Comments on: What about Ron Paul? http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/ Free Markets and Social Justice Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:45:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8.3 By: Jessica DelBalzo http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-13099 Thu, 26 Jan 2012 02:42:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-13099 I think this is the best analysis of Ron Paul I’ve ever read.  I watch the debates, and I want to like him.  I find myself agreeing with many of his ideas (specifically when it comes to eliminating war and ensuring personal freedoms), but I cannot throw my support behind a candidate who is anti-choice and anti-marriage equality.  These issues are way too important to me.  I’ve had an abortion, and I have no qualms about my decision.  It was a good experience, and I’d do it again in a similar situation.  By the same token, I have friends for whom the right to marry is critically important.  I cannot see Paul as anything less than a hypocrite for opposing abortion and gay marriage.  

If you believe the role of the federal government is almost exclusively to ensure public safety while allowing a maximum amount of personal freedoms, you just can’t rationally oppose reproductive rights or marriage equality.  There’s no logic in it.  

]]>
By: Damien S. http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11713 Sat, 24 Dec 2011 14:06:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11713  Because there’s no middle ground between no government-enforced IP monopolies at all, and the current situation of ever-increasing copyright terms and patent trolling, of course.

]]>
By: Anonymous http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11712 Sat, 24 Dec 2011 14:05:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11712 You have read Stephen Kinsella?

]]>
By: Anonymous http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11710 Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:58:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11710
And as far as I know, Paul hasn’t noted the ways in which monopolistic intellectual property privileges boost corporate power at the public’s expense

You just lost all credibility with me.  I’m a software developer with a photo enhance program for sale.  You’d apparently let anybody sell copies of my program for their own profit.  Can you say BULLSHIT?  There’s a name for people like you: freetards.

]]>
By: Anonymous http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11692 Sat, 24 Dec 2011 04:15:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11692 Sorry, but its not really that simple. “Don’t like murder, the don’t murder any one else, but don’t infringe on the rights of others who feel differently.” Get it?

]]>
By: Gabriel Farkas http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11690 Sat, 24 Dec 2011 04:00:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11690 I will tell you what I’ve told other libertarians who identify as pro-life. Don’t like abortions and/or believe unequivocally they are murder? Then don’t have one, but don’t infringe on the rights of others who feel differently.

]]>
By: Rick Schaut http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11677 Fri, 23 Dec 2011 21:11:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11677 “Hence, here are no measurements in economic reasoning.”

Sorry, but that statement is, well, just plain wrong. We don’t even measure gravity in any direct fashion. Rather, we measure the effects of gravity.

We have no way of directly knowing if there is such a thing as a gravitational constant that defines a relationship between mass and distance in such a way as to predict the effects that gravity has on objects that have mass. Moreover, we have observed that gravity also has effects on things, such as light, which have no mass. The latter observation leads us to think of gravity as a displacement in space itself.

Either the assumptions one derives through introspection lead to some conclusions about quantifiable effects on things like prices, quantity sold and income, or they don’t lead to any such conclusions. In the latter case, the logical edifice thus constructed has no relevance to our understanding of an economy. In the former case, we have effects that can be measured, and through which we can test the validity of the assumptions that lead to those conclusions.

]]>
By: Anonymous http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11675 Fri, 23 Dec 2011 20:12:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11675 Sorry, I don’t get your point. If A is, w/o justification, attacking, raping or enslaving B, it seems clear to me that C has a moral permission, although not an obligation, to intervene. I fail to see anything in ASU inconsistent with this idea. Now, I don’t expect you to agree that the situation in Iraq under Saddam fits this description, but that just means we disagree about the facts, not that I am saying something inconsistent with Nozick’s principles.

]]>
By: Anonymous http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11672 Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:34:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11672 The towering logic of math is analogous to the deductive apriorism of Mises– except on one  specific issue:  the simultaneity of human subjectiveness and being human.  You are human, I am human, Mises is human. The pilot on the way to Seattle is referencing the physical world outside. He measures windspeed, altitude, thrust, gravitational pull, etc. But what of human reference? There are no objective units common to all humans that can accurately rate the intensity of such human experiences as love, desire, emotion, pain. But we know these things exist.

Hence, here are no measurements in economic reasoning.  How does one empirically put a number on desire? Intensity cannot be observed.  But what can be observed is action. An individual makes a choice, revealing preference.  This understanding had to exist prior to observed action in order for there to be any meaning derived concerning the said action. This is the logic that evolves out of introspection and indeed- experience. But once discovered it is revealed to be logical all along.

]]>
By: Adam http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/12/what-about-ron-paul/#comment-11671 Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:00:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=1658#comment-11671 Kurt, 
   I think that the methodology of the social sciences is more accurately described as abductive reasoning than inductive. 
    There are certainly deductive elements to the research process, especially in the early hypothesis-forming stage. But you are right, deductive conclusions rarely contain confidence intervals, significance levels, probabilities, effect sizes, etc. It tends to lend itself to binary thinking. 

]]>