Re: Definition of "rich"?

<royls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:14:16 +0200, peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_Bj=F8rn_Perls=F8?=) wrote:

<royls@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 02:28:47 +0200, peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_Bj=F8rn_Perls=F8?=) wrote:

Just Cocky <just@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 00:07:13 +0200, peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Peter
Bjørn Perlsø) wrote:

Besides, the alternatives (collectivisation or government intervention)
are repugnant.

In a libertarian world, it's only "Government intervention" *IF* the
people delegate to Government that job.

What makes you think that government wont damn well do what it pleases?
Do you really think government answers to anybody?

Oh, I get it. This is just more "me hate government" spew.

Anybody who values life and liberty dislikes the government.

Garbage. The exact opposite is the case, because only government has
ever been effective in securing people's rights to life and liberty.

Only the deluded think og government as their savior and champion.

Somalia sure looks like a place where life and liberty are valued,
doesn't it?

Give your head a shake.

In some ways, peoples lives, liberties, and wealth is valued way better
than most of the western world.

Take a look at this, for instance:

http://www.peterleeson.com/Better_Off_Stateless.pdf

"Peter T. Leeson - Department of Economics West Virginia University

....The government's collapse and subsequent emergence of statelessness
opened the opportunity for Somali progress. This paper uses an "event
study" to investigate the impact of anarchy on Somali development. The
data suggest that while the state of this development remains low, on
nearly all of 18 key indicators that allow pre- and post-stateless
welfare comparisons, Somalis are better off under anarchy than they were
under government.

....Indicators of Somali welfare remain low in absolute terms, but
compared to their status under government show a marked advance.
•
• Under statelessness life expectancy in Somalia has
grown.

• Access to health facilities has increased.

• Infant mortality has dropped.

• Civil liberties have expanded.

• Extreme poverty (less than $1 PPP/day) has plummeted.

• In many parts of the country even security has improved.

....In the year following the state's collapse, civil war, exacerbated by
severe drought, devastated the Sub-Saharan territory killing 300,000
Somalis (Prendergast 1997). For a time it seemed that Somali
statelessness would mean endless bloody conflict, starvation, and an
eventual descent into total annihilation of the Somali people.

Though largely unrecognized by economists, the widespread violence that
ravaged Somalia in its first year without government vanished
considerably by 1994. By the mid-1990s peace prevailed over most of the
country (Menkhaus 1998, 2004). Since 1997 most indicators of Somali
development show slow but steady progress and today are above their
pre-stateless levels."


If you
don't dislike the government, youre merely another thug who doesn't give
a *** about the Non-agression principle (NAP).

?? Do not presume to lecture me about non-aggression, you lying
hypocrite.

Oh please...

You're the one who intends to _shoot_ people who try to
exercise their rights peaceably, and refuse to accede to your
arbitrary demands.

-- Roy L

Since I've read up on geolibertarianism, I may just have changed my
mind. Mind you, it's not thanks to your incessant yelling of "LIAR!" and
"GARBAGE!" and so on, which I find slightly annoying. You should really
moderate your debate tactic...


--
regards, Peter Bjørn Perlsø
http://haxor.dk
http://liberterran.org
http://haxor.dk/fanaticism/
.

Quantcast