On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 21:36 -0700, shadow wrote:
> On 05-Sep-05, Tim Bedding wrote:
>
> BA>> I'm sorry folks but as much as the Libertarian in me would like
> BA>> to, I don't see any reasonable fault in those actions.
>
> TB> Something clearly went wrong. If people are too relaxed to
> TB> take appropriate action, then government needs to respond.
>
> Excuse me, I thought this was a Libertarian discussion group....
>
> I can't believe I'm seeing Libertarians whining about fedgov not exercising
> authority in an, well, for want of a better word, authoritarian manner.
I'm not entirely sure you can classify Tim as a Libertarian. And I doubt
anyone can take my writings on this subject to be a lamentation of the
government not wielding authority strongly enough. If anything I'm
"defending" it not doing so.
> What would be a Libertarian fedgov's response in such a scenario?
I've been saying it wouldn't be much different if at all given the
current situation of the government.
I am saying also that had we had a libertarian government for the past
100 years the entire situation would be so different as to render it
moot. A Libertarian government would never had subsidized the building
of levees and canals that amplify the problem and lead to a false sense
of security ("the levees will protect you, move to New Orleans!"),
subsidizing the rebuilding of homes and businesses in an area known to
be going below the water at a rate of about an acre every half hour. As
a result I'd expect there to be far less of a concentration of
population or at minimum much better storm protection.
As a result the tragedy would be far less than it is now.
But that's a different tale.
Cheers,
Bill
_______________________________________________
Libnw mailing list
Libnw@immosys.com
List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw
Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
