Food Trucks From Colorado to Alabama Are Still Struggling With Red Tape and Protectionism
Denver blames food trucks for late night chaos, while a city councilman in Alabama says he straight up wants to protect restaurants.

Record food and fuel prices and ongoing supply-chain issues are causing many of the same problems for food trucks that brick-and-mortar restaurateurs, grocers, and consumers now face. Coupled with the impact of rising crime rates, those issues have caused some truck operators to cut back on their operations, Trib Live reported last week, with some, for example, electing to vend only at high-density events where customers are plenty in number.
In Denver, large numbers of food-truck customers are the problem—at least according to city police. And officials' claims of rising crime leave many food trucks caught in the middle. As Reason's Fiona Harrigan reported in August, Denver police moved to bar food trucks from operating in the Lower Downtown (LoDo) section of the city, popular with late-night revelers, after a shooting on July 21. Denver police shot a man seen fighting outside a popular beer hall at 1:35 a.m. The man, 21-year-old Jordan Waddy, had a gun that he dropped on the ground while putting his hands up in response to police. Denver police shot Waddy and six innocent bystanders in the crowd near the beer hall.
How exactly is a police shooting the fault of food trucks? And why, many of their operators wonder, is the city "punish[ing] vendors who have nothing to do with violence"? While those are the right questions to ask, the Denver Gazette reported last week that the city has moved to restrict most food truck operations in LoDo on Friday and Saturday nights for the next six months. Denver police, for their part, claim the restrictions were in the works before they shot six unarmed people.
While police violence is a concern for food truck owners in Denver, in other cities the challenges faced by food trucks are more familiar. For example, in Long Beach, California, the Press-Telegram reported last week, the city council may decide, boldly, to "simplify and consolidate regulations governing the trucks and—eventually—create rules about where food trucks can operate."
As the paper explains, various city departments—including health, business, and permitting—currently regulate food trucks in the city, independent of each another. While the city is looking to streamline that process, it's also planning to add new requirements. One new rule would require food trucks to obtain a city health department permit in addition to the existing county permit. The report also notes a plan to discuss new rules with "stakeholders," including not just food trucks and residents but also brick-and-mortar restaurants, which raises the familiar threat of rules that would protect brick-and-mortar restaurants at the expense of food trucks.
In Spanish Fort, Alabama, near Mobile, city planners have recommended allowing food trucks to operate in the city, where they're currently banned. But one city council member, Carl Gustafson, Jr., openly admits he's opposed food trucks operating in the city because he wants to protect the city's brick-and-mortar restaurants.
"So, it was out of an abundance of respect for the people that have invested money in Spanish Fort in brick-and-mortar restaurants we didn't want to have a lot of competition coming in against them and setting up right across the street," Gustafson told NBC 15 last week. "I think we need to maintain a healthy respect for them and their invest[ment] in Spanish Fort by setting a distance parameter that the food trucks are allowed to go within a certain distance."
While officials in Denver, Long Beach, and Spanish Fort are making a mess for food truck owners and their customers, Seattle lawmakers are bucking that trend. The city council is looking to make permanent many of the improvements they introduced in food-truck regulations during the pandemic, My Northwest reported last week.
As the report details, Seattle introduced regulations on food trucks in 2011. Those rules stunk. Trucks couldn't park near any brick-and-mortar restaurant, school, or park, My Northwest notes. Food trucks were also prohibited from parking in most areas of the city and were limited from parking near other legally parked food trucks. During the pandemic, though, the city relaxed those idiotic rules, "removing restrictions on distances from permanent locations, schools, and parks and restrictions on the number allowed on each block." It's those good, new rules the city is looking to adopt permanently.
Though food trucks today still face evolving challenges—from inflation to violence—many of the greatest threats to the industry's existence and growth continue to take the form of regulations that would hamper their success even in the best of economic climates.Since the pandemic's early days, I've written dozens of columns—as here—in which I've identified many needlessly burdensome food regulations governments had chosen to lift or relax temporarily. Seattle's pitch to make permanent the looser, Covid-inspired food-truck regulations the city implemented early in the pandemic is a welcome development. Denver, Long Beach, Spanish Fort, and other cities and towns that treat food trucks like crap are hurting their own food scenes, residents, and economic recoveries.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Coupled with rising crime rates?
Baily don't you even read ENB repost of the new your times? There is no rising crime rates. That is all in your imagination.
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but (dbt-02) my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://cashprofit99.netlify.app/
eighty North American nation greenbacks... have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but (dbt-02) my friend mate... convinced Maine to avail...
The bots still have nothing on Sqrlsy.
You make a good point. Thanks.
Reason Rundown
Nord Stream gas supply pipeline from Russia will be closed indefinitely after ‘oil leak was found’… just hours after G7 nations decided to cap payments to reduce Russia's war chest.
No way anyone could have seen that coming!
The idea was literally laughable.
Just another example of that keen European foresight. That's why we should be more like them.
Yeah, who started WW1 and WW2 again?
MAGA?
Give it a few more years, then I'm sure this will be part of the curriculum.
I’m by and by turning out to be further $19k or extra month-to-month from local through doing surprisingly sincere and clean task online from local. [rfv-07] I truly have gained expressly $20845 outrageous month from this local task. be a region of at this point this endeavor and start getting more money online through notice teaching:-
.
At the given webpage:>>>> https://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
Reason Rundown
Much of The Great Pacific Garbage Patch's Plastic Comes From These 5 Countries
Spoiler: Two thirds is from China and Japan. Enjoy your soggy paper straws, Yankee.
To be fair to Japan, there was a massive tsunami that washed up a bunch. For the same reason, Indonesia and Thailand also put a ton of plastic into the ocean in 2004. But both of those counties are pretty significant plastic polluters in general while Japan is very locked down in terms of plastic pollution.
Also, to be entirely fair to them, there are only five countries or so on the Pacific ocean that are significantly industrialized. Australia doesn't count because they only produce stubbies.
Look, America, along with most "first world" countries, are embracing their new purpose: to act so retarded that we can make people in true shit holes laugh about us.
I’m by and by turning out to be further $19k or extra month-to-month from local through doing surprisingly sincere and clean task online from local. [rfv-10] I truly have gained expressly $20845 outrageous month from this local task. be a region of at this point this endeavor and start getting more money online through notice teaching:-
.
At the given webpage:>>>> https://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
Come on guys. That 12yr old kid gave us all the valid scientific data we need! Plastic straws are killing whales! So said, a 12yr old kid!!!
