Finally, a Libertarian Utopia!

[MikeK]

Hurricane Andrew proved you wrong.

If that fellow were simply stupid it would be easy to dismiss his plainly distorted reasoning as ordinary intellectual deficiency. But he isn't stupid. Which tends to support my increasingly valid suspicion that some adherents to the Libertarian philosophy are as fanatically devoted to this wingless bird of a political ideology as are some religious fanatics who believe so strongly in the Virgin Birth and The Resurrection they would be as willing to die for their ethereal fantasy as were many equally delusional and sacrificial disciples of Jim Jones at Jonestown, Guyana.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

You say I deny the obvious, yet you fail to provide a single example? What is obvious is that your argument is weak and unsupported. You have zero evidence that companies will build unsafe buildings without government forcing them to build safe ones. Companies do not make profit selling products that are supposed to shelter consumers but end up killing them or injuring them. Government is not needed to ensure higher quality computers, nor is it needed to ensure higher quality buildings. Why is that so hard to understand?

Like Marxism, the Libertarian fantasy has it all figured out except for one thing -- human nature. What you are proposing in the way of eliminating building codes is analogous to proposing the end of FDA regulations. How long do you suppose your self-regulation-for-competitive-assurance theory would prevent the inclusion of horsemeat and dead flies in hamburger, etc.? So long as meat-packers and construction contractors see a way to increase their bottom lines by cheating and think they can get away with it, some of them are going to cheat. Just like the S.O.B. who wired the condo I bought and used aluminum wiring pigtails where the code calls for copper along with a few other corners he'd cut that cost me money. But it could have been worse.

The reason for copper in the building code is aluminum pigtails are prone to overheat and cause fire. But if the code didn't deter the guy in my own example imagine how many more builders would be motivated to do the same thing if there were no codes at all?

The Libertarian ideal sounds good to a point. And I agree with Thom Hartmann who believes ordinary Libertarians are simply Republicans who want to smoke dope, get laid and pay no taxes. But when taken to extremes the Libertarian ideology quickly crashes. Because in a society as big and diverse as ours such unpleasant things as taxes, laws, rules and regulations are unavoidably necessary. We literally cannot live without them.

I like Ron Paul. I agree with a lot of his assertions. But he's taking his followers down a primrose path.

 

[eflatminor]

Although this has aready been proven in history it will be much harder to deny when it fails with this little experiment.

Yea, those first 125 years of America were just awful. You're an ass.

 

[Andaluz]

Id rather just move to Spain and ignore all the laws i dint like just like the locals do.

It's great! I recommend it. The rule of thumb is, 'ignore the laws you don't like until someone with a gun tells you otherwise'. In my bar, if you come in and want to smoke, provided no one else objects, go ahead. It's illegal but the police take the same approach as me. If there's no offence taken, there's no offence.

 

[Ravi]

Do you have specific examples of what codes were violated and how such violations would have caused problems? If you want a building with certain specifications, a company will offer it if you will pay for it. If there were no building codes you could not violate them, so your statement does not even make sense.

Again, the fallacy that without government something terrible will happen. "Without government banning drugs we will all do drugs and become useless! Without government providing healthcare we will all die on the streets! Without government social security, the elderly will never be able to retire! Without building codes and regulations, our buildings will be hazardous and crumble!"

It is all the same old, same old. If these codes are violated, it is more likely they are unnecessary codes. Companies are not going to construct buildings that are inherently unsafe. They will not make a profit by killing their customers.

I didn't work for the Buidlings Department so I don't retain specific examples of code violation litigations or prosecutions. Nor can I supply specific examples of convenience store holdups, house burglaries, arsons, etc., but I can assure you they do happen. And as Ravi has pointed out in a previous message, whenever there is a hurricane or other natural disaster evidence of code violations become readily apparent. Other examples frequently appear during investigations of fires and pre-purchase home inspections. In fact, I was made painfully aware of a code violation in my own home when I had a new air conditioner system installed, which required an inspection of existing electrical wiring.

But if your need to adhere to Libertarian delusions about competitive self-regulation is such that you're able to deny the obvious I won't interfere with that. Be happy.

Well, I can supply specific examples of store holdups, etc. I do not doubt that codes may be violated. But what is the exact code that is violated? Maybe the code is a bad code. Maybe not. But if you have absolutely no specific evidence of anything, you have no argument.

