk that what they choose to produce isn't going to sell and they will wind up worse off.

    Some people prefer to be told what to do and have someone just give them a fixed price for thier work. That's the deal. You get paid whether the product sells or not, and the capitalist gets the profit/loss potential.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Anti-Semitic Elmo pleads guilty to attempting to extort $2 million from the Girls Scouts of America

    A crackpot Times Square performer who was once busted making anti-Semitic slurs while dressed as Elmo admitted Wednesday he tried to extort $2 million from the Girl Scouts.
    Dan Sandler is expected to get two years in jail in exchange for his plea to attempted grand larceny and stalking through a deal struck with prosecutors in Manhattan Supreme Court.
    Prosecutors said Sandler, 49, sent "alarming" and "bizarre" emails to a Girl Scouts supervisor beginning in July 2012.
    He had previously done work for the organization through a temp agency, but the term of employment ended in 2008.
    Sandler admitted to trying to get them to pay up by threatening to publicize bogus lies, such as that sex with young girls at scout camp was set up and condoned by the institution.
    [...]
    He was previously busted on Sept. 18, 2012 for blocking traffic and resisting arrest while shouting about hating "the Jews."
    "The Jews are responsible for everything that's wrong with the world!" the nutjob said.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Higginsbottom,

    For all its faults, the Soviet Union did manage to feed, house, educate, and provide health care for its people.


    After they got rid of a few dozen million of those same people. With all its faults, that is still an impressive number of dead innocents. Quite an achievement. A grizzly one, but still - ONE achievement they can call their own.

  • Archduke of Pantsfan||

    Man Booker, Not just for Brits anymore

    You know who else won a writing contest?

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    The Jacket?

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Chouder,

    The thing they don't want you to know about this privatization gimmick is that capital isn't free.


    Your statement tells me unequivocally that you have no idea, clue or even a hint of what is capital, what it means or even what it entails.

    Just so you get a hint: if you buy a hammer for your carpentry, that hammer is part of your capital.

    If you privatize something you will still be paying for it, and for the interest on the capital.


    This also tells me you have no idea or clue on the concept of costs. Or interest rates, for that matter.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Battlestar Galactica: Blood and Chrome is actually pretty good. Shame it wasn't picked up for development.

  • Don Mynack||

    It blows the libs minds that Benjamin Franklin once made himself rich by providing fire insurance and an accompanying private fire department for his clients in Philadelphia.

  • Tony||

    Of course conservatives don't believe in science. But I agree, rahh progressives.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement