subject:"The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market"

Rob wrote:
We are the entertainment

Well, if it makes you happy to think so...  :-p

Jim
Pithy remarks Maru


Free Learning Centers Information. Click here.
Learning Center
http://tagline.excite.com/fc/FgElN1g0ZWEerlNvjcTnRsNo52A1FP8ZVZe157BQ3SDIvPzph2znOsEVGog/___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

Doug wrote:

Has he been arrogant at times?

The arrogance doesn't fuss me; there's far too many brainy people here to 
expect excessive modesty.  :-)

The passive-agressive posts, though?  I don't mind admitting that kind of stuff 
gets under my skin.

Jim
Admitting weakness maru



Scale
Find precision scales that can weigh anything. Click now!
http://tagline.excite.com/fc/FgElN1gvzpWGF2KUFOuCRBhuD3d0cdOEh7z7ZnvsCQC5zIswiJDK6r17ZUs/___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

John Williams wrote:
I would go with lazy more than ignorant

I think that intellectual laziness leads to stupidity, though. How can live
your whole life in this country and not know Medicare is a government program,
to cite one of Maher's examples? Let alone not know there are two senators per
state, or any other of a number of things. I personally have no interest at all
in who Miley Cyrus is, but just by being alive (and having two tween
daughters, to be fair) you pick things up.

Additionally, it's one thing to be ignorant because you haven't had an
opportunity to learn. It's entirely another to be *purposefully* ignorant. You
don't have to want to learn everything about everything; there's no way to do
that. And it's OK to have topics that are of no interest to you - I have no
more interest in learning to operate a bulldozer than one of my clients has in
learning ERISA. But if you squeeze your eyes shut and put your fingers in your
ears and yell LALALALALALAAA anytime a piece of knowledge is dropped on
you, whether it's because it contradicts your religious dogma or makes you
question your personal weltanschauung or because you find learning to be far
too onerous a task, I will argue that you're stupid.

Jim
Darn you guys for making me de-lurk Maru

The difference is clear. Click now for a great laminating machine!
Laminating Machine
http://tagline.excite.com/fc/FgElN1gxFAkkKCkz6GEzJTpopAVficpBNQiXpa3dex1f7ocUQnPBrl6qcCk/___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-18 Thread Doug Pensinger

Jim  wrote:


 The passive-agressive posts, though? I don't mind admitting that kind of
 stuff gets under my skin.

 Jim
 Admitting weakness maru


Now see, I guess I don't understand what passive-aggressive means because I
would think that his confrontational, sometimes sarcastic style has any
passivity to it.  Wiki describes P-A as passive sometimes obstructionist
resistance to following through with expectations in interpersonal or
occupational situations and says It can manifest itself as learned
helplessness, procrastination, stubbornness, resentment, sullenness or
deliberate/repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is
(often explicitly) responsible.  I'm not sure how that (or anything else in
the article) applies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive–aggressive_behaviorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive%E2%80%93aggressive_behavior

BTW, apologies to JW for this behind-the-back-in-front-of-your-face
discussion.  (Is that P-A?)

Doug
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Passive-Agressive posting (was Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market)

Doug wrote: 

Now see, I guess I dont understand what passive-aggressive means because I 
would think that his confrontational, sometimes sarcastic style has any 
passivity to it. 

I see it differently, perhaps. Passive-agressive may not be the right 
clinical term here, but I find repeated statements such as Im just asking 
questions and intimations of it being the other persons' faults for how they 
interpret what you're writing as a way to irritate someone and present a point 
of view without *really* presenting it. It may not be a textbook definition, 
but that's how it strikes me. 

I'm not saying JW does this regularly, it's just something I get exposed to on 
a lot of lists and it pushes my buttons, so it's certainly possible the fault 
lies within me. Erik used to do it to people here all the time (JVB was 
*especially* prone to rising to that particular bait(, and that was one of the 
reasons I could barely stand to read even his quality posts. 

Jim 
Confessionals Maru 


Click for a wide selection of quality scales. 
Scale
http://tagline.excite.com/fc/FgElN1gvzpYOpCE2YebVUiKlopvQmf2vqQ0AtBC07PsS2vG1Cs1XlWJuYa0/___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: Passive-Agressive posting (was Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market)

2009-08-18 Thread Patrick Sweeney

It's a put-on. And it's a put-on anyone who's been on the Internet for
more than 5 minutes has seen dozens of times. The repetitive I'm just
asking questions to try to understand, the feigned cluelessness, the
detached pose, the deliberate obtuseness ... it's all carefully
calculated to do one thing and one thing only - get the other person
to blow his top so you can disregard them as being irrational or
rude.

It's kind of like playing with that old Eliza computer program. Anyone
remember that?

Patrick


On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Jim Sharkeytemplar...@excite.com wrote:
 Doug wrote:

Now see, I guess I dont understand what passive-aggressive means because I
 would think that his confrontational, sometimes sarcastic style has any
 passivity to it.

 I see it differently, perhaps. Passive-agressive may not be the right
 clinical term here, but I find repeated statements such as Im just asking
 questions and intimations of it being the other persons' faults for how
 they interpret what you're writing as a way to irritate someone and present
 a point of view without *really* presenting it. It may not be a textbook
 definition, but that's how it strikes me.

 I'm not saying JW does this regularly, it's just something I get exposed to
 on a lot of lists and it pushes my buttons, so it's certainly possible the
 fault lies within me. Erik used to do it to people here all the time (JVB
 was *especially* prone to rising to that particular bait(, and that was one
 of the reasons I could barely stand to read even his quality posts.

 Jim
 Confessionals Maru
 
   Click for a wide selection of quality scales.
 Scale
 Click Here For More Information

 ___
 http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com






-- 
___
Patrick Sweeney
Firefly Games | www.firefly-games.com

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: Passive-Agressive posting (was Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market)

2009-08-18 Thread Richard Baker


Patrick said:


It's a put-on. And it's a put-on anyone who's been on the Internet for
more than 5 minutes has seen dozens of times. The repetitive I'm just
asking questions to try to understand, the feigned cluelessness, the
detached pose, the deliberate obtuseness ... it's all carefully
calculated to do one thing and one thing only - get the other person
to blow his top so you can disregard them as being irrational or
rude.


Or else it could be the socratic method. Perhaps it's a mirror that  
shows people what they want to see.



It's kind of like playing with that old Eliza computer program. Anyone
remember that?


Why do you say anyone remember that??

Rich


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: Passive-Agressive posting (was Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market)

2009-08-18 Thread Bruce Bostwick

Yeah, Eliza and Parry could be quite entertaining if they talked to  
each other.


Eliza and Racter could be too, but Eliza didn't get to say much in  
those conversations ..


On Aug 18, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Patrick Sweeney wrote:


It's kind of like playing with that old Eliza computer program. Anyone
remember that?


(Type mismatch error: expected boolean value but found string 'cake'.   
Input not parsed.)



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: Passive-Agressive posting (was Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market)

2009-08-18 Thread Rceeberger


On 8/18/2009 4:22:27 PM, Bruce Bostwick (lihan161...@sbcglobal.net) wrote:
 Yeah, Eliza and Parry could be quite entertaining if they talked to
 each other.
 
 Eliza and Racter could be too, but Eliza
 didn't get to say much in
 those conversations ..
 
 On Aug 18, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Patrick Sweeney wrote:
 
  It's
 kind of like playing with that old Eliza computer program. Anyone
  remember that?
 
 (Type mismatch error: expected boolean value but found string 'cake'.
 Input not parsed.)

The cake is a lie?


xponent
Portalizations Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: Passive-Agressive posting (was Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market)

2009-08-18 Thread Doug Pensinger

Rob wrote:

Bruce wrote:

 (Type mismatch error: expected boolean value but found string 'cake'.
 Input not parsed.)

 The cake is a lie?

Apparently the cake is neither true nor false.

Doug

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-18 Thread dsummersmi...@comcast.net

Original Message:
-
From: Jo Anne evens...@hevanet.com
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:14:29 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

Doug wrote:
 Has he been arrogant at times?  Maybe, but that sort of thing is
difficult
 to judge via email.  One can often sound arrogant or diffident or whiny
and
 not really mean to.   But if arrogance was the criteria by which we
judged
 people for their on list fitness, how long would JDG have lasted?

ROFLMAO!!  Exactly. And how many times did how many of us try to talk to
him
about the *way* he said things more that *what* he said.

Well, nice to have you back in the conversation, but I differ with you on
that.  I think most folks with long memories know that JDG and I have gone
at it many times back when he was on the list. He certainly got under my
skin, but I did not count him as arrogantjust a passionate debator that
really believed in his ideas.   He was the most conservative long term
member of the list, and I think it's no coincidence that I, an Obama
delegate last year, is the closest thing we have to an arguemetative long
term conservative here.  I know there are long term folks more conservative
than me here; they just don't get in long debates/

Indeed, I think we lost a lot of IAMOAC in the big dust upwhich ended
up in a significant drop in tolerance with those who differed from the
normative view of the list. 

I disagree, Doug.  Talking about how we have worked out talking to each
other, especially after 'the big blow' and a few of the smaller ones is an
important steam release valve, I think, and one of the ways this list
continues to work.

Unfortunately, it hasn't worked nearly as well after the dust up/blow up. 
If you look at the number of posts per month when someone like John doesn't
start a big discussion, it's down about 90% from before the times of
trouble.  

Dan M. 

mail2web.com  Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft®
Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:52 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 OK, I fear this won't work, but I'm going to try.

Work? How does it work?

 So, you can decide that everyone else is crazy or you can decide that there
 are areas that you can learn more about.

I choose the third one.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Martin Lewis

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM, John Williamsjwilliams4...@gmail.com wrote:

 So, you consider his post to me thoughtful, constructive, and worthy of 
 respect?

 Yes.

 Martin

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Alberto Monteiro

Doug Pensinger wrote (in html, and it's a hell to reformat):

 I do occasionally blow up. Once when I was accused of racism,
 once when a private discussion I'd had with someone was forwarded
 to the list, and ISTR Nick and I talking completely at
 cross-purposes. I was really annoyed on Friday night,
 partly 'cause I'd got home after drinking with a couple
 of friends in the pub, and an acquaintance of one of them
 was spouting anti-vaccination lunacy. And when I asked a
 couple of simple questions, I received the reply Oh, so
 you're science. That figures. 
 
 There's no arguing with simpletons like that.  And we seem to
 have more nut cases than ever before.  Birthers???  Ay Yi Yi. 

If you think things can't get worse...

On another list, when those Muhammad cartoons appeared, all the
list was mocking Islam and preaching freedom of speech, and
that was the opportunity for one listmember to get out of the
closet and confess being a Holocaust denier.

I still don't know if he was sincere, or if we was just testing
how free speech rulez we were.

Alberto Monteiro

PS: just because we believe in free speech doesn't mean we have to
feed the trolls...


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

It is interesting what some people find rude which does not seem rude
to others. I suspect that a neutral observer would look at my posts
during the last few weeks and judge that they are not at all rude. I
have been asking some uncomfortable questions, but not making any
obviously rude remarks.

The interesting thing is that the data do not support the claim that
my posts make people less likely to communicate here. Rather, just the
opposite. If you look at the volume of non-JW posts as a function of
JW-posts to this list, there is a remarkably large positive
correlation.

Anyone listen to Bill Maher? I disagree with a lot of what he says,
but he is entertaining. He speaks his mind, and is not afraid to
discuss uncomfortable issues. I have never found him rude, but I
suspect others may have a different opinion. To each his own. Here's
an example of an uncomfortable issue that he discusses:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-smart-president_b_253996.html

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:

It is interesting what some people find rude which does not seem rude
to others. I suspect that a neutral observer would look at my posts
during the last few weeks and judge that they are not at all rude. I
have been asking some uncomfortable questions, but not making any
obviously rude remarks.


John--

This time around, you've been much better.  When you
started here (late last Fall?) you were much worse.


The interesting thing is that the data do not support the claim that
my posts make people less likely to communicate here. Rather, just the
opposite. If you look at the volume of non-JW posts as a function of
JW-posts to this list, there is a remarkably large positive
correlation.


That doesn't really prove anything.  For instance,
a flame war would produce a large number of posts,
but one could hardly call that communication.

---David

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:38 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

 That doesn't really prove anything.  For instance,
 a flame war would produce a large number of posts,
 but one could hardly call that communication.

Of course it does not prove anything, but it is highly suggestive.
While you no doubt have a different idea of flame war than I do, it
is obvious that most of the posts in question are communication of
some sort.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market


On 8/17/2009 8:04:00 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:38 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
 
  That doesn't really prove anything. For instance,
  a flame war would produce a large number of posts,
  but one could hardly call that communication.
 
 Of course it does not prove anything, but it is highly suggestive.
 While you no doubt have a different idea of flame war than I do, it
 is obvious that most of the posts in question are communication of
 some sort.

LOL!!
You have no idea what this list has been through over the years.
Your statement reads quite humorously.G


xponent
Yrkoon Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 Your statement reads quite humorously.G

That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
rude and sincere. Feel free to give my posts the benefit of the
doubt...

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market


On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
 wrote:
 
  Your statement reads quite humorously.G
 
 That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
 rude and sincere. Feel free to give my posts the benefit of the
 doubt...

Oh, you have received that particular benefit in spades.
Still here, right?


xponent
Vegas G Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
 wrote:

  Your statement reads quite humorously.G

 That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
 rude and sincere. Feel free to give my posts the benefit of the
 doubt...

 Oh, you have received that particular benefit in spades.
 Still here, right?

Are you implying that you would kill file me if you did not give my
posts the benefit of the doubt?

I apologize in advance if I have jumped to any unwarranted conclusions.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Nick Arnett

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:02 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

  Hi.  Seriously, are you trolling, or just
  dense?  : )  We rank respect the way most communities
  do--completely informally.

 Not trolling. Possibly dense. There is that reference to we again,
 which is what led me to believe that there was some pooled resource
 that was being referenced.


We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse.  We do, indeed.
We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at two
rather opposite ends of the materials spectrum, whatever that might
signify).



Even when we lose our tempers, that doesn't mean we don't still believe in
those standards.  We are human, after all.

Nick
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Nick Arnett

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:

  We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
  explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse.  We do,
 indeed.
  We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at
 two
  rather opposite ends of the materials spectrum, whatever that might
  signify).

 There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
 email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
 did you determine that these people have that view?


I'm a highly evolved mammal with a brain the size of a dog's breakfast.
That's how I know.

Nick
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:

 We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
 explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse.  We do, indeed.
 We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at two
 rather opposite ends of the materials spectrum, whatever that might
 signify).

There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
did you determine that these people have that view?

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:


 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:

  We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
  explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse.  We do,
  indeed.
  We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at
  two
  rather opposite ends of the materials spectrum, whatever that might
  signify).

 There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
 email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
 did you determine that these people have that view?

 I'm a highly evolved mammal with a brain the size of a dog's breakfast.
 That's how I know.

Which does not answer the first question.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:


We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse.  We do, indeed.
We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at two
rather opposite ends of the materials spectrum, whatever that might
signify).


There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
did you determine that these people have that view?


John--

You're not going to claim that all the lurkers are
the silent majority are you?  : )  This is a silly
discussion, because every statement Nick made above
would get broad agreement on most established lists.

What do you want, that we should all sign a petition?

---David

FYI, there ARE etiquette guidelines for the list.
(In fact, googling finds several slightly different
versions.  Here's an old one from the archives, at
a previous host:
http://www.mail-archive.com/bri...@cornell.edu/msg13842.html

Julia Thompson, posting in 2002.)



Etiquette Guidelines

The Brin-L Mailing List exists for the discussion of matters pertaining to
the writings of Drs. Brin and Benford and topics of interest to list
members.

As members of a civilization, these are the guidelines we agree to live
under:

- We post as if every message we write as if we were going to read it
  aloud in front of the whole group.
- We sign our messages with our name and e-mail address.
- We are tolerant of subject threads that bore us to death.
- We keep subject lines appropriate to the contents of the message.
- We do NOT include the entire message to which we are replying.
- We DO include a few lines if our reply can't stand on its own.
- We DO keep attributions correctly assigned to the original poster.
- We do NOT send terse, one line replies.
- We use emphasis to make our comments clear. (Stars, smilies, etc.)
- We use white space and keep our paragraphs short.
- We keep our line length below 80 characters.
- If our reply is more appropriately directed only at the original poster,
  we don't send it to the entire list.
- If our message is funny, frivolous, humourous, or is generally silly in
  nature, we add a Silly/Humor flag to the subject line so others can
  identify it easily.
- We flag long messages with GLL, ELL or L3 in the subject line. (In
  deference to our Grand Past Alpha Mails this stands for Gord like
  length, Eythain like length or Lazh like length)

We agree that:
- Questions are welcome.
- Extensive discussions that get into the nitty-gritty of the subject are
  welcome.
- Funny, silly, frivolous, amusing, playful, joking, cheerful postings are
  welcome. Original humor, especially if it pertains to an existing
  thread, is quite welcome. Forwarding blanket humor from other sources is
  discouraged, but not forbidden.
- We are a multilingual group, and as such we tolerate mistakes and
  idiosyncracies when they show up on the list in English (American
  English). We remember that some folks may not be the best typists
  around, and tolerate those mistakes as well. We all will kindly answer
  any questions others have about our native language in a friendly
  manner.
- Brin and Benford ROCK. =+))  Trevor Sands is the best screen
  writer ever. Most of the time we think Iain Banks is pretty cool, too.

We will further endeavor to remember, as David Brin says, to Remind
yourself, now and then, to say the following phrase: 'I am a member of a
civilization.' (IAAMOAC). Our society has its flaws, but if you
ponder history, and cantankerous human nature, it's astonishing how far
we've come. We just don't say IAAMOAC often enough. ... 

We further agree that:

- Personal attacks, whether direct or indirect are not welcome. These
  should be handled off list, and if you disagree with some controversial
  point, direct the attack at the argument, not the person.
- Abusive or inflammatory language is not welcome.
- Profanity is not welcome.
- Chain letters are not welcome.
- Mail bombs to each other are not welcome.
- The Listowners have the right to remove someone who does not wish to
  comport themselves in a manner concordant with our civilization.


Thank you,

Jo Anne
Lady of the List, Bearer of the High Standards, Owner of the 7th Chalice
of Betazed etc.  ( I still like these titles! Maybe I should get a
business card for introductions with these titles on it? ;+))

Note: This list was written using another set of guidelines originally
composed by Donna Hrynkiw of Vancouver, British Columbia -- and is used
with her permission.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Besides these guidelines, please keep in mind that posting attachments is
a no-no, for reasons of bandwidth (some people *do* have to pay per
minute, others have finitely-sized inboxes and I'm tired of error

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 On 8/17/2009 9:12:11 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
 wrote:
 
  On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
  On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
  wrote:
 
   Your statement reads quite humorously.G
 
  That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
  rude and sincere. Feel free to give my posts the benefit of the
  doubt...
 
  Oh, you have received that particular benefit in spades.
  Still here, right?

 Are you implying that you would kill file me if you did not give my
 posts the benefit of the doubt?

 No.
 If certainty was high that you were just a troll you would be kicked from 
 the list.

Perhaps there was a misunderstanding. I meant that you might give my
posts the benefit of the doubt -- singular you. Rceeberger, that is.
Or did you mean that you have access to the subscriber list and you,
personally, would have removed my name if you did not give me the
benefit of the doubt?

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:54 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
 John Williams wrote:

 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:

 We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
 explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse.  We do,
 indeed.
 We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at
 two
 rather opposite ends of the materials spectrum, whatever that might
 signify).

 There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
 email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
 did you determine that these people have that view?

 You're not going to claim that all the lurkers are
 the silent majority are you?  : )

No. I don't really follow you.

 This is a silly
 discussion, because every statement Nick made above
 would get broad agreement on most established lists.

Have you done that experiment, or are you speculating? Perhaps your
contention is true, but I think that the term community and also
straw man are ambiguous, so the broad agreement would not
necessarily be meaningful, since people would be thinking they were
agreeing to different things. I notice, for example, that straw man
gets used by several people here in a way that I have trouble
following.

 What do you want, that we should all sign a petition?

I do not want anything in particular with regards to what list
subscribers believe.  We gets thrown around by several posters, and
it was unclear to me in several cases who was being referred to. I was
just asking questions.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:
...
We don't like straw men or trolls 

...

There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
did you determine that these people have that view?

You're not going to claim that all the lurkers are
the silent majority are you?  : )


No. I don't really follow you.


John--

I don't have current figures, but I'd guess the list
has around 200 subscribers, but only 50 regular posters.
(Welcome back, Jo Anne!)  We call the other 150 lurkers.

It looked like you were setting up to argue that the
we was only 50/200 of the list, or whatever.  Which
would not have been a particularly valid argument.

...

I do not want anything in particular with regards to what list
subscribers believe.  

...

I note you snipped the etiquette guidelines.  : )

---David

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

 I note you snipped the etiquette guidelines.  : )

I did snip it. I did read it.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread xponentrob

- Original Message - 
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 On 8/17/2009 9:12:11 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
 wrote:

  On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
  On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
  wrote:

   Your statement reads quite humorously.G

  That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
  rude and sincere. Feel free to give my posts the benefit of the
  doubt...

  Oh, you have received that particular benefit in spades.
  Still here, right?

 Are you implying that you would kill file me if you did not give my
 posts the benefit of the doubt?

 No.
 If certainty was high that you were just a troll you would be kicked from 
 the list.

 Perhaps there was a misunderstanding. I meant that you might give my
 posts the benefit of the doubt -- singular you. Rceeberger, that is.

For clarity: Robert Seeberger 
But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you pegged 
as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be.

 Or did you mean that you have access to the subscriber list and you,
 personally, would have removed my name if you did not give me the
 benefit of the doubt?

No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past booted 
people from the list as a group in most cases. There being no one person in 
particular one can suck up to in order to avoid consequences, it behooves 
everyone to be generally inoffensive. A few people have been removed, a 
couple of them long term listees and one was a moderator here. We definitely 
are not queasy when it comes to pulling the pin.

xponent
Wide Borders Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Trent Shipley


 No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past booted 
 people from the list as a group in most cases. There being no one person in 
 particular one can suck up to in order to avoid consequences, it behooves 
 everyone to be generally inoffensive. A few people have been removed, a 
 couple of them long term listees and one was a moderator here. We definitely 
 are not queasy when it comes to pulling the pin.
 
 xponent
 Wide Borders Maru
 rob

Who was the moderator who got booted?

Are you suggesting J.W. is near that limit?  I'm not nearly that ready
to take offense yet.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote:

 But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you pegged 
 as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be.

My apologies for not being as perceptive as you are.

 No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past booted 
 people from the list as a group in most cases.

So, is there is a vote of the 50 unnamed we people David referred to?

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread xponentrob

- Original Message - 
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 We are friends who have been with each other for many years.
 We can finish each others sentences.
 We are practically fucking married for crissakes.
 Brin-L and the Culture list are bicameral lobes of a humongous hive mind.
 We are gay telepaths whose thought balloons are filled with big pink fluffy 
 gothic fonts and we are all laughing at your sloppy desk.

 Do you see people objecting to the We?

 No. I do not see myself objecting to we either. Just asking questions.

 Anyway, that did not answer my question about how many list
 subscribers there are, and how many are covered by the we. 

No one particular cares how many lurkers there are. Officially, they are our 
readers since that is what they do on this list. Occasionally one perks up and 
adds something to the discussion and on rare occasions someone will contact 
someone else offlist. But for the most part We are the entertainment and they 
are our beloved audience even though the star of the show appears only 
infrequently.

Since no
 one is answering, I will  jump to a conclusion. Apologies if it is
 unwarranted. 

It is.

It seems to me that it is important to you to demonstrate
 to me that there are a number of people on this list who are like you
 and agree with you on most subjects and philosophies of life, and that
 I am not among that number. 

No, that is not important at all, because it is irrelevant to the subject at 
hand.
When it comes to the life of this list, most of the longtimers can easily speak 
for the group because we share a great deal of common history. It is 
pretty much the same as using we when speaking for Americans even though 
Americans are very diverse there is still considerable commonality. Happens all 
the time on this list in both situations.
As for you not being included in the we when any of us are responding to you, 
you are still quite new here, disagreeable, and prone to pushing buttons. We 
are trying to gently guide you away from culture shock and toward assimilation 
into the group in some way.

Perhaps it will simplify future
 discussions for me to assure you that yes, I am aware of that, and I
 am not trying to join your clique, start my own clique, or compete
 with your clique in any way. I am just asking questions.

We have no cliques.
But we do have Jedi Mind Tricks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI

xponent
Your Source For Pure Evil Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Trent Shipley

John Williams wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote:
 
 But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you 
 pegged as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be.
 
 My apologies for not being as perceptive as you are.
 
 No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past 
 booted people from the list as a group in most cases.
 
 So, is there is a vote of the 50 unnamed we people David referred to?
 

No. There is discussion about the excommunication and then the list
moderators perform the ceremony.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market


On 8/17/2009 11:03:58 PM, Trent Shipley (tship...@deru.com) wrote:
  No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past
 booted people from the list as a group in most cases. There being no one
 person in particular one can suck up to in order to avoid consequences, it
 behooves everyone to be generally inoffensive. A few people have been
 removed, a couple of them long term listees and one was a moderator here.
 We definitely are not queasy when it comes to pulling the pin.
 
  xponent
  Wide Borders Maru
  rob
 
 Who was the moderator who got booted?
 
Remember JVB?


 Are you suggesting J.W. is near that limit?  I'm not nearly that ready
 to take offense yet.
 
No, but anyone who is in a spat on this list should be aware of the potential. 
It keeps all of us on better behavior.
Personally, I'd rather leave a list of my own accord than be forcibly removed 
from one.


xponent
In Disgrace Maru
rob


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market


On 8/17/2009 11:04:59 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net
 wrote:
 
  But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you
 pegged as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be.
 
 
 My apologies for not being as perceptive as you are.
 
  No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past
 booted people from the list as a group in most cases.
 
 So, is there is a vote of the 50 unnamed we people David referred to?
 

In such cases, yes.


xponent
Democracy Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:15 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote:

 No one particular cares how many lurkers there are.

I care, that is why I asked.

 It is pretty much the same as using we when speaking for Americans even 
 though Americans are very diverse there is still considerable commonality.

Usually when I hear someone say something like that, I ask for
clarification, since the meaning is ambiguous.

We are trying to gently guide you away from culture shock and toward 
assimilation into the group in some way.

You are of course free to try, but as I said, I have no interest in
joining your mysterious we clique.

 We have no cliques.

We (not we) will just have to disagree about that, then.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-17 Thread Doug Pensinger

On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:

 It is interesting what some people find rude which does not seem rude
 to others. I suspect that a neutral observer would look at my posts
 during the last few weeks and judge that they are not at all rude. I
 have been asking some uncomfortable questions, but not making any
 obviously rude remarks.

 The interesting thing is that the data do not support the claim that
 my posts make people less likely to communicate here. Rather, just the
 opposite. If you look at the volume of non-JW posts as a function of
 JW-posts to this list, there is a remarkably large positive
 correlation.

 Anyone listen to Bill Maher? I disagree with a lot of what he says,
 but he is entertaining. He speaks his mind, and is not afraid to
 discuss uncomfortable issues. I have never found him rude, but I
 suspect others may have a different opinion. To each his own. Here's
 an example of an uncomfortable issue that he discusses:


 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-smart-president_b_253996.html


He can be a little rude at times, but I watch him every week and probably
agree with him more often than you.

On the Americans are stupid issue, I would agree somewhat, but I would use
the terms ignorant and/or intellectualy lazy rather than stupid.

Have you seen Religulous?

Doug
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread John Williams

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 It is worth noting that this guy is one of the most respected members on 
 this list

Decide that with a vote, did you?

He seems rather a hot-head to me. I was going to ask him to explain
what set him off, but evidently he would rather call me names and then
stalk off then discuss it.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Rceeberger


On 8/16/2009 1:09:53 AM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
 On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
 wrote:
 
  It is worth noting that this guy is one of the most respected members
 on this list
 
 Decide that with a vote, did you?

One would have to be quite dense to not notice after over a decade on the list. 
Once again, your default position is to assume that others are stupid.
Do you actually think your feeble attempts to place others in a defensive 
position are not recognized for what they are?

 
 He seems rather a hot-head to me.

Normally Charlie is level headed and even tempered. Perhaps it was just an off 
day.

 I was going to ask him to explain
 what set him off, but evidently he would rather call me names and then
 stalk off then discuss it.

Normally, that would be my gig.


xponent
The Subversive Maru
rob

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Doug Pensinger

Dan  wrote:


 One thing to remember about experimentation:  99.99% of experiments fail;



What's the criteria for success?  An experimental form of governance (or
some aspect of governance) may not yield a completely successful law or
system of laws, but I'm relatively certain that important knowledge can be
gleaned from any well designed experiment forming the basis for further
experimentation and eventually a more successful law or system.


 they do not achieve the goals they set out to achieve.  In physics,
 theorists have come up with tens if not hundreds of thousands of wrong
 theories.  Shelly Glashow, who I mentioned, said he came up with 5 new
 theories per day.  Only one of his really paid off...and it paid off big.
 Most experiments in physics don’t find the new and exciting thing they are
 looking for; they just find that the 2 sigma signal they spent 2 years
 getting more data on disappear.


I'm not sure physics experiments where there is generally one right answer
and thousands of wrong ones are comparable to social experiments where there
is seldom one correct answer and often many acceptable solutions to a
problem.  Furthermore, a correct answer in physics will remain correct
whereas a social system is always fluctuating not only from year to year but
from one location to the next.

Economic studies have shown that, for average entrepreneurs, the business
 ends up failing and costing money. We are fortunate that we have these
 folks, because every once in a while they come up with something that
 _really_ benefits everyone.  But, even averaging the winners in, the
 average person taking a risk on a new business loses money.


Am I wrong in guessing that very few new businesses are experimental


 Finally, we do have experimentation in government.  California and Texas
 have very different governments; and very different sets of problems.
 California is wining the race down to failure, it seems.because Texas
 doesn't have much of a housing problem and is not about to go bankrupt.


I don't think that this is an experiment in any useful sense of the word.


 You may argue that these are minimalistic changes; and they are.


I would argue that they are apples and oranges.

Doug
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread John Williams

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

 One would have to be quite dense to not notice after over a decade on the 
 list.
 Once again, your default position is to assume that others are stupid.
 Do you actually think your feeble attempts to place others in a defensive 
 position are not recognized for what they are?

I'm sorry that you feel that way. I did not say and I do not think you
are stupid. I was just curious about this respect ranking. Do you rank
above or below Mr. FUCK YOU in respect on this list? Is this respect
ranking secret, or can anyone view it?

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Doug Pensinger

Charlie  wrote:


 I do occasionally blow up. Once when I was accused of racism, once when a
 private discussion I'd had with someone was forwarded to the list, and ISTR
 Nick and I talking completely at cross-purposes. I was really annoyed on
 Friday night, partly 'cause I'd got home after drinking with a couple of
 friends in the pub, and an acquaintance of one of them was spouting
 anti-vaccination lunacy. And when I asked a couple of simple questions, I
 received the reply Oh, so you're science. That figures.


There's no arguing with simpletons like that.  And we seem to have more nut
cases than ever before.  Birthers???  Ay Yi Yi.

Doug
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Charlie Bell



On 16/08/2009, at 5:46 PM, Doug Pensinger wrote:


Charlie  wrote:

I do occasionally blow up. Once when I was accused of racism, once  
when a private discussion I'd had with someone was forwarded to the  
list, and ISTR Nick and I talking completely at cross-purposes. I  
was really annoyed on Friday night, partly 'cause I'd got home after  
drinking with a couple of friends in the pub, and an acquaintance of  
one of them was spouting anti-vaccination lunacy. And when I asked a  
couple of simple questions, I received the reply Oh, so you're  
science. That figures.


There's no arguing with simpletons like that.  And we seem to have  
more nut cases than ever before.  Birthers???  Ay Yi Yi.


Uh-huh. Thing is, the guy wasn't thick, he was just gullible. He'd  
read the crap in a couple of newspapers, and a few websites, like the  
toss Jenny McCarthy spews out, along with the convincing to the  
uninitiated stuff written by a few medics and prominent journos such  
as RFKjr (and it pains me that the otherwise reasonably sensible  
Huffington Post has a science section populated by woomeisters).


But like most of these subjects, it takes longer to explain why stuff  
is wrong than to repeat the wrongness (the so-called Gish Gallop works  
in all areas of woo and conspiracy).


So there I am saying but if it's mercury in Thimerosal that causes  
autism, why haven't rates of new autism diagnosis dropped now that  
Thimerosal isn't in UK vaccines and vaccination rates have dropped?  
while I'm getting a new point about rabies vaccine to deflect. So I  
give up. Sigh.


Oh, and the population thing came up too. Yay.

Charlie.
However, The Beer Was Very Very Good Maru

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread dsummersmi...@comcast.net

Rob wrote:

 
LOL.I'm the cellar dweller!

Yea, that's true, but we know why.  That's where all the best list wines
are kept.

Dan M. 


mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Ronn! Blankenship


At 10:15 AM Sunday 8/16/2009, David Hobby wrote:

John Williams wrote:

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:

One would have to be quite dense to not notice after over a decade 
on the list.

Once again, your default position is to assume that others are stupid.
Do you actually think your feeble attempts to place others in a 
defensive position are not recognized for what they are?

I'm sorry that you feel that way. I did not say and I do not think you
are stupid. I was just curious about this respect ranking. Do you rank
above or below Mr. FUCK YOU in respect on this list? Is this respect
ranking secret, or can anyone view it?


John--

Hi.  Seriously, are you trolling, or just
dense?  : )  We rank respect the way most communities
do--completely informally.  Everyone has their own
sense of who they respect, and we don't ever need to
pool them to produce a hierarchy.

Yes, Charlie is someone I respect.  His posts are
thoughtful, and when he argues, he does it in a fair
and constructive way.

---David

Hint, hint, Maru




FWIW the _Atlantic_ article is well worth reading carefully.  I've 
already forwarded the link with my recommendation to a couple of 
other lists, and got a couple of comments back.  Unfortunately, 
that's about exhausted my energy for this morning, so I am going back 
to bed for awhile.



I might also pass along this link to another first-person account 
about the costs of the current system I came across a couple of days ago:


http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1916193,00.html


. . . ronn!  :)



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread dsummersmi...@comcast.net



FWIW the _Atlantic_ article is well worth reading carefully.  I've 
already forwarded the link with my recommendation to a couple of 
other lists, and got a couple of comments back.  

The problems the article lists are real; I won't argue that the present
system is really messed up.  However, the solution of having high
deductables has been tried; and the results are counterprodutive.  People
under those conditions eschew paying for services until they reach crisis
porportions, then they go in. They gamble that things will get better on
their own, and if they lose, they only risk their deductable.

Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single
silver bullet for this problem.  But, we do know things can be better,
because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per
person with worse than average results.

FWIW, I've discussed this with numerous professionals (including my
brother-in-law who is one of the few doctors who take Medicaid paitients
and patients who can pay only part of their bill, a friend who was the
chief administrator of a hospital ranked one of the 100 best in the US,
before she went on to an even better hospital, and others who develop new
products and are frustrated with how hard it is to get them past
regulations and into use.

Ironically, one of the things that John is ralling about has become the
rallying cry for the anti-government groups: any attempt to decrease the
spending of hundreds of thousands on the last month of life so mom or dad
could painfully exist the world in four weeks insteasd of four days.  Thank
God my sister was a hospice nurse, so we knew enough to discuss this and
let dad die when gangrine formed in his legs at 90 when his circulation
dropped. 

We could have had an expensive painful amputation, used extrodinary
measures, and he would have lived a couple more years in agony and
dementia.  We chose to let him die.  Counseling on this is not a death
panel, and Congressmen villifying this after promoting it is some of the
worst bad faith I remember in politics.

Dan M. 


mail2web.com  Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft®
Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread John Williams

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

 Hi.  Seriously, are you trolling, or just
 dense?  : )  We rank respect the way most communities
 do--completely informally.

Not trolling. Possibly dense. There is that reference to we again,
which is what led me to believe that there was some pooled resource
that was being referenced.

  Everyone has their own
 sense of who they respect, and we don't ever need to
 pool them to produce a hierarchy.

That is what I was wondering about.

 Yes, Charlie is someone I respect.  His posts are
 thoughtful, and when he argues, he does it in a fair
 and constructive way.

So, you consider his post to me thoughtful, constructive, and worthy of respect?

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

...

Yes, Charlie is someone I respect.  His posts are
thoughtful, and when he argues, he does it in a fair
and constructive way.


So, you consider his post to me thoughtful, constructive, and worthy of respect?


That one, not so much.  But I tend to take a running
average.  His is still better than yours.  : )

---David

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Andrew Crystall

On 15 Aug 2009 at 20:00, John Williams wrote:

 On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 7:51 PM,
 dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
 
  That's a true statementbut the problem with failure with radically new
  government is that the failures are horrid: (e.g. the French Revolution,
  the Cultural Revolution, Pot Pol).
 
 Which suggests that we need lots of very small scale experiments, so
 failures are small.

Islands. Huxley's idea :)

AndrewC

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Trent Shipley


 Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single
 silver bullet for this problem.  But, we do know things can be better,
 because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per
 person with worse than average results.

I have heard, but have been too lazy to confirm, that there is a GDP per
capita health care spending curve, and as a very affluent country the
USA is almost right where it should be on that predictive model.  What
is whacked is that relative to our per capita spending (which meet
expectations) we get crappy *public* health results.

So health care savings probably are not in the works--unless we move off
the health care spending / per capita income curve.

We can improve typical health care outcomes, but that will produce a lot
of health care reform losers.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Andrew Crystall

On 16 Aug 2009 at 11:45, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 
 
 FWIW the _Atlantic_ article is well worth reading carefully.  I've 
 already forwarded the link with my recommendation to a couple of 
 other lists, and got a couple of comments back.  
 
 The problems the article lists are real; I won't argue that the present
 system is really messed up.  However, the solution of having high
 deductables has been tried; and the results are counterprodutive.  People
 under those conditions eschew paying for services until they reach crisis
 porportions, then they go in. They gamble that things will get better on
 their own, and if they lose, they only risk their deductable.

Exactly!

Except very often, if they lose, they have problems which will 
allways plague them or at the least will take longer and be more 
difficult to cure.

 before she went on to an even better hospital, and others who develop new
 products and are frustrated with how hard it is to get them past
 regulations and into use.

To be fair, that problem is in no way limited to America.

AndrewC

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread Trent Shipley

Trent Shipley wrote:
Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single
silver bullet for this problem. But, we do know things can be better,
because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per
person with worse than average results.

I have heard, but have been too lazy to confirm, that there is a GDP per
capita health care spending curve, and as a very affluent country the
USA is almost right where it should be on that predictive model. What
is whacked is that relative to our per capita spending (which meet
expectations) we get crappy *public* health results.

So health care savings probably are not in the works--unless we move off
the health care spending / per capita income curve.

We can improve typical health care outcomes, but that will produce a lot
of health care reform losers.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/why-does-us-health-care-cost-so-much-part-i/?apage=2

An additional insight from the graph, however, is that even after
adjustment for differences in G.D.P. per capita, the United States in
2006 spent $1,895 more on health care than would have been predicted
after such an adjustment. If G.D.P. per capita were the only factor
driving the difference between United States health spending and that of
other nations, the United States would be expected to have spent an
average of only $4,819 per capita on health care rather than the $6,714
it actually spent.

Health-services researchers call the difference between these numbers,
here $1,895, “excess spending.” That term, however, is not meant to
convey “excessive spending,” but merely a difference driven by factors
other than G.D.P. per capita. Prominent among these other factors are:

1 trent:bad/. higher prices for the same health care goods and
services than are paid in other countries for the same goods and services;

2 trent:bad/. significantly higher administrative overhead costs
than are incurred in other countries with simpler health-insurance systems;

3 trent:good/. more widespread use of high-cost, high-tech
equipment and procedures than are used in other countries;

4 trent:/good. higher treatment costs triggered by our uniquely
American tort laws, which in the context of medicine can lead to
“defensive medicine” — that is, the application of tests and procedures
mainly as a defense against possible malpractice litigation, rather than
as a clinical imperative.

There are three other explanations that are widely — but erroneously —
thought among non-experts to be cost drivers in the American health
spending. To wit:

1. that the aging of our population drives health spending

2. that we get better quality from our health system than do other
nations, and

3. that we get better health outcomes from our system

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-16 Thread dsummersmi...@comcast.net

Original Message:
-
From: Trent Shipley tship...@deru.com
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 15:19:16 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

 Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single
 silver bullet for this problem.  But, we do know things can be better,
 because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per
 person with worse than average results.

I have heard, but have been too lazy to confirm, that there is a GDP per
capita health care spending curve, and as a very affluent country the
USA is almost right where it should be on that predictive model.  

Well, the curve would have to be a specially shaped curve for that to be
true. In 2 minutes I found:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004ra
nk.html

and

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004ra
nk.html

Note how Norway per capita GDP is 20% higher than that of the US, yet it's
percentage of GDP spending on health care is only 58%. 

Looking further we see that it's infant mortality rate is just of half of
the US's,

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

 and its life expectency is 19th in the world compared to the US's 45th

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

I've been to Norway many times and know a number of Norwegians.  It's
government is one of the more socialistic governments in Europe and is far
more intrusive in the ecconomy than the US's.  

I can't do a scatter plot here, but, if you did a polynomial fit that
predicted this, you would need as many orders as data points. :-) 

So, with only 5 minutes of work, I have pulled up data falsifying this
propaganda.

Dan M. 

Dan M. 

mail2web.com  What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you?
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-15 Thread dsummersmi...@comcast.net


The most enjoyable discussions for me involve new ideas or points of view
that I have not encountered before. People interested in SF seem to be
more likely to have unique ideas than people who are not SF fans. Not
that there isn't a lot of noise of conventional ideas mixed
in...anyway, I write about my points of view, and hopefully they are
interesting to some, and I hope others will do the same.


Well, that explains a  lot.  There are some _very_ old ideas that I accept
(e.g. a good position needs logical consistency) that I see as being the
cause of us going in circles. For what it's worth, virtually nothing you've
written has been new to me.  I've seen new combinations, but virtually all
of them involve, IMHO, contradictions that are not accepted by the author. 
My humble opinion is that, with most internet discussions  Ecclesiastes 1:9
is right on target.

The value of these discussions, IMHO, is when both parties agree to accept
ground rules of logical arguement and data.  I realize that my request for
that has been called by you trying to impose my will on others.  But, if
you look at where actual progress has been made (e.g. in science), that has
always been present. 

Thanks for giving me information that helps me figure out from where you
are writing.  I am very much oblidged for you doing this.  I just find it
amusing how different your view and Shelly Glashow's views are concerning
the vetting of new ideas(he was one of 3 people who developed the standard
model of physics).

Dan M. 

Dan M. 





myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft® Windows® and Linux web and application
hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-15 Thread Chris Frandsen



On Aug 13, 2009, at 11:10 PM, John Williams wrote:


What ever gave you the idea that I want things to work out neatly?
Messy, quirky, diverse, surprising, unpredictable, they're all good
(as long as coercion is minimal).


I suspect that is your objective here on the list as well. Charlie may  
have a point!


I do agree that there is little experimentation going on right now in  
government.  One of the best reasons for getting humanity out into  
space is to allow that experimentation to begin again. Though I expect  
that 99% of the time humanity will just reinvent the wheel.  Today all  
that experimenting is occurring in science and fantasy fiction and  
more and more in virtual computer generated worlds.  I  fear that is  
where we, humanity, will end our run, experimenting in virtual worlds  
as the real universe swallows us up and spits us out. Perhaps if we  
are luck it will keep a few mega servers around running our virtual  
worlds as a form of zoo.


learner

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-15 Thread dsummersmi...@comcast.net


I do agree that there is little experimentation going on right now in  
government.  One of the best reasons for getting humanity out into  
space is to allow that experimentation to begin again. 

One thing to remember about experimentation:  99.99% of experiments fail;
they do not achieve the goals they set out to achieve.  In physics,
theorists have come up with tens if not hundreds of thousands of wrong
theories.  Shelly Glashow, who I mentioned, said he came up with 5 new
theories per day.  Only one of his really paid off...and it paid off big. 
Most experiments in physics dont find the new and exciting thing they are
looking for; they just find that the 2 sigma signal they spent 2 years
getting more data on disappear.

Economic studies have shown that, for average entrepreneurs, the business
ends up failing and costing money. We are fortunate that we have these
folks, because every once in a while they come up with something that
_really_ benefits everyone.  But, even averaging the winners in, the
average person taking a risk on a new business loses money.

Finally, we do have experimentation in government.  California and Texas
have very different governments; and very different sets of problems. 
California is wining the race down to failure, it seems.because Texas
doesn't have much of a housing problem and is not about to go bankrupt.

You may argue that these are minimalistic changes; and they are.  But big
changes work better in fiction than in fact.  The American Republic stands
almost uniquely as a radically new form of government that worked.  (Its
not the only working form of representative government, of course, but the
other representative governments changed to something close to 1 man 1 vote
after the US was shown to survive the Civil War.)


Dan M.



myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft® Windows® and Linux web and application
hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-15 Thread John Williams

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 7:26 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
 One thing to remember about experimentation:  99.99% of experiments fail;

Which suggests we need a lot of experiments to get successes!

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-15 Thread John Williams

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Chris Frandsenlear...@mac.com wrote:

 I do agree that there is little experimentation going on right now in
 government.  One of the best reasons for getting humanity out into space is
 to allow that experimentation to begin again.

It does seem like there is a lot more latitude for innovation when
there is a new frontier being explored and settled. Unfortunately, the
timescale involved in opening up space colonies or colonization of
other planets is so long that I do not think I have much chance of
seeing it.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-15 Thread John Williams

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 7:51 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 That's a true statementbut the problem with failure with radically new
 government is that the failures are horrid: (e.g. the French Revolution,
 the Cultural Revolution, Pot Pol).

Which suggests that we need lots of very small scale experiments, so
failures are small.

 The US was lucky in that it was a very
 controlled experiment.  At this point, I don't think we should just roll
 the dice, but use the states as labs to test new ideas in government.

States are still too large for most of the experiments, I think. Even
many cities are too large. Also, I think dividing things
geographically is often counter to the goals of many experiments we
might devise.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-14 Thread Charlie Bell



On 14/08/2009, at 1:43 PM, John Williams wrote:

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Chris Frandsenlear...@mac.com  
wrote:


Okay. However if a corporation or a family group infringes on the  
health of
my family by polluting a stream I drink from doesn't it become my  
business

? How you personally handle such a situation?


I would not handle that personally. I think rules about emissions and
waste, and enforcement of those rules, is a valid government function.


And yet, when I suggested not long after you arrived in this mailing  
list, that regulation on pollution was a valid government function,  
you SCOFFED ME. So you can't even keep your own shit straight.


So, frankly, and very rarely for me, breaking the rule of IAAMOAC:  
FUCK YOU.


You're a troll AT BEST, and frankly, I think you're the worst kind of  
tosser. Your principles apply only when they don't actually affect you.


Goodbye.

*plonk*

Charlie.
Very Rare Killfile Maru

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:50 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:


I wasn't clear. They don't understand enough about what is being regulated
to enforce the laws.  The laws are very clear to me; its how one interprets
these clear laws in the light of facts that are far too complex for the
judge to understand.


Then they are poorly written laws. Laws should be kept to a minimum,
and when absolutely necessary, should be written in a way that makes
them as easy as possible to understand and enforce.

...

John--

I'd argue that the patent laws are not that poorly
written, the problem is that there's latitude in
their interpretation.  I think that may be an
unavoidable problem.

Why don't you attempt to outline a system of patent
laws that would NOT have latitude in their interpretation?
There are of course trivial examples, such as have no
patents, ever.  I believe that's worse than the present
system.

You keep going on about poorly written laws--let's
see if you can produce alternatives.  (Or do it for some
other system of laws.  Except the US income tax code--
I'll believe that could be radically simplified.)

---David

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Bruce Bostwick


On Aug 12, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Dan M wrote:

No, that is the fault of the laws as written.  The problem with the  
court
system is that they do not understand enough to enforce the laws as  
written.


There is also the problem of laws written by people who often fail to  
anticipate the unintended consequences of the laws they write,  
compounded by the fact that people still don't approach legislation  
the way they do software design and testing.


I still think version control, requirements management, and user  
acceptance testing have very definite roles to play in the development  
of legislation, and I'd still like to see alpha and beta level testing  
with bug tracking, or a very close analogue, employed in the rollout  
of new legislation.  But I'm kind of a voice in the wilderness on that  
one ..


Heard from a flight instructor:
The only dumb question is the one you DID NOT ask, resulting in my  
going out and having to identify your bits and pieces in the midst of  
torn and twisted metal.




___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread David Hobby


Bruce Bostwick wrote:

On Aug 12, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Dan M wrote:


No, that is the fault of the laws as written.  The problem with the court
system is that they do not understand enough to enforce the laws as 
written.


There is also the problem of laws written by people who often fail to 
anticipate the unintended consequences of the laws they write, 
compounded by the fact that people still don't approach legislation the 
way they do software design and testing.


I still think version control, requirements management, and user 
acceptance testing have very definite roles to play in the development 
of legislation, and I'd still like to see alpha and beta level testing 
with bug tracking, or a very close analogue, employed in the rollout of 
new legislation.  But I'm kind of a voice in the wilderness on that one ..


Bruce--

Hi.  That's a clever idea.  Some would say that
the alpha and beta testing should be done in
individual states, and then the final roll out
be done at the Federal level.

---David

No officer, I didn't subscribe to that law.
It's still in beta.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Lance A. Brown

Bruce Bostwick wrote:
 I still think version control, requirements management, and user
 acceptance testing have very definite roles to play in the development
 of legislation, and I'd still like to see alpha and beta level testing
 with bug tracking, or a very close analogue, employed in the rollout of
 new legislation.  But I'm kind of a voice in the wilderness on that one ..

How the hell would you alpha test new legislation?  It's not like you
can set up a test lab for legislation.  I'm genuinely curious.

--[Lance]

-- 
 GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9
 CACert.org Assurer

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Chris Frandsen


Wow, a mention of science fiction!  On this list of all places:-)

The first sci fi read to me was Heinlein's Have Spacesuit, Will Travel  
and Starship Troopers was almost a life guide. I did go to West Point  
and believe in government service. I think everyone should do at least  
18 months in some form of service. I was a Goldwater Republican for  
many years with a belief in limited federal government.  However life  
experience has changed my attitude about many things.


John, obviously you believe that individuals are responsible for  
themselves and their families, yes?
Now what is your attitude towards passing your wealth on to family  
members?


Corporations today have rights as corporate citizens that you and I do  
not have, one of which is with regards to national borders.  As a  
libertarian , what is your position on corporations and their wealth?


I am interested in the answers if you have a moment

learner

On Aug 12, 2009, at 12:56 PM, John Williams wrote:


By the way, as I've mentioned before, I have not read any of Ayn
Rand's novels. If you want to discuss a SF novel with libertarian
ideas, may I suggest Heinlein's Moon is a Harsh Mistress? And I don't
mean to suggest that as a libertarian guidebook or anything (it is
rather simplistic), but it does bring up some interesting ideas that
might be worth discussing on a SF forum. For example, there is an
interesting court / justice system which may be workable on a small
scale, but I do not see how it could be scaled up beyond a community
level.





___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Alberto Monteiro

Bruce Bostwick quoted:
 
 Heard from a flight instructor:
 The only dumb question is the one you DID NOT ask, resulting in my  
 going out and having to identify your bits and pieces in the midst 
 of  torn and twisted metal.
 
This seems like a Heinlein quote to me.

Alberto Monteiro the lurker


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Andrew Crystall

On 12 Aug 2009 at 10:56, John Williams wrote:

 On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Dan Mdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
 
  John, would you agree that some sort of community system, like the courts,
  are necessary to resolve disputes over true ownership of property,
  contracts, and the like?
 
 Necessary, no, I can imagine alternatives that might be practical, at
 least on a small scale. But desirable, yes, I think it is a good idea
 to have some sort of government justice system to settle contractual
 and legal disagreements. I've never met anyone who thinks that a free
 market means total anarchy. A free market simply means that people are
 free to enter into agreements with others. If these agreements are
 formalized into a contract, then it is a good idea to have some way --
 that all parties agree is fair -- to enforce the contract. I think a

The missing element is an easy to to assure that contracts are 
equitable. That is, there is no system of templates and checks (think 
legal AI on tap) to check the contacts you'd enter into, when you say 
buy some software.

If the contracts are visible (maybe even a RFID tag on the software 
box, to continue that example) and examinable before purchase, that 
you be asked if you agree with the terms before purchase and so on.. 
well, then you might have a point.

(And indeed on this particular point I'd agree, including agreements 
between people to do things which would otherwise be on shaky legal 
grounds)

However, that system /must/ be fully in place (and it involves, among 
other things, proper identity authentication services (which to me 
/is/ a proper government function, on-tap legal AI's and more) /and/ 
I do not in any way see it excluding the role of government and 
taxation in other areas.

AndrewC

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Charlie Bell



On 14/08/2009, at 1:53 AM, Lance A. Brown wrote:


Bruce Bostwick wrote:

I still think version control, requirements management, and user
acceptance testing have very definite roles to play in the  
development
of legislation, and I'd still like to see alpha and beta level  
testing
with bug tracking, or a very close analogue, employed in the  
rollout of
new legislation.  But I'm kind of a voice in the wilderness on that  
one ..


How the hell would you alpha test new legislation?  It's not like you
can set up a test lab for legislation.  I'm genuinely curious.


It's called Europe.

Charlie.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Chris Frandsenlear...@mac.com wrote:

 Now what is your attitude towards passing your wealth on to family members?

None of my business, unless it is my wealth. Right now, most of my
estate is slated to go to a couple charities I favor. I doubt I will
change that significantly (possibly the specific charities may change,
depending on how many years I have left and what the future
brings...).

 Corporations today have rights as corporate citizens that you and I do not
 have, one of which is with regards to national borders.  As a libertarian ,
 what is your position on corporations and their wealth?

Please don't ask me questions that begin as a ...I won't answer
them in the future. I am John. As John, my position on corporations
and their wealth is, none of my business (unless of course I am an
owner or partner).

As for my position on national borders, I am against them. Let
everybody in, or out, or make in and out meaningless.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 4:36 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

 I'd argue that the patent laws are not that poorly
 written, the problem is that there's latitude in
 their interpretation.  I think that may be an
 unavoidable problem.

Are you including the patents themselves in patent laws? Because I
think that is the real problem in the system. Other than the existence
of the system, which I agree, is full of unavoidable problems.

 Why don't you attempt to outline a system of patent
 laws that would NOT have latitude in their interpretation?
 There are of course trivial examples, such as have no
 patents, ever.  I believe that's worse than the present
 system.

You know we disagree on that, right? I stated my belief earlier.
Obviously, I don't think that is an efficient use of my time. Short of
eliminating the system all together, which I think is unlikely to
happen, then the best thing that could happen is that the number of
patents granted by drastically reduced. The vast majority of the
patents granted are not beneficial to anyone but the patent-holder.
The only collective benefit of the patent system is to disseminate
information that might otherwise have been kept secret. Only patents
consistent with that criterion should be granted. And that is a small
fraction of the ones that currently are granted.

 You keep going on about poorly written laws--let's
 see if you can produce alternatives.

I also mentioned too many laws. That is the first problem to attack.
If the number were drastically reduced, then perhaps there would be
more resources available to carefully craft the remaining laws. Bruce
and I have similar views on that -- testing is required. I'd like to
see something along the lines of letting people vote to choose which
system of laws they are subject to -- instead of electing a politician
where your vote might not count, your vote chooses for certain what
you get (of course, as a practical matter this is only applicable to a
subset of total laws).

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread Chris Frandsen



On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:29 PM, John Williams wrote:

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Chris Frandsenlear...@mac.com  
wrote:


Now what is your attitude towards passing your wealth on to family  
members?


None of my business, unless it is my wealth. Right now, most of my
estate is slated to go to a couple charities I favor. I doubt I will
change that significantly (possibly the specific charities may change,
depending on how many years I have left and what the future
brings...).


I am sorry I did not mean you specifically.  However based on your  
response below I will not ask you to suggest solutions for other  
people again.  I struggle with this question.  I raised my family  
without benefit of inherited wealth, would I have worked as hard if I  
had inherited money? Have I earned my way? What do I owe my  
forefathers and my nation for the safety and security that I and my  
family have enjoyed for all my years?Now  my parents have left me some  
wealth for which I am very grateful as I grow older.  How much should  
be returned to the common weal?  Our system of government will answer  
some of this partiular question for me and I accept that.


Corporations today have rights as corporate citizens that you and I  
do not
have, one of which is with regards to national borders.  As a  
libertarian ,

what is your position on corporations and their wealth?


Please don't ask me questions that begin as a ...I won't answer
them in the future. I am John.
I  apologize. Absolutely and with no hesitation. I will not generalize  
or label you again as anything but John



As John, my position on corporations
and their wealth is, none of my business (unless of course I am an
owner or partner).

Okay. However if a corporation or a family group infringes on the  
health of my family by polluting a stream I drink from doesn't it  
become my business ? How you personally handle such a situation?

I

As for my position on national borders, I am against them. Let
everybody in, or out, or make in and out meaningless.


Impressive position. Actually the United States of America has done  
this pretty well with state borders. I personally believe that to do  
this on a world wide scale with our present population levels is not  
tenable.  From my understanding of historical and archeological  
records humans have always tended to aggregate together.  In today's  
environment of competition for resources such aggregates must  have  
considerable power and wealth to secure sufficient resources.  The US  
has been blessed with an abundance of natural resources and for the  
most part of the last two centuries our territorial boundaries have  
provided security from other such aggregations. However the wealth  
that this nation and its citizens have enjoyed since WWII largerly  
resulted from the world beating a path to our door for education,  
manufactured products and medical care.  I will also grant you that  
some groups have been overrun and/or over ruled by our present system  
of government.  It still occurs today but I believe our constitution  
and this nation state has been the best solution that mankind has ever  
developed to provide safety and security to the majority of its  
citizens.


John, no answer is required but I wonder why you expend time and  
effort writing to this list if you are not trying to influence our  
thinking.


learner


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-13 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 4:36 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:


I'd argue that the patent laws are not that poorly
written, the problem is that there's latitude in
their interpretation.  I think that may be an
unavoidable problem.


Are you including the patents themselves in patent laws? Because I
think that is the real problem in the system. Other than the existence
of the system, which I agree, is full of unavoidable problems.


Why don't you attempt to outline a system of patent
laws that would NOT have latitude in their interpretation?
There are of course trivial examples, such as have no
patents, ever.  I believe that's worse than the present
system.


You know we disagree on that, right? I stated my belief earlier.
Obviously, I don't think that is an efficient use of my time. Short of
eliminating the system all together, which I think is unlikely to
happen, then the best thing that could happen is that the number of
patents granted by drastically reduced. The vast majority of the
patents granted are not beneficial to anyone but the patent-holder.
The only collective benefit of the patent system is to disseminate
information that might otherwise have been kept secret. Only patents
consistent with that criterion should be granted. And that is a small
fraction of the ones that currently are granted.


John--

I'd like you to pick one area pretty much of your
choice, and have a detailed discussion of how your
ideas would work in practice.  You may find that
things won't work out as neatly as you hoped.

I agree, there have been WAY too many US patents
granted, particularly recently.  To pick a famous
one, Amazon should never have been granted a patent
on one-click ordering.  There really wasn't anything
new there.

I doubt that would otherwise have been kept secret
is going to be a useful criterion for when a patent
should be granted.  How do you propose to tell when
that's the case?


You keep going on about poorly written laws--let's
see if you can produce alternatives.


I also mentioned too many laws. That is the first problem to attack.
If the number were drastically reduced, then perhaps there would be
more resources available to carefully craft the remaining laws. Bruce
and I have similar views on that -- testing is required. I'd like to
see something along the lines of letting people vote to choose which
system of laws they are subject to -- instead of electing a politician
where your vote might not count, your vote chooses for certain what
you get (of course, as a practical matter this is only applicable to a
subset of total laws).


O.K., please give me an example of ONE well-written law,
just so I know what you mean.

As for having people pick the laws they'd be under,
wouldn't that be a huge mess?  Would the police be
enforcing the laws, and have to check which system
people were under before ticketing/arresting them?
Could you be more specific about what you have in
mind?

---David


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:50 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

 I doubt that would otherwise have been kept secret
 is going to be a useful criterion for when a patent
 should be granted.  How do you propose to tell when
 that's the case?

Easily, when you look at the reverse: when would it obviously NOT be
kept secret. You gave one example. Unfortunately, there are many in
the patent system.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Chris Frandsenlear...@mac.com wrote:

 Okay. However if a corporation or a family group infringes on the health of
 my family by polluting a stream I drink from doesn't it become my business
 ? How you personally handle such a situation?

I would not handle that personally. I think rules about emissions and
waste, and enforcement of those rules, is a valid government function.

 John, no answer is required but I wonder why you expend time and effort
 writing to this list if you are not trying to influence our thinking.

Did I miss something? This seems like a non-sequitur.

Anyway, I would not say that I am trying to influence other people's
thinking, nor am I NOT trying to influence.  Neither is a goal. The
most enjoyable discussions for me involve new ideas or points of view
that I have not encountered before. People interested in SF seem to be
more likely to have unique ideas than people who are not SF fans. Not
that there isn't a lot of noise of conventional ideas mixed
in...anyway, I write about my points of view, and hopefully they are
interesting to some, and I hope others will do the same.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-12 Thread Dan M



Ever since I was given Atlas Shrugged to read by a girlfriend in 1975,
I've been discussing the wonders of free markets with objectivists, radical
libertarians and the like.  When asked how disputes over contracts,
ownership, and the like were resolved, all agreed that a governmental court
system was necessary.

John, would you agree that some sort of community system, like the courts,
are necessary to resolve disputes over true ownership of property,
contracts, and the like?

Dan M.



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Dan Mdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 John, would you agree that some sort of community system, like the courts,
 are necessary to resolve disputes over true ownership of property,
 contracts, and the like?

Necessary, no, I can imagine alternatives that might be practical, at
least on a small scale. But desirable, yes, I think it is a good idea
to have some sort of government justice system to settle contractual
and legal disagreements. I've never met anyone who thinks that a free
market means total anarchy. A free market simply means that people are
free to enter into agreements with others. If these agreements are
formalized into a contract, then it is a good idea to have some way --
that all parties agree is fair -- to enforce the contract. I think a
government controlled enforcement system is a good idea, since I
suspect that any privately run enforcement system would be more likely
to be suborned than a government controlled system.

It is difficult for me to generalize on this subject, but I'll give it
a shot (you probably should not try to read too much into this).
Government is a good idea when its purpose is to preserve freedom
(prevent loss of freedom) by those who would directly harm or coerce
others. So, a court system is generally a good idea, as is a police
force, and a defensive military force. Of course, these could (and in
certain historical cases did) go horribly wrong, but I think that it
is less likely to go wrong than the alternatives.

By the way, as I've mentioned before, I have not read any of Ayn
Rand's novels. If you want to discuss a SF novel with libertarian
ideas, may I suggest Heinlein's Moon is a Harsh Mistress? And I don't
mean to suggest that as a libertarian guidebook or anything (it is
rather simplistic), but it does bring up some interesting ideas that
might be worth discussing on a SF forum. For example, there is an
interesting court / justice system which may be workable on a small
scale, but I do not see how it could be scaled up beyond a community
level.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

Original Message:
-
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:56:01 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Dan Mdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 John, would you agree that some sort of community system, like the
courts,
 are necessary to resolve disputes over true ownership of property,
 contracts, and the like?

Necessary, no, I can imagine alternatives that might be practical, at
least on a small scale. But desirable, yes, I think it is a good idea
to have some sort of government justice system to settle contractual
and legal disagreements. I've never met anyone who thinks that a free
market means total anarchy. A free market simply means that people are
free to enter into agreements with others. If these agreements are
formalized into a contract, then it is a good idea to have some way --
that all parties agree is fair -- to enforce the contract. I think a
government controlled enforcement system is a good idea, since I
suspect that any privately run enforcement system would be more likely
to be suborned than a government controlled system.

I thought you'd say that, it's a reasonable position.  But, I know from
personal experience, that one of the main tactics of Fortune 500
corporations is to game the legal system in order to take the property of
others.

I'll give three examples from personal experience. Yes, these are
individual stories, but since the number of personal connections I have is
limitedit gives a much better measure of what actually happens than
stories that are told by people who sample all possible stories of what has
happened in the US.

#1. Friends of mine invented geosteering.  They signed away their rights to
the patent as a matter of employmentit's a pre-requsite and not really
the problem I'm talking about.  A competitor patented something that, by
law, they could not patent.  They couldn't because they had disclosed it
before the patent. The company they, and I worked for, patented this
geosteering technique.  If the law were enforced properly, our former
employer would get 5% royalties for the use of the patented technique,
while paying nothing for the invention of the other company.

But, as things ususally go, it's not what reality is; it's how good your
lawyers are and how big you are.  Our employers were rolled and ended up
paying for a bogus patent and getting $0.00 for their own patent.  One
emperical fact that butresses this is the fact that the most junior patent
lawyer makes far more than the top inventor.

The problem is sometimes corruption.  But, even with a non-corrupt system,
the judge is does not possess ordinary skill in the art.  The value of a
patent is not fact based, but how well you can convince a judges.  Sure,
there is the occasional exception, like variable wiper blades, which make
great movies.  But, that is the exception.  Even patent examiners, who have
to be engineers, do not know enough about the fields they judge to seperate
the wheat from the chaff.

#2.  I sat on a Fortune 500 company's patent commitee for 7 years.  I
listened very carefullly when senior legal council spoke.  The said flat
out our policy is to use our muscle to roll anyone small who has a patent
claimthey can't stand up to us.  They all but admitted that they would
fold before anyone bigger.

#3.  One of the two key inventors asked for a raise.  He was laughed at to
his face who'd hire you was the quote.  It turned out that this company,
and the other two companies in the field had an agreement to honor each
others illegal restriction on workers.  Now, it was illegal to restrict
employmentafter the employee spent his life savings in court he could
get that rulingbut it was legal to honor such restrictions.

#4.  You might argue that this would be a perfect place for a start-up.  It
was.  They were hired by a start-up and promply sued for millions for theft
of intellectual property.  The property was everything they knew.  After a
couple of years, and  10 million dollars, a deal was reached.  The startup
would hire no more people who had been employed by the suing company and
the charges would be dropped.  They learned their lesson.

#5.  One of our good friends holds the first bioengeering patent.  His
partner ended up buying the patent from the company he worked for when it
closed.  He found a major corporation violated it.  He tried to enforce the
patent.

His laywer told him it was a hopeless case: they were too big and he was
too small.  But, since it was worth multi-millions he pressed on.  That was
a _big_ mistake.  They countersued with scores of false infringement
claims.  Each one took hours of paperwork to counter, as well as legal
fees.  After he lost 300k, he was asked willing to give up?
  He had to, he was out of money.

So, even the minimal government involvement is gamed by those with power. 
In a pure

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

#1 patent-related

#2  patent-related

#4 IP-related

#5 patent-related

Sounds like you have a problem with the government-run patent system.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

This went just to john instead of the list twice.  I'm not sure why.


On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:40 PM, 
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote: 
 
Sounds like you have a problem with the government-run patent system. 
 
 If you understood the patent system and how these issues arise, you would 
 know that isn't true.  These issues are settled in the courts, not by 
 patent examiners. 
 
 What I was trying to point out is that even the most minimal government 
 possible: courts that decide property and contract law, are subject to 
 gaming by those who can have the resources to game the system.  The fact 
 that the bottom of the rung gamer is paid _a lot_ more than the top 
 innovator tells me something loud and clear: 
 
 gaming the system is more important the coming up with the innovation 
 yourself. 
 
 The patent system itself has its flaws, but those are not the critical 
 factors.  _On paper_ the system works just fine.  It's just that the way
it 
 really works, like most contract law, the Golden Rule of Texas is
followed. 
 
 The way to make money, as was pointed out on the local business program,
is 
 to insert yourself into the money stream.  Thus, investment bankers who 
 lost trillions for others made billions for themselves, using a model
that 
 was inherently flawed but was thought to be a brilliant financial 
 breakthrough by virtually everyone in the financial system. 
 
 Dan M. 
 




mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-12 Thread David Hobby


John Williams wrote:

#1 patent-related

#2  patent-related

#4 IP-related

#5 patent-related

Sounds like you have a problem with the government-run patent system.


Yes.  He's saying it doesn't actually work the
way you think it would, since there's latitude
for people to game the system.

How would a non-government-run patent system
(whatever it was) not be just as flawed?

Or better, how would you design a patent system
that did not give a significant advantage to the
side with the best lawyers?  (Feel free to propose
changes to the legal system too, if you want.)

---David

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:20 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:

 How would a non-government-run patent system
 (whatever it was) not be just as flawed?
 Or better, how would you design a patent system
 that did not give a significant advantage to the
 side with the best lawyers?
 (Feel free to propose
 changes to the legal system too, if you want.)

Actually, I favor no patent or IP restrictions. I do not know of any
way to prevent gaming the system, and I think the benefits of the
system, as implemented, are outweighed by the costs, several of which
Dan mentioned.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:04 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 No, it's the courts that decided, not the patent system itself. Enforcement
 of  patents and other IP are in the courts, not through patent clerks.

So, if some politicians decided to make a law that all Texans must
have a job and they cannot be paid more than the minimum wage, and the
courts enforced it, then it is the courts fault?

 No matter how the laws are written, those with the most money tend to win.
 Laws are typically analyzied right left and upside down.  They are
 typically gamed by lawyers, and the ones who can afford to spend the most
 on gaiming them almost always wins.

That sounds like a good argument for severely limiting the number and
complexity of the laws, so that anyone can be familiar with most or
all of them, and easily understand them.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-12 Thread Trent Shipley

David Hobby wrote:
 John Williams wrote:
 #1 patent-related

 #2  patent-related

 #4 IP-related

 #5 patent-related

 Sounds like you have a problem with the government-run patent system.
 
 Yes.  He's saying it doesn't actually work the
 way you think it would, since there's latitude
 for people to game the system.
 
 How would a non-government-run patent system
 (whatever it was) not be just as flawed?
 
 Or better, how would you design a patent system
 that did not give a significant advantage to the
 side with the best lawyers?  (Feel free to propose
 changes to the legal system too, if you want.)
 
 ---David

You could go with the radical Linuxers and Pirate Party types and decide
that intellectual property is an anachronism that should be put out of
its misery.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-12 Thread David Hobby


Trent Shipley wrote:

David Hobby wrote:

John Williams wrote:

...

Sounds like you have a problem with the government-run patent system.

Yes.  He's saying it doesn't actually work the
way you think it would, since there's latitude
for people to game the system.

How would a non-government-run patent system
(whatever it was) not be just as flawed?

Or better, how would you design a patent system
that did not give a significant advantage to the
side with the best lawyers?  (Feel free to propose
changes to the legal system too, if you want.)

---David


You could go with the radical Linuxers and Pirate Party types and decide
that intellectual property is an anachronism that should be put out of
its misery.


Trent--

Hi.  You're talking about intellectual property in
general.  This includes copyright.  I could agree that
copyright should be pretty much abolished.

Patents are different, though.  The problem is that
without patents, companies tend to just keep innovations
secret.  It's pointless to keep secret the kinds of
things you can copyright--the whole point is that you
WANT people to see them.

I don't have examples, but I'd argue that without
patents A LOT of recent advances would have been kept
as trade secrets.  And that because of that, the advances
that built on them would not yet have happened.  There's
a large economic cost to Society at large when most
advances are kept secret.  It stifles progress.

That's why the patent system was set up in the first
place, to foster innovation.

---David

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market


Actually, I favor no patent or IP restrictions. I do not know of any
way to prevent gaming the system, and I think the benefits of the
system, as implemented, are outweighed by the costs, several of which
Dan mentioned.

Lets assume that companies that innovated got nothing more than a few
months head start on the competition copying them.  In that case,
innovation would only happen when the few months paid for all the RD.
Otherwise, the smart move would be to always wait for the other guy to do
all the hard work.

As flawed as things are, as much as it doesn't favor the smaller guys, I'm
in favor of a system that allows those that create wealth to at least
sometimes keep some of it.  If you look at the last 1500 years, you will
see that the increase in wealth per worker is due to innovations.
Occasionally, as with Wal-Mart, the innovations are not patentable but hard
to copy.  But, mostly, they are brand new thing, but once shown..quite
copyable.

In particular, the high cost of drug development and the relative low cost
of production would mean that, without patent protection, there would be
few if any new drugs.  Only fools would throw hundreds of millions in the
toilet.

BTW, I chose IP gaming examples because that's what I know best.  The
entire legal system is subject to gamingwhy do you think there are so
many lawyers who make so much money compared to those folks who create
wealth who make less?


Dan M.

Dan M. 

Dan M. 


mail2web.com  What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you?
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:08 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 BTW, I chose IP gaming examples because that's what I know best.  The
 entire legal system is subject to gamingwhy do you think there are so
 many lawyers who make so much money compared to those folks who create
 wealth who make less?

Thus my earlier statement that we have too many laws and excessively
complex laws. That comes from have too many politicians, and too much
government.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market


 BTW, I chose IP gaming examples because that's what I know best.  The
 entire legal system is subject to gamingwhy do you think there are so
 many lawyers who make so much money compared to those folks who create
 wealth who make less?

Thus my earlier statement that we have too many laws and excessively
complex laws. That comes from have too many politicians, and too much
government.

OK, then why do we have so many more lawyers than much more socialistic
countries that have a far more complex history of laws than the US?

There is a model that fits all these data.  The US is the most
individualistic of all the developed countries.  If you traveled or talked
to folks from Europe, you would know that.  We have far more litigation
than any of those countries.  Instead of control by governmental
bureaucrats, we have a version of the old gunfightonly in the courts. 

See, if X is the problem, one would think that reducing X would decrease
the problem.  Yet, the developed country that values and promotes
individualism the most has the most lawyers. 

Dan M.




mail2web LIVE  Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology -
http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

RE: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

2009-08-12 Thread Dan M

 -Original Message-
 From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On
 Behalf Of John Williams
 Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:32 PM
 To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion
 Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

 On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:04 PM,
 dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

  No, it's the courts that decided, not the patent system itself.
 Enforcement
  of  patents and other IP are in the courts, not through patent clerks.

 So, if some politicians decided to make a law that all Texans must
 have a job and they cannot be paid more than the minimum wage, and the
 courts enforced it, then it is the courts fault?

No, that is the fault of the laws as written.  The problem with the court
system is that they do not understand enough to enforce the laws as written.

  No matter how the laws are written, those with the most money tend to
 win.
  Laws are typically analyzied right left and upside down.  They are
  typically gamed by lawyers, and the ones who can afford to spend the
 most
  on gaiming them almost always wins.

 That sounds like a good argument for severely limiting the number and
 complexity of the laws, so that anyone can be familiar with most or
 all of them, and easily understand them.

So, then, we need to have no field of engineering so complex that a layman
cannot understand it?  Simple laws can be gamed and have long been gamed. 

Let me give you an example from my field.  The laws of classical
electrodynamics are so simple they can fit on a tee shirt.  Yet, people who
have studied them and worked with them for years can still be surprised by
their application. Such it is with the law, and its application.  

Or, if you just want to consider the law, think about the Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights is a _very_ simple document.  Its interpretation has been
varied, subtle and complex.

Dan M. 

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Dan Mdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 No, that is the fault of the laws as written.  The problem with the court
 system is that they do not understand enough to enforce the laws as written.

Or it could be that the laws are too many and too poorly written for
the courts to efficiently enforce them.

 Or, if you just want to consider the law, think about the Bill of Rights.
 The Bill of Rights is a _very_ simple document.  Its interpretation has been
 varied, subtle and complex.

What percentage of lawyers or court time do you think is expended on
arguing cases about the Bill of Rights?

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:39 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:

 OK, then why do we have so many more lawyers than much more socialistic
 countries that have a far more complex history of laws than the US?

I'm not really following you. Do you mean to suggest that number of
lawyers is a metric for the quality (or disfunctionality?) of a court
system?

And why are you comparing to socialist governments? I would think you
would compare to something as similar as possible. There are so many
other things (than number of laws) that could affect the number of
lawyers in a country with a socialist government.

 See, if X is the problem, one would think that reducing X would decrease
 the problem.  Yet, the developed country that values and promotes
 individualism the most has the most lawyers.

When America was young and had much fewer laws and less government,
did it have more lawyers?

This is getting rather silly. Nothing can be proved this way.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com

Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market