As Contumacious pointed out, the buildings that were destroyed in Hurricane Andrew followed the building codes. New regulations were then enacted, but even those are likely to do little. So that too is a moot point.

You say I deny the obvious, yet you fail to provide a single example? What is obvious is that your argument is weak and unsupported. You have zero evidence that companies will build unsafe buildings without government forcing them to build safe ones. Companies do not make profit selling products that are supposed to shelter consumers but end up killing them or injuring them. Government is not needed to ensure higher quality computers, nor is it needed to ensure higher quality buildings. Why is that so hard to understand?

Yeah, they followed the building codes that weren't strong enough. The libertarian argument is that the buildings would be strong enough in the absence of codes, just because Libertarians are teh awesome.

But that simply isn't true.

 

[Contumacious]

Hurricane Andrew proved you wrong.

If that fellow were simply stupid it would be easy to dismiss his plainly distorted reasoning as ordinary intellectual deficiency. But he isn't stupid. Which tends to support my increasingly valid suspicion that some adherents to the Libertarian philosophy are as fanatically devoted to this wingless bird of a political ideology as are some religious fanatics who believe so strongly in the Virgin Birth and The Resurrection they would be as willing to die for their ethereal fantasy as were many equally delusional and sacrificial disciples of Jim Jones at Jonestown, Guyana.

If that fellow were simply stupid it would be easy to dismiss his plainly distorted reasoning as ordinary intellectual deficiency. But he isn't stupid. Which tends to support my increasingly valid suspicion that adherents to the Marxist philosophy are as fanatically devoted to this wingless bird of a political ideology as are some religious fanatics who believe so strongly in the Virgin Birth and The Resurrection they would be as willing to die for their ethereal fantasy as were many equally delusional and sacrificial disciples of Jim Jones at Jonestown, Guyana.

.

 

[ShackledNation]

I didn't work for the Buidlings Department so I don't retain specific examples of code violation litigations or prosecutions. Nor can I supply specific examples of convenience store holdups, house burglaries, arsons, etc., but I can assure you they do happen. And as Ravi has pointed out in a previous message, whenever there is a hurricane or other natural disaster evidence of code violations become readily apparent. Other examples frequently appear during investigations of fires and pre-purchase home inspections. In fact, I was made painfully aware of a code violation in my own home when I had a new air conditioner system installed, which required an inspection of existing electrical wiring.

But if your need to adhere to Libertarian delusions about competitive self-regulation is such that you're able to deny the obvious I won't interfere with that. Be happy.

Well, I can supply specific examples of store holdups, etc. I do not doubt that codes may be violated. But what is the exact code that is violated? Maybe the code is a bad code. Maybe not. But if you have absolutely no specific evidence of anything, you have no argument.

As Contumacious pointed out, the buildings that were destroyed in Hurricane Andrew followed the building codes. New regulations were then enacted, but even those are likely to do little. So that too is a moot point.

You say I deny the obvious, yet you fail to provide a single example? What is obvious is that your argument is weak and unsupported. You have zero evidence that companies will build unsafe buildings without government forcing them to build safe ones. Companies do not make profit selling products that are supposed to shelter consumers but end up killing them or injuring them. Government is not needed to ensure higher quality computers, nor is it needed to ensure higher quality buildings. Why is that so hard to understand?

Yeah, they followed the building codes that weren't strong enough. The libertarian argument is that the buildings would be strong enough in the absence of codes, just because Libertarians are teh awesome.

But that simply isn't true.

I never made the argument buildings would be any stronger. I am only arguing that they would not all be of terrible quality without building codes. And if government codes were so great, they should have prevented the problem, and they didn't. So your example was terrible, no matter how you try to spin it.

 

[ShackledNation]

[...]

You say I deny the obvious, yet you fail to provide a single example? What is obvious is that your argument is weak and unsupported. You have zero evidence that companies will build unsafe buildings without government forcing them to build safe ones. Companies do not make profit selling products that are supposed to shelter consumers but end up killing them or injuring them. Government is not needed to ensure higher quality computers, nor is it needed to ensure higher quality buildings. Why is that so hard to understand?

Like Marxism, the Libertarian fantasy has it all figured out except for one thing -- human nature. What you are proposing in the way of eliminating building codes is analogous to proposing the end of FDA regulations. How long do you suppose your self-regulation-for-competitive-assurance theory would prevent the inclusion of horsemeat and dead flies in hamburger, etc.? So long as meat-packers and construction contractors see a way to increase their bottom lines by cheating and think they can get away with it, some of them are going to cheat. Just like the S.O.B. who wired the condo I bought and used aluminum wiring pigtails where the code calls for copper along with a few other corners he'd cut that cost me money. But it could have been worse.

Wrong. I do not think we should end FDA regulations. I think we should end the FDA altogether. I would not buy horsemeat and dead fly hamburgers. Companies could just as easily try to pull that crap now even with regulations they have to follow. Selling a burger, claiming it is made of cow, and making it with horse is called business fraud. Business fraud would not be legal in a free market, and would be severely punished. People will cheater whether or not you have somebody telling them not to. It doesn't matter if that somebody is the free market or government. There will always be cheaters.

If people were really concerned about food quality, private ratings agencies could easily be developed to test products and ensure higher quality. Again there is the strange idea that without government people will all be helpless.

The reason for copper in the building code is aluminum pigtails are prone to overheat and cause fire. But if the code didn't deter the guy in my own example imagine how many more builders would be motivated to do the same thing if there were no codes at all?

People don't need the state to tell them that if their houses were more soundly built, or built on higher ground, they would have less to fear from disaster.Nothing strikes me as more absurd than the assumption that only government cares if your own house can withstand an earthquake or tornado. The people who live there, the banks, the insurers, the builders—none of them have any interest in solid construction and so the regulators have to be involved. That's the theory anyway, and it is ridiculous.

If builders tried to use aluminum and call it copper, they would be sued for fraud and consumers would never deal with them again. Insurance companies would have a huge incentive to make sure such buildings were soundly built.

The Libertarian ideal sounds good to a point. And I agree with Thom Hartmann who believes ordinary Libertarians are simply Republicans who want to smoke dope, get laid and pay no taxes. But when taken to extremes the Libertarian ideology quickly crashes. Because in a society as big and diverse as ours such unpleasant things as taxes, laws, rules and regulations are unavoidably necessary. We literally cannot live without them.

I like Ron Paul. I agree with a lot of his assertions. But he's taking his followers down a primrose path.

I can't say I am surprised at such a statement. Such propaganda is commonly espoused from the government. From the minute we are born we are engrained with this silly idea that government exists to keep us safe, and without it we would have horsemeat burgers, melting buildings, and a worse life. But that is simply not true. People care about their own health and safety more than the government does.

 

[bripat9643]

I didn't work for the Buidlings Department so I don't retain specific examples of code violation litigations or prosecutions. Nor can I supply specific examples of convenience store holdups, house burglaries, arsons, etc., but I can assure you they do happen. And as Ravi has pointed out in a previous message, whenever there is a hurricane or other natural disaster evidence of code violations become readily apparent. Other examples frequently appear during investigations of fires and pre-purchase home inspections. In fact, I was made painfully aware of a code violation in my own home when I had a new air conditioner system installed, which required an inspection of existing electrical wiring.

But if your need to adhere to Libertarian delusions about competitive self-regulation is such that you're able to deny the obvious I won't interfere with that. Be happy.

Pure unadulterated horseshit. I lived in Florida for 10 years, and I have seen plenty of damage from hurricanes. All the damaged homes were built according to code. The problem is, a building code isn't going to do a thing to protect your home from 2x4s flying through the air at 120 mph. If you don't shutter your windows, the roof will come off then they break. Shingles cannot be made to withstand 120 mile an hour winds.

Homes can be made hurricane proof, gut few people are willing to pay the cost.

The true delusion is that government does anything to make you safe. All it does is come in after the fact and impose regulations that drive up the cost of everything. Furthermore, insurance companies would require that home construction meet certain standards. When I worked commercial construction, it wasn't the building inspector who made sure the fireproofing was done correctly. It was inspectors for the company that insured the property.

Government simply isn't necessary for 99% of human activity.