Dude, it was turtles.
Oh, well, let's ban plastic altogether! Cannot kill turtles, especially if 12yr old "scientist" is the cornerstone of the research team.
Reason Rundown
WaPo columnist: Biden delivered a great "wartime address"
Biden gave the address that presidents give when they're invading another country.
Biden gave the address that
presidentsmadmen give when they're invading another country.The speech was given on the anniversary of Hitler kicking off WW2 with the invasion of Poland. Coincidence? (dah, dah, dummm...)
Couldn’t do his Afghanistan withdrawal on 9/11 like he wanted to, so this will have to do.
Brandon’s thrilling speech reminded me of the time when Obama’s DHS warned that Veterans could be terrorist threat to the US.
Maybe the big guy could be the next President of the University of CA:
https://edsource.org/2019/uc-president-janet-napolitano-stepping-down/617643?amp=1
Or some cult. Oh, wait...
Nikita Kruschev's ghost has been quoted as saying "Biden went a little over the edge with his speech".
Reason Rundown
California Births a New Kind of Threat to Second Amendment Rights
Freethinking California is so creative.
How are California births threatening the Second Amendment? No one's born being a gun control freak. 😉
“California Gun Store Employees Dress in Drag in an Attempt to Prevent State From Running Them Out of Business”
Reason Rundown
FBI: No end to soaring gun sales
All to bitter, MAGA white males, right?
Reason Rundown
Biden Swallows Cyanide Capsule In Underground Bunker
Forget the articles, their whole front page today is pretty hilarious.
Damn it. You had me excited with that headline.
Denver, Long Beach, Spanish Fort, and other cities and towns that treat food trucks like crap are hurting their own food scenes, residents, and economic recoveries.
Food trucks don't vote in most cities - who gives a crap who gets hurt?
Ah, but food trucks, with a little work, can morph into SUVs and get really dangerous!
As JFK observed: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable."
So let the food trucks vote. It's not like they'd bring back Prohibition. 🙂
Wow wow wow hey Peanuts isn't this Biden economy amazing!!!!!! I just got my monthly financial statement and of course it set yet another all-time high. You Peanuts should be making a killing too since this is the strongest economy ever. If you're not doing much better now than you did under Trump you need a new financial advisor.
#TemporarilyFillingInForButtplug
Reason Rundown
A precision raid just like White Mike insisted.
Feds Seized Dozens Of Trump’s “Clothing/Gift Items,” Books, and Hundreds Of Magazine Clippings In Mar-a-Lago Raid, Per Updated Inventory.
Here are some of the other items seized as described on the inventory sheet [repeat descriptions mean multiple such items were located in different boxes]:
• US Government Documents/Photographs without Classification Markings [numerous similar entries throughout the inventory]
• 99 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between O 1/2017-
10/2018
• Documents from Office
• Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between 01/2020-
11/2020
• 68 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between 10/2015-
05/2017
• 1 Article of Clothing/Gift Item
• 1 Book
• 91 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between 01/2019-
09/2020
• 1 Article of Clothing/Gift Item
• 30 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between 10/2008-
12/2019
• 3 Articles of Clothing/Gift Items
• 1 Book
• 116 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between 06/2019-
08/2020
• 39 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between 01/2017-
03/2020
• 62 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
09/2018 -08/2019
• 1 Article of Clothing/Gift Items
• 65 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
10/2016-11/2018
• 2 Books
• 76 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
11!2017-12/2017
• 67 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
7/2016 – 3/2017
• 5 Articles of Clothing/Gift Items
• 4 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
01/2018- 12/2019
• 1 Book
• 53 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
05/2016 – 01/2020
• 5 Articles of Clothing/Gift Items
• 121 MagazinesMewspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
08/2017-12/2017
• 2 MagazinesMewspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated 11/2020
• 109 MagazinesMewspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
06/2020 – 10/2020
• 67 MagazinesMewspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media’dated between
11/2016- 06/2018
• 1 Book
• 1 MagazinesMewspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated circa 2018
• 76 MagazinesMewspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
10/2016- 11/2017
• 8 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
12/2017 – 3/2020
• 1 Article of Clothing/Gift Items
• 1 Book
• 1 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
07/2016 – 9/2020
• 1 Article of Clothing/Gift Items
• 23 Books
• 2 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
2/2017 – 3/2017
• 1 Article of Clothing/Gift Items
• 1 Book
• 86 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
10/1995 – 05/2019
• 29 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
05/2020 – 09/2020
• 111 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
06/2015 – 04/2019
• 94 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
02/2008 – 04/2020
• 1 Book
• 88 US Government Documents/Photographs without Classification Markings
• 83 Magazines/Newspapers/Press Articles and Other Printed Media dated between
02/2017 – 02/2018
• 1 Book
Those Time magazine articles contained nuclear secrets.
Is Trump a hoarder? That seems like a bunch of useless shit.
That’s it! We got him now!
If there’s not a law against it, there oughta be.
How dare Trump waste the time of FBI agents with ordinary crap!
He's a narcissist so that explains the clippings and photos.
And lots of people own books.
nice.
Lying ass Dee won’t read this, and months from now will ask for evidence if anyone brings this up again. Which she will ignore again.
"One unused prophylactic...One soiled."
Blues Brothers--Jakes Inventory
https://youtu.be/Qw__irwL6pY
🙂
Reason Rundown
Money smuggled to left wing NGO’s under the auspices of “climate change action.”
John Podesta to Oversee $370 Billion in U.S. Climate Spending
Hey, somebody has to employ all those leftist humanities grads, even after forgiving some of their oppressive student loans.
Reason Rundown
The ol’ accuse and snooze?
DOJ Is Likely to Wait Past Midterms to Reveal Any Trump Charges
I actually disagree though. They're going to try to perp walk him in front of the cameras on some flimsy charge immediately before midterms.
Nah, it's basically an advanced case of the 'we need to pass it to find out what's in it' situation. They need to be elected across the board promising to finally 'get Trump' then they can safely release that they had nothing all along on a Friday afternoon and nothing more will happen...until the next 'investigation' anyway.
At this point, with how evil they know Trump to be, it's becoming clear they aren't capable of finding their own ass with both hands so I'm not so sure more 'investigating' will really get them anywhere. At a certain point, finding nothing while demonizing Trump just makes them look entirely incompetent even to their own supporters.
Truly 'Trumped Up Charges' has taken on a bit of a new meaning these days.
My guess is, the DOJ tries something the next day, an anonymous online source serves up all the declassified documents that destroy the FBI and Obama administration.
I'd prefer Trump do this as an October surprise. The real question is: even if he does, will the media actually cover it enough to make a difference or will it be Hunter Biden laptop censorship all over again.
Oh, they'd definitely censor the living fuck out of it.
Dr. Scott Mosser of the Gender Confirmation Center in San Francisco says they have "secret missions" to normalize child sex change surgery, no minimum age "at all" to get sex change surgery and he has done sex change surgeries on 13 year olds.
Video speech given by Dr. Scott Mosser
Jeff says this doesn't happen.
Money Money. Ching Ching.
More important: fulfilling the holy doctrine of post-modern progressivism by the radical activist priesthood.
Oh it happens. There is an actual international standard of medical care for teens who claim to be transgender, and part of that standard of care does indeed include surgery when it is warranted. But you know this, it's been pointed out to you many times.
All your tribe can do though is just demagogue on the issue. Generate outrage in order to generate votes and power for Team Red. Completely lacking in any of these hot-take outrage tweets is any sort of discussion about what Team Red suggests should happen to teens who claim to be transgender. I mean, Greg Abbott had half an idea of trying to put parents in jail who try to pursue gender-affirming care for their teens. But even he had to backtrack on that because it makes him look like even more of an authoritarian dickhead than he already is. This entire culture war outrage over transgenderism, from Team Red, is only about using transgender issues to rile people up so that they will vote for Team Red who will then proceed to do absolutely nothing about it.
Actually, first we enjoy making fun of emotional wrecks, and the compulsively compassionate types who can't resist "helping", and demanding that society follow their lead.
"All your tribe can do though is just demagogue on the issue"
He cuts off thirteen-year-olds balls, dick and tits, you fucking psychopath. He should be rotting in jail.
This isn't anymore a standard of care than Aztec heart removals at the top of the pyramid of Teotihuacan.
It's pure brutal, demonic evil, Jeff. Child abuse of the highest degree. And you know it's evil, but you run cover for it because your evil too.
"It's pure brutal, demonic evil, Jeff. Child abuse of the highest degree. And you know it's evil, but you run cover for it because your evil too."
This right here Lying Jeffy. Stop the bullshit. There is no reality where mutilating a 13yo via a sex change is acceptable. NONE. If you cannot even be honest enough to acknowledge this, then you're a worthless POS.
Usually the penis is turned inside out to attempt to make a vagina. If the penis is too small they use a section of the colon or sometimes just to get a little natural lubrication.
The balls, those have to go.
The mastectomy on the other hand confuses me. Do these young girls identify as women with breast cancer? Last I checked men have nipples. The simulation of a man is ruined for me without the nipples.
Give them another year or two and heart removal will become an acceptable procedure.
Sometimes doctors remove internal organs from kids.
Sometimes doctors amputate limbs from kids.
Sometimes doctors give kids medicine that winds up making the kid feel awful.
They do this not because they are evil, but because they are trying to treat and/or cure a medical condition that the child has.
It is not my fault, and not the doctors' fault, that you do not recognize the very valid medical conditions that some kids very sadly have to deal with.
Because these types of medical procedures are very serious and life altering, if you were to propose that they be strictly regulated, I would be inclined to agree, broadly speaking. If you were to propose that gender reassignment surgery could only happen after mandatory counseling and a waiting period, I would be inclined to agree. If you were to propose that gender reassignment surgery could only happen with parental consent i would absolutely agree. What I don't agree with is banning the procedure and throwing doctors or parents in jail. Because I am not qualified to speak for all parents, all doctors, all children and state that it is never ever appropriate. It is only your hubris and social conservatism which dictates otherwise.
And it is telling that your team makes none of these logical arguments. It is entirely an appeal to emotion, in this case anger and outrage, coupled with a "for the children" rationalization of using suffering kids as pawns for the sake of acquiring power. It is the same thing that Team Blue does all the time with their social welfare spending. But you and Team Red are doing the same thing, and intelligent people who are also not bigots can understand your ploy.
You evil, disgusting piece-of-shit. Comparing the sexual maiming of children by perverts to life saving surgery.
What's next? Justifying cannibalism because there are heart operations?
As for you trying to deflect it as parental choice and medical professionalism, there are parents and doctors who rape and otherwise abuse children.
Being called "mom" isn't kryptonite to Munchausen-Syndrome-by-Proxy, and being called "Doctor" doesn't stop a child mutation. There's plenty of doctors and hospitals in the Middle East justifying clitoridectomies.
You're so vile.
Yup, more outrage and more appeal to emotion. No logic, no reason, no factual analysis. Plus a heaping dose of logical fallacies.
"Some parents abuse kids, therefore all parental decisions are suspect" is not exactly a solid argument. It is about the most anti-libertarian argument that I can think of. It is literally a license for open-ended government usurpation of parental rights.
All you have is emotion and bigotry, and the heavy hand of the state supplanting parental rights with social conservative dogma.
You're advocating for the castration, vaginectomies and sexual mutilation of minors. That's the hard facts.
You can scream "emotional argument" all you want, but when these children mature into adults they're never going to have normal sex lives or bear children of their own because you perverts robbed them of that.
Those are hard facts, you fucking monster. You can't bullshit your way around them.
Once again all you can do is appeal to emotion and call people names.
You're advocating for the castration, vaginectomies and sexual mutilation of minors.
I "advocate" for these things in the exact same sense that I "advocate" for people starting heroin habits - meaning, I don't, but I don't think they should be banned by the state. Do you get it now?
You are a complete demagogue on the issue. You have no rational argument, all you have is rage and emotion. Just like the demagogues of old.
In every age the vilest specimens of human nature are to be found among demagogues.
— Thomas Macaulay, The History of England from the Accession of James II (1849)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue#The_enduring_character_of_demagogues
That's you to a tee.
Amazing how a psychotic extremist who is actually arguing for the genital mutilation of children has the guts to call those opposed "Demagogues".
You're an evil man by any measure.
Well, ML, if you would actually discuss the issue rationally, instead of constantly resorting to HOW DARE YOU emotional harrumphing, maybe then you wouldn't be called a demagogue.