 

[MikeK]

I didn't work for the Buidlings Department so I don't retain specific examples of code violation litigations or prosecutions. Nor can I supply specific examples of convenience store holdups, house burglaries, arsons, etc., but I can assure you they do happen. And as Ravi has pointed out in a previous message, whenever there is a hurricane or other natural disaster evidence of code violations become readily apparent. Other examples frequently appear during investigations of fires and pre-purchase home inspections. In fact, I was made painfully aware of a code violation in my own home when I had a new air conditioner system installed, which required an inspection of existing electrical wiring.

But if your need to adhere to Libertarian delusions about competitive self-regulation is such that you're able to deny the obvious I won't interfere with that. Be happy.

Pure unadulterated horseshit. I lived in Florida for 10 years, and I have seen plenty of damage from hurricanes. All the damaged homes were built according to code. The problem is, a building code isn't going to do a thing to protect your home from 2x4s flying through the air at 120 mph. If you don't shutter your windows, the roof will come off then they break. Shingles cannot be made to withstand 120 mile an hour winds.

Homes can be made hurricane proof, gut few people are willing to pay the cost.

The true delusion is that government does anything to make you safe. All it does is come in after the fact and impose regulations that drive up the cost of everything. Furthermore, insurance companies would require that home construction meet certain standards. When I worked commercial construction, it wasn't the building inspector who made sure the fireproofing was done correctly. It was inspectors for the company that insured the property.

Government simply isn't necessary for 99% of human activity.

The following is excerpted from a formal report submitted by experts from The University of Florida, School of Building Construction:
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/FBC/publications/CodeViolationsFinalReport4.pdf

1) In Florida, the study conducted after Hurricane Andrew, revealed that building code adoption and enforcement was inconsistent throughout the state, and that those local codes thought to be the strongest proved inadequate when tested by major hurricane events. The consequences of an inadequate code system were devastation to lives and economies and a statewide property insurance crisis.

2) The Florida Building Code went into effect in March, 2001, and it supersedes all local codes. Compliance with the Florida Building Code is enforced through building inspections, continuing education courses, and violation penalties.

However code violations still occur and it is the purpose of this study to determine which violations are the most common and to then educate the population about these violations. Increased awareness about common code violations would reduce violation
occurrences and in turn increase the safety and welfare of a building’s inhabitants and users. Few studies have been done about the most common code violations, which gives this study added importance.


Most of the things you post here range from juvenile nonsense to malicious misinformation. What I've posted above is for the benefit of those who might be misled by your commentary. I'm aware that any attempt to educate you would be a waste of time.

 

[bripat9643]

The following is excerpted from a formal report submitted by experts from The University of Florida, School of Building Construction:
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/FBC/publications/CodeViolationsFinalReport4.pdf

1) In Florida, the study conducted after Hurricane Andrew, revealed that building code adoption and enforcement was inconsistent throughout the state, and that those local codes thought to be the strongest proved inadequate when tested by major hurricane events. The consequences of an inadequate code system were devastation to lives and economies and a statewide property insurance crisis.

In other words, the homes that were destroyed were built according to code. Government regulations did nothing to prevent the damage. You just proved my point.

2) The Florida Building Code went into effect in March, 2001, and it supersedes all local codes. Compliance with the Florida Building Code is enforced through building inspections, continuing education courses, and violation penalties.

What do you imagine this proves? It certain doesn't prove that building codes prevent hurricane damage. Florida experienced a rash of hurricanes in 2005 and there was still plenty of damage from hurricanes. I recall driving through Orlando and seeing many homes lacking large sections of their roofs.

However code violations still occur and it is the purpose of this study to determine which violations are the most common and to then educate the population about these violations. Increased awareness about common code violations would reduce violation
occurrences and in turn increase the safety and welfare of a building’s inhabitants and users. Few studies have been done about the most common code violations, which gives this study added importance.

Code violations still occur? What a revelation! Who is in charge of enforcing the code? Why, it's the very government that you claim is going to save us all.

Note, that you posted not one shred of evidence that building codes did a thing to prevent hurricane damage. Not a damn thing.

Notice also that the authors of your "study" are a bunch of petty government bureaucrats, and what is their conclusion? We need more government!

Who would have imagined they would ever reach such a unpredictable conclusion?

Most of the things you post here range from juvenile nonsense to malicious misinformation. What I've posted above is for the benefit of those who might be misled by your commentary. I'm aware that any attempt to educate you would be a waste of time.

In other words, I rip your shallow idiocies to shreds and it's painful to have everyone in the forum realize what an ignorant fool you are.

Glad to be of service.

 

[Auxous]

I think Briprat just ripped you apart.

Additionally, insurance companies were more prone to take insurance on flooded areas do to the government. The government absolved them from risk from a Katrina.

 

[Ravi]

What roofs did you see ripped of in Orlando? If you saw any, you saw them ripped off of houses built prior to the new codes going into effect.

The State building codes are much stronger than the various local building codes were. That's a fact. And if they had been in place prior to that Lenar home project being built in south Dade the damage would have been hugely smaller from Andrew. And our insurance premiums would be hugely smaller as well.

 

[Auxous]

What roofs did you see ripped of in Orlando? If you saw any, you saw them ripped off of houses built prior to the new codes going into effect.

The State building codes are much stronger than the various local building codes were. That's a fact. And if they had been in place prior to that Lenar home project being built in south Dade the damage would have been hugely smaller from Andrew. And our insurance premiums would be hugely smaller as well.

And?

 

[Ravi]

Aw, come on! A floating island with no regulations or codes? The first hurricane or earthquake would destroy them.

 

[editec]

What cracks me up about LIBERTOPIA is this..

Most of the people who imagine this place would thrive would ALSO not be allowed to live there.

 

[FA_Q2]

*psssst*

I wouldn't really target the libertarian flotilla. Just making a point.

Yeah... I got that. The point I hear all of you making is that freedom can never really prevail. Moreover, it seems that seeing it fail would feel like a sort of victory. I think some of you would take great satisfaction in seeing libertarians brought to their knees and dragged back into 'civilized' society in chains. Overly dramatic? Sure. But it seems to capture the kind of bitter resentment i'm seeing here.

Are you really deprived of your "freedom" right now? I mean, really? It seems to me that people use the inefficiencies in the system to make their points and suddenly the United States turns into Communist Russia.

Most libertarians are decent people. Actually, I don't think I've ever run into an obnoxious libertarian. I just find their world view to be somewhat Polly Annaish. Maybe it's because I thought "Atlas Shrugged" sucked. I don't know.

This "billionaire" was able to amass enough wealth in this country to entertain the thoughts of building his own country. Along the way, he obtained an education and through his hard work became fabulously wealthy. Good for him. Every step of the way he was protected by the Police and the Miltary and profited off of a society that is relatively functional and that manages to change leadership every four years or so in a bloodless coup.

I can anticipate the cries of "statist", but I don't get these protests of being deprived from "liberty" and "freedom".

In truth, after a while it kind of sounds like whining.

I find your point about changing power in a bloodless coup rather disingenuous. We have a whopping 2 powers in this nation and we only exchange power within those 2 groups. Even further, in our short 200 years of existence, we have already had a bloody exchange though its attempt failed. There are far more dictatorships that have a better record based on that metric. The point of the parties being the same was made already thought you blew it off as a conspiracy theory. It is not. The parties ARE the same bullshit but there is no conspiracy. It is a simple matter of both parties goals being power. Though there are some base differences, the thirst and quest for influence has changed both parties into the same monster. The ideas that they differ on are not the important ones. The core is the same and that is rotting our country as we speak.

Are you really deprived of your "freedom" right now? I mean, really?

Sure. To a degree. And it's getting worse. How much worse should we let it get before it's ok to start 'whining'? Are you excited at the prospect of indebting all of us to insurance corporations from cradle to grave?

This "billionaire" was able to amass enough wealth in this country to entertain the thoughts of building his own country. Along the way, he obtained an education and through his hard work became fabulously wealthy. Good for him.

Yeah, for what it's worth, I'm not defending this nonsense. At best it IS, in fact, naive - at worst it's a scam preying on the gullible. I'm speaking up here because of the "isn't it cute that we've made the libertarians so miserable they're looking to escape" vibe throughout the thread. Seems like a particularly ugly form of gloating.

Well, we technically aren't gloating. I mean, it hasn't been tried yet. Remember how Bill Murrey said there are "two types of people in the world, those who like Neal Diamond