As it stands now, though, you have no interest in discussing the issue rationally from a libertarian perspective, your only desire here is to rile up people's emotions and call me names. That is what demagogues do. They manipulate emotions for the purpose of achieving power. Which is what Team Red is currently doing with these culture war issues.
Requiring food trucks to disclose how many piss jugs are aboard -- the current figure and the historical average -- would address many of the issues associated with food trucks.
Sounds like someone is a slack-jawed, regressive, reactionary Xenophobe against pot, Mexicans, and buttsex, since food trucks are corollaries of pot and Mexicans and food trucks make a great barrier for hiding rendez-vous.
Well, be prepared to open wide for more chimichangas of Libertarian Free Minds and Free Markets from your betters, Rev. Artie, because that is the food of the Apocaypses you and your ilk have created in big cities.
Carry on, Klinger! *Flourishes cape!*
Thank you, clinger, for making it so easy for guys like me to kick the deplorable, disaffected, bigoted shit out of guys like you in the American culture war for the most recent half-century or so.
Your continuing compliance with the preferences of better Americans is appreciated.
Fuck off and die, asshole bigot.
We don't want your friendship, approval, or consent.
But we will continue to have your compliance. Until replacement occurs.
Thank you for that.
Reason Rundown
HORSE PASTE!!!
PUBLISHED. 2nd large study of the effects of ivermectin as prophylaxis for COVID-19
We observed that among who used ivermectin, those who used ivermectin regularly every 15 days at a dose of 1cp of 6mg for every 30kg of body weight for 2 consecutive days for at least 6 to 8 weeks had up to a 92% reduction in mortality compared to those who did not.
Reason hates this url for some reason.
www (dot) cureus (dot) com/articles/111851-regular-use-of-ivermectin-as-prophylaxis-for-covid-19-led-up-to-a-92-reduction-in-covid-19-mortality-rate-in-a-dose-response-manner-results-of-a-prospective-observational-study-of-a-strictly-controlled-population-of-88012-subjects?email_share=true&expedited_modal=true
Replace the (dot) with, well, you know...
Regardless of any results of Ivermectin, I hope we can all agree that the weird group push to deride it as horse medicine, when it's actually an incredibly widely used anti-parasitic in humans and animals, was just stupid.
Stupid or virtue signaling in support of hyper-partisan narratives?
I don't think that's an either/or.
Not stupid. Corrupt.
Even Trumps wondering if blood with covid could be treated outside the body wasn't that stupid - that's basically what dialysis is. Blood is streamed from the body through a machine that filters out waste, like kidneys do.
I'm not sure blood could be treated to remove viruses, but I don't see how that was so off the wall.
The context was the weirdest part. Bragging about how smart he is, his relative at MIT, how the epidemiologists he spoke with were so impressed with his huge brain.
Nah, it was pretty standard issue sarcasm. Not brilliant, but not stupid.
"a 92% reduction in mortality compared to those who did not."
I think this needs to be emphasized.
Every public official who fought against allowing Ivermectin use, and pushed to censor results, is guilty of the deaths of thousands.
Where does the Mises Caucus stand on food trucks? These municipalities are clearly the gravest threat to liberty in our lifetime. I'm not advocating for insurrection here (or denying free and fair elections) but it's high time Libertarians stand up and get counted here. If that means exercising our 2nd amendment rights so be it. And I'm going to demand that Reason finally give this tyrannical oppression the coverage it deserves. I mean one article a week? Seriously?
That’s right. After all, the trucks are normally run by noble immigrants.
Video: After no WMDs were found in Iraq, Biden was still defending the war. He said that it was ok for Bush to lie about WMDs in order to build public support for the war.
“Babies being killed was icing on the cake to sway public opinion [to go to war with Iraq]”
This is contrary to everything he said in 2020.
He forgot.
As libertarians we must be comfortable siding with Iraq War supporters. Heck, Reason.com's editor-in-chief KMW used to work for Bill Kristol at The Weekly Standard and he wrote an entire book advocating the war.
#LibertariansForEmbracingNeocons
That dumbass even gets his Iraq Wars mixed up! It was Iraq War I a.k.a Desert Storm that was supported with lies about Saddam's henchmen removing babies from ventilators. C'mon, Man, Joe! 🙂
So, since this is the fun Saturday: Free Jazz edition of the comments section, I wonder if anyone here would be willing to give your opinion on something I've been thinking about for awhile.
If you read my comments a comment I've made for years is that people need to pay more attention to the "why" people think something and not just what they think. The marijuana debate was a big highlight of this for me, where I came at it from very libertarian-conservative view, that is that people have to make choices and allowing them to do so in cases where no direct harm can be shown is important. I increasingly became aware that marijuana legalization was driven partially by that, but also by a simple shift to viewing marijuana as good. Thinking it's a good that should be positively affirmed by government is very different from thinking that it is not a breach of rights that should be negatively prevented by the government.
Reason does not do this analysis and instead claims marijuana legalization as a libertarian victory, and then jumps to a general statement of libertarianism in American that I think is weaker than they claim.
Increasingly, reading Reason I notice that even if I agree with any given conclusion they draw, their reasoning is often really different from me and often somewhere close to repulsive to me.
So, this gets me thinking about the priors we all have. What are my underlying beliefs that tie into my reasonings that lead me to my conclusions. I know that I have a strong belief that the most important thing in life, for every single individual, is to be Good. I also believe that Goodness cannot be forced. So, taxation is not charity. Putting a gun to someone's head and making them give blood is not a donation. This has lead me to a very libertarian stance on government, and an increasingly strict view on personal conduct. These priors inform my thinking heavily, and I've noticed they differ from mainstream libertarianism increasingly, and Reason for sure.
So, I'm curious other people's priors here. What are the major driving beliefs of your thinking process? Would folks be willing to share?
I also ponder what makes people think the way they do. Beyond the 150+ common logical fallacies and biases, I tend towards knowledge itself, and how and why people "know" what they think they do. And then I find myself over my own head in knowing, since I have no expertise in philosophy and epistemology.
So then I revert to one of my core values: mind your own business. I realize this contradicts many of those "normal" human urges and biases. But I can't imagine any lasting, free society that includes, or even "tolerates" too much nannyism, Karenism, or other informal or formal intrusion on what other people want to think, say, and do.
What about in your personal interactions? What are your driving principles in life?
I guess I am driven by and for personal responsibly, which other commenters have before accused me of excessive fixation. I want to first take care of myself and my family, and then with others I connect with or people I judge worthy. And I expect others to take care of themselves.
By temperament and profession I am a scientist, thus an optimistic skeptic. And I am probably hung up on rational objectivity, and sometimes cynical about emotions (and emotional "reasoning").
Yeah, I'm fond of personal responsibility on at least two levels. The first being that multiple levels of preparedness have a practical impact. So, me taking care of myself and my family, and also having broader societal protections for me an my family give me redundancy that reduces the risks.
The second is also technically practical, but feels more obscure, which is that practicing virtue is how you get better at virtue. Taking care of yourself first prepares you to value you and yours more, which prepares you to value others more, and makes you better at acting on it.
That second looks like word jumble to me, but I hope there's some point that can be drawn out.
"sometimes cynical about emotions (and emotional "reasoning")"
The only way to be brother.
" I want to first take care of myself and my family, and then with others I connect with or people I judge worthy."
Who are "worthy "?
That's because reason has abandoned first principles. Ie the gov shouldn't do something because it's an infringement on freedom and rule of law (old reason). To today's reason of the goverment shouldn't do it because 1 it hurts minorities, and 2 the Republicans might do it too
Reason continues to disappoint. I will not deny it, though I'm less critical than folks here since they sometimes have at least interesting thoughts, even if I disagree.
I'd love to hear where you're coming from on your own thinking though. What is your true north?
That is a very difficult one. It use to be from a very core perspective of do not interfere with rights to life liberty and pursuit of happiness, that individual should be left alone to do what they want. However we are witnessing the rise of corporate/goverment codependency, so my previous private companies ideals are shot. This is expecially true with the Gove giving money to Blackrock and vanguard then haveing them impliment investing based on esg scores. We have also seen the embedding of Marxism into most public institutions. This one is a little easier as there is no such thing as a Marxist libritarian, all Marxist/socialists need to be eradicated from public sector. As for the non aggression principle, there is no live and let live left, when one side says "I want to be left alone" and the other side says "I want to dominate you" the side hell bent on domination will win every time regardless of what rights you have.
Long story short my first principles used to be easy and clear for me. Now it's back to trying to muddle my through to a clear concise and consistent first principles framework.
Even then, I think the principles are fairly solid (modulo the fact that we're all sort of ignorant apes) but we see how it can evolve to a failing state. Regulatory capture and invested interests concern me as well. Probably why I trend towards a pretty extreme distributed system of government, but that is admittedly a practical concern rather than a high minded value. A distributed system helps contain the inevitable spread of tragedies. To that extent I'm very anti-federal (as opposed to anti-federalist).
Right now I am caught in the weeds of how my ideas work out. The people at the top broadcasting their hand in 2016 (wef a ounces you will own nothing and be happy) really threw a wrench in my notion of "private" and nap. I too think decentralization is necessary and best
Yeah, one of the most illuminating concepts in the development of my political beliefs was that of Public Choice Theory. I honestly think it should be taught in school, because it leads very naturally to many of the problems we see today including Regulatory Capture and whatever the fuck the Public Schools are.
The public schools should be merged with waste management
I really enjoy these long form discussions. It helps me vet my own opinions, and if they don't hold up to scrutiny, my opinions have to change. Unfortunatly during the week I am usually in a lab 16 hours a day, and taking care of my kid the other 8. Leaves very little time to keep up with the world. Most of my typos (and I know there are many) come from a combination of :no time, fat fingers, and a professional training that doesn't care about spelling.
Can we agree to meet on the food blog to discuss these things? Really being challenged has helped me formulate my ideas
I'm increasingly looking at a principle of you reap what you sew. Are you pushing for global socialist goverment via the wef? Fine you now have a 100% income and asset tax, however you will recieve welfare. You don't believe in social security? Fine don't pay it, but don't expect a bail out. Don't believe in guns? Fine you and your body guards are not allowed guns
I can sympathize with this mentality of "hold people to their own standards" though I tend to give a lot of value to grace and forgiveness. I think this goes to my below link to the political gnosticism.
If you have a person who truly believes something, and it's a bad idea but they truly believe it will help people (you'll still somehow find true-blue socialists like this) then when their shit gets kicked in by reality I think it's worthwhile to reach out and offer them a hand and a path.
If it's just base politics and they know something is bad but argue because it advances some larger goal, then that's pretty vile and they need to get their shit kicked in to even begin hoping that they'll change.
1. Contrary to the slander of the Mises caucus around here, one the reasons they felt the need to take over the party was because “mainstream” libertarians, similar to Reason, have become more left wing, “woke” LIBERTINES. They like weed, food trucks, prostitution, etc, then work backwards from there, instead of consistently approaching all topics from principles. It’s why they support unelected bureaucrats and law enforcement going after the duly elected president on bullshit because they don’t like that president. They say things like “It’s not enough not to be racist, one must be anti-racist”.
They have not been good stewards of the voice of liberty.
2. Personally, my driving factors are the NAP, and being honest (why I’m so vociferous in my criticism of dishonest and disingenuous people here). The case for marijuana being legal shouldn’t be that it’s good for you or not, it should simply be because the government doesn’t have the authority to commit aggression against us to stop us from using it.
And by not approaching things this way, you’re more likely to find yourself being disingenuous, which is what Reason frequently does. They’re a collection of activists for things that libertarians mostly agree with, but they’re willing to advocate for those things at all costs.
lol you are one of the most dishonest people here
Nobody believes that. Not even you Lying Jeffy.
god you are such a liar.
why I’m so vociferous in my criticism of dishonest and disingenuous people here
lol right. You enable the right-wing liars around here every single fucking day. When was the last time you ever pointed out something wrong that Jesse or ML said or any of the other right-wingers? Hmm?
Your project is entertaining, Lying Jeffy.
Projection
"god you are such a liar."
Hands down you're the most dishonest person here, Jeff. You even beat Shrike, which is a gargantuan feat.
Not even close Lying Jeffy. In your brain, you think Trump is biggest liar right? You're 10x worse. And, I'm being generous. Seek professional help dude.
lol not surprised that the right-wing morons around here think I'm a liar.
Sure, I'm a "liar", in the same way that I'm a "far left progressive", a "Marxist" or a "pedophile".
You all have a very casual relationship with the truth.
The right-wingers don't like me and the left-wingers don't like me either.
Looks like I'm doing something right.
Just curious what makes you think I’m a right winger?
"Just curious" lol
Another lie
No really, why am I right wing?
Bullshit. You are just trolling like you always do. God you are such an asshole.
If you really want a serious answer, then you will have to start treating me with the respect that you think you deserve.
No more trolling, no more calling me a liar, no more bullshit. Give good faith answers to the questions I pose instead of baiting and gotchas.
But if you treat me like dirt then that is the treatment you will get.
Otherwise go fuck yourself and go back to your circle jerk with your right wing buddies.
Lol, BUCS asked a thoughtful question and I answered. You didn’t need to respond to my answer, but you felt the need to call me one of the biggest liars on the site, then a right winger. Now you won’t back up that claim, and say I need to change my behavior before you’ll do so. Should be an easy answer.
Did you notice I didn’t respond to your answer of BUCS question with insults? Hmm?
Oh and now here comes the right-wing victimhood complex. You expect me to forget and ignore the YEARS of abuse and trolling you have heaped upon me? Fuck you. You posted an obviously ridiculous response that you were somehow "vociferous in my criticism of dishonest and disingenuous people here" when that vociferous-ness only goes in one direction, against the people you hate, and you ignore and even provide cover for the outright lies and falsehoods that your right-wing buddies peddle on a daily basis. I called you out on your obvious attempt to gaslight BUCS and everyone else and now YOU pretend to be the victim. God you are such an asshole.
The moment you sincerely apologize and start treating me with the respect that you think YOU are entitled to, that is when you will start to get a serious response from me. Otherwise, go fuck yourself and go slinking back to your right-wing pals. I'm sure Jesse will be more than willing to give you a handjob if you praise Trump some more.
Did you notice I didn’t respond to your answer of BUCS question with insults?
Except when you did?
Calling out your hypocrisy doesn’t make me a victim. I think it’s silly that anyone could be a victim on this comment section, except maybe when KAR doxed Chuck’s friend.
“YEARS of abuse”
Lol. I’m finally understanding one of the characteristics of people susceptible to TDS. Your childish feelings are easily hurt.
“when that vociferous-ness only goes in one direction, against the people you hate,”
I don’t hate anyone here, except maybe the guy that posted links to kiddie porn and the filth that is Tony. I do dislike certain people. Because they lie and are disingenuous. But hate is far to strong a word for people that amuse me.
“I called you out on your obvious attempt to gaslight BUCS and everyone else and now YOU pretend to be the victim. God you are such an asshole.“
Nope. No gaslighting. It’s how I feel. I think you and your “tribe”are consistently dishonest and disingenuous, and your consistent use of the word “tribe” is one of many reasons why. And again, I’m no victim here nor have I ever claimed to be. That’s silly talk and another new example of your and Dee’s dishonesty. As far as being an asshole, yeah, sometimes. But I don’t turn around afterwards and pretend I’m not like your dishonest buddy sarc.
“The moment you sincerely apologize and start treating me with the respect that you think YOU are entitled to, that is when you will start to get a serious response from me.”
I’ll never apologize for calling you a liar because I think you’re a liar. Such an apology would be dishonest, get it? I don’t really concern myself with respect from anonymous people on this site nor do I feel anyone is “entitled” to respect. I certainly respect most of the regular commentators here because I feel they’ve earned it, but none were entitled to it.
“Did you notice I didn’t respond to your answer of BUCS question with insults?
Except when you did?”
Check the time of the comment.
Nope. No gaslighting. It’s how I feel.
lol yeah right. Let me know the next time you criticize the lies that emanate on a daily basis from Jesse/ML/Kuckland/Nardz/Ted/Earth Based Human Skeptic/all of the other right-wingers around here. You're either lying or mentally ill.
I’ll never apologize for calling you a liar because I think you’re a liar.
Fine, asshole. Eat shit and die. There's your answer.
Check the time of the comment.
Right. So you claimed to take the high road until it was no longer convenient for you to do so. Such a moral paragon of virtue that makes you, doesn't it? The entire stunt was a lie.
Calling out your hypocrisy doesn’t make me a victim.
So stop claiming to be a victim when I call out your obvious lies.
“lol yeah right. Let me know the next time you criticize the lies that emanate on a daily basis from Jesse/ML/Kuckland/Nardz/Ted/Earth Based Human Skeptic/all of the other right-wingers around here. You're either lying or mentally ill.”
Such as?
“Fine, asshole. Eat shit and die. There's your answer.”
This wasn’t a response to a question, so not an answer.
“Right. So you claimed to take the high road until it was no longer convenient for you to do so. Such a moral paragon of virtue that makes you, doesn't it? The entire stunt was a lie.”
Convenience has nothing to do with anything. BUCS asked a question and I answered it with no interest in shitting up the thread. Then you shit up the thread. So I went ahead and pointed out the self-righteous bullshit of your response.
Are you claiming that not responding to your post initially was a “stunt”?
"when I call out your obvious lies."
You never call out lies, Jeff, you obnoxious human garbage. You're deceit personified. The only time you're not telling your own lies is when you're twisting other peoples words into lies here.
You're an evil, sociopathic, Nazi in the actual sense, and one of the worst human beings I've ever had the misfortune to encounter.
“So stop claiming to be a victim when I call out your obvious lies.”
Not sure how much clearer I could be that I’m not a victim. Why do you keep lying about this?
Oh that’s right, because you’re a liar that can’t stop lying.
I mean I literally made the point that I’m not a victim and never claimed to be, and you made a post telling me to stop being the victim. Does this insanity make sense in your head Lying Jeffy?
Or are you just being dishonest hoping someone won’t notice and take your side?
Oh and let's not forget this:
" I’m so vociferous in my criticism of dishonest and disingenuous people here"
When have you ever called out the dishonesty of your right-wing pals Jesse/ML/Nardz/Ted/etc.?
You don't. In fact you'll run cover for their dishonesty by attacking the people like myself who DO point out their dishonesty. You may THINK you are some type of truth-teller but that is a figment of your imagination. You're a right-wing tribalist and a troll as demonstrated by your actions here on a daily basis.
And again, I’m no victim here nor have I ever claimed to be.
Right, so you whine about being called a liar and then claim you're not wallowing in your typical victimhood complex.
All I see is a grey box Jeffy, but I'm 100% sure its bullshit lies.
He's a psychopath.
Co-signed. Well said.
"They have not been good stewards of the voice of liberty."
Understatement of the decade.
Note Lying Jeffy never responded to this post other than to lie and attack. While calling others trolls.
I will also add one further prior I think I have. One should say what one means, and should avoid, as much as possible, to play politics. By this I mean, saying things you think will guide one towards a end-point you want but isn't actually what you believe.
This is a weird and confusing point and I think it's best summed up by the line "Do not swear false oaths, instead let your yes be your yes, and your no be your no."
Though, in a longer form, here is an article that really resonated with me and put into words thoughts I had had:
https://www.aier.org/article/against-political-gnosticism/
My starting point ultimately is humility and respect. I don't know what is best for you in your life. You don't know what is best for me in my life. No one knows what is best for me except myself. So I want to grant you the space to make those decisions for yourself. And I request that you grant me the space to make those decisions for myself. That is the respect piece. This can't happen with top-down solutions imposed on everyone. This can only happen in a regime of liberty when people have maximal latitude to make free choices about their lives.
Every day I continue to be stunned at the wide diversity of people and situations and circumstances out there and how people make choices that I would never have considered in their lives - sometimes for the worse, oftentimes for the better, but always they are their choices.
The second part, for me, is an individualism that is not being a self-centered narcissistic asshole, but instead is an enlightened type that recognizes that we are all better off when we voluntarily decide to help each other in our various ways. My "radical individualism" is radical in the sense that it ponders that it's possible to have collective action from voluntary individual choices to address social problems without outrageous government bureaucracies deciding these things.
The third part is a commitment to using one's intellect and one's moral reasoning to decide major questions. Not tribalism, not emotional outrage, not demagoguery, not an appeal to tradition, not an appeal to the mob, but instead focusing on empirical observations, rational deduction, and a moral foundation based on a commitment to liberty.
So those are where I am coming from.
“My starting point ultimately is humility… The second part, for me, is an individualism that is not being a self-centered narcissistic asshole, but instead is an enlightened type”
Lying Jeffy is a self appointed enlightened type with humility. That’s rich.
I *am* smarter than you. I also know that my intelligence does not give me license to tell you how to live your life. You'd think a supposed "libertarian" such as yourself would appreciate that.
When did I tell you how to live your life?
I also know that my intelligence does not give me license to tell you how to live your life. You'd think a supposed "libertarian" such as yourself would appreciate that.
Yes or no, asshole?
What a weird non sequitur. And by weird I mean dishonest. I’ve never claimed anyone has license to tell anyone how to live their life, unless they’re violating the NAP.
Feel free to live your life as a dishonest piece of shit, just don’t commit fraud.
I’ve never claimed anyone has license to tell anyone how to live their life, unless they’re violating the NAP.
But you won't acknowledge that in ME, though.
“Every day I continue to be stunned at the wide diversity of people and situations and circumstances out there and how people make choices”
Every day you’re stunned? Seems like eventually you’d not be stunned by what you observe every day. It’s almost like you made this statement to be a pretentious douche.
Every day you’re stunned, lol.
Does anyone believe that Lying Jeffy is stunned every day? Because that sounds like a lie to me.
Yup it's a pretentious statement. It's also a figure of speech. You have a habit of trying to problematize innocuous figures of speech or grammar choices or even punctuation in order to try to turn it into some deceitful act. That itself is an act of deception.
Me: "I slept for eight hours last night."
Troll Mac: "Really? By my watch, you only slept 7 hours 58 minutes. That makes you a LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!"
That type of pedantry makes you and mad.casual into the deceptive ones.
Didn't you once criticize me for supposedly using quotation marks incorrectly? FFS this is an Internet comment board not a Ph.D. dissertation.
And yet the guy who is so scrupulous in calling out lies and deception cannot find it within himself to lift a finger to criticize the dishonesty of his tribe. And he wonders why I call him a right-wing tribalist.
“not emotional outrage, not demagoguery,”
Well I’m relieved. Because here I was feeling like you’ve been expressing emotional outrage and demagoguery against me. But clearly I was mistaken. Or you’re a liar.
Hey Lying Jeffy, would you make the claim that you haven’t expressed emotional outrage against me? That you haven’t demagogued me?
This is clearly not emotional outrage:
https://reason.com/2022/09/03/food-trucks-from-colorado-to-alabama-are-still-struggling-with-red-tape-and-protectionism/?comments=true#comment-9685469
Oh I have absolutely expressed emotional anger and contempt towards you. But in your deceit you elided the important part of my quotation:
"The third part is a commitment to using one's intellect and one's moral reasoning to decide major questions. Not tribalism, not emotional outrage, not demagoguery, not an appeal to tradition, not an appeal to the mob, but instead focusing on empirical observations, rational deduction, and a moral foundation based on a commitment to liberty."
So I will absolutely express my outrage and anger towards pieces of shit like you who do nothing but troll, but I don't use mere emotion to decide major questions. I don't, for example, decide to vote for a presidential candidate in order to "pwn the libs" or juvenile crap like that. Unlike your buddies. Which you don't seem to have any opprobrium for. Yet you dishonestly criticize me for not being pure enough in your estimation in my use of reason and logic. Huh. Funny that.
I think you make a good point about marijuana. The legalization organizations sold the proposition that it needed to be taxed, regulated and available only to adults, a group that seems to be getting older over time. The obvious failure of the WOD presented an opportunity for government to grab that tax money and investment opportunities by pretending that MJ was unique amongst all other substances over which they claim the right to prohibit. These are the same people who are prohibiting tobacco and vapes. With every prohibition ultimately enforced at the point of a gun. None of this reveals any respect for or acknowledgement of individual liberty. Reason whines incessantly about regulated states being unable to compete with the black market as if that's a bad thing. It's actually just individuals asserting their inalienable rights.
Yes. I think there are three major arguments you see for weed. One is the libertarian one, which is people should be allowed to make choices. One is hard to place politically into an easy category, but is a practical argument which is basically the WOD is a huge negative and the costs are not worth the cure. The third is a progressive argument that experts have shown weed is good for people and should be allowed insofar as it is given to people who will benefit from it.
This is then filtered through the Government lens which is tax anything you can, fuck you.
But your comparison to tobacco is the one I myself make. We are simultaneously warring against vaping and tobacco while moving towards marijuana legalization. Culturally, this means we're ignoring argument one, and you can make argument two I suppose but I would argue evidence supports that the harm reduction of vaping is significant and so that movement is wrong. So, we're left with argument 3, which Weed is Good, Tobacco is Bad.
And talking to people about this, I think this is a common view. And it is not libertarian. It is as Nanny State as anything and it's simply an argument that evidence has shifted about what is good.
That second argument is the utilitarian one. The costs of the WOD outweigh the benefits of legalization therefore let's legalize pot. This utilitarian argument of course will fail when applied to other drugs, because other drugs are in general worse than marijuana.
Which is more akin to the Progressive argument than anything. The basis of Progressivism is complicated, but it has a strong connection to Utilitarianism going back to Dewey and Pragmatism. It's an argument that neutral experts can be trusted to decide what is and isn't good for society and it's populace. The various forms of the "It's not worth the costs" is closer to that argument than anything.
Marijuana "legalization" in it's current form amounts to government granting a "right" to certain select people to be free from the threat of government violence for smoking or eating a fucking plant. Government cannot create a right that you were born with. I'm happy that some people under certain circumstances are free from the threat of government violence. But to claim it amounts to some kind of libertarian moment is absurd and in fact reinforces the belief that government can grant rights.
Food trucks, Reason's second favorite topic.
The real question is number 1 drugs or ass sex?
To answer your question, yes. 🙂
Yeah, don't these 2 kinda go together?
Um not for me. But I may be an outlier.
You are just not using the right drugs.
Apparently.
Certainly Baylen Linnekin’s. It’s almost like it’s his “beat”, and he has a gig to write an article about food and liberty every Saturday.
Captain obvious has entered the chat.
Birds gotta squawk.
I hope that we're getting some really good "Fuck Joe Biden" chants around America now that college football is back!
Help us, Jared Polis, you're our only hope!
This is why we need Federal Control of all state and local entities. Because food truck regulations are at risk.
Holeeeee shit.
I was talking about Nitter the other day, and how it's a lot nicer than Twitter, particularly if you're like me and don't have a Twitter account (anymore...). Well, here's a really useful extension which will automatically redirect any Twitter link to a Nitter front-end version instead:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nitter-redirect/mohaicophfnifehkkkdbcejkflmgfkof
Wow. They really don't give a fuck about the proles anymore, huh?
Gotta let a lot of Germans die to pwn the Russians. Good to see how far we've come.
Too local for Reason to cover.
BUCS, responding to your post down thread about Public Choice Theory. I'm a fan, but 2 issues arise.
1. Progressives, and to a lesser extent Conservatives, are elitist. They believe they are MUCH smarter than everybody else. And, if they don't make decisions for everybody else, people will literally die on the street. As such, they'll agree that they like freedom of choice, but everybody else is too stupid to run their own lives; especially minorities. (But they're not racist!)
2. Government policy compared to Market Alternatives. As crony socialism has grown so bad, many times the market alternatives are not separate from government policy. The lines are extremely blurry and only getting worse. I still prefer market options, as the market is better than the government at everything, except wasting money and printing money.
I'll add a third item - most progressives I know only respect the Constitution while they agree with it. When you start asking, what part of the Constitution gives the government authority to run SS, or Medicare or education, they're concern for rule of law goes right out the window. You're derided as being unloving, uncompassionate and wanting people to die on the street. (Man, progressives really like that phrase.)
Conclusion - Americans are too lazy to properly understand history or even understand the mechanisms for which our government derives it's powers. Similarly, they're too emotionally unstable to apply logic and reason to a subject in order to consider alternative choices. It's why I'm so pessimistic on America's empire lasting too much longer.
(Fortunately, my Lord's Kingdom is eternal. Earthly empires will come and go.)
1. Progressives, and to a lesser extent Conservatives, are elitist. They believe they are MUCH smarter than everybody else.
and also:
Conclusion - Americans are too lazy to properly understand history or even understand the mechanisms for which our government derives it's powers. Similarly, they're too emotionally unstable to apply logic and reason to a subject in order to consider alternative choices.
I guess that makes you an elitist?
But let me attempt a semi-serious response:
Similarly, they're too emotionally unstable to apply logic and reason to a subject in order to consider alternative choices.
If you think they are too emotionally unstable to apply logic and reason, then it is because you do not understand their thought process and so since their thought process is so different than yours, you condemn it as emotional garbage. The problem is not with them, it is with YOU. At the end of the day, the people you are condemning are fundamentally no different than you. If you are able to apply logic and reason to come to a decision that you think is correct, then so are they. And that is what they have done, based on their own set of premises and biases and circumstances. That you cannot see this or understand this is not their problem, it is yours.
Denver police moved to bar food trucks from operating in the Lower Downtown (LoDo) section of the city, popular with late-night revelers, after a shooting on July 21.
At first glance, a food truck seems like an odd vehicle for a drive-by, but you could fit 5 guys with AK-47s in the serving window.
Denver police are the problem. They are lazy and would prefer to collect a pay check without doing anything. They neglect practice at the range, because that is too much effort. Better hope you aren't robbed or raped in Denver, the cops will just watch from across the street.
Well if they neglect range practice maybe you'll survive a no knock warrant.
Not good for the bystanders they keep shooting.
So: Media reports that the Wisconsin GOP candidate for governor gave money to groups that endorsed anti-abortion and anti-gay positions.
What is the GOP candidate's response?
“I believe people should just, just be ready to get out on the streets with pitchforks and torches with how low the liberal media has become,” Michels said Thursday on a conservative talk radio show. “People need to decide ‘Am I going to put up with this? Am I going to tolerate this, taking somebody that gives money to churches or cancer research and use that as a hit piece in the media?’ I’m appalled. It’s disgusting.”
https://apnews.com/article/abortion-2022-midterm-elections-entertainment-health-donald-trump-79e3632493fb8c30a1edeb5e53844992
If you report what a GOP candidate has actually done, then that's proof of "librul media" and deserving of pitchforks and torches. No fair doing math to add up donations to causes. Math is librul.
Interesting. Was he painting himself as being a moderate on gay rights and abortion issues?
Well, he was endorsed by Trump. So, probably not.
Something tells me this candidate isn't going to win.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/02/trump-pick-in-michigan-election-kristina-karamo-threatened-to-kill-family.html
Allegations from an ex husband are not always true.
So, like all other businesses in the US then.
The crime problem is not the food truck it is the drinking that happens before the bars close. People will always drink, and drunk people will always act badly. That speaking as someone who in my youth did both. The food trucks are likely doing a service by getting food into people to help them sober up a little. The solution is having more cops around as the bar time passes. Not to hassle or arrest just to keep people calm by their presence. Not cheap but likely less costly for all in the long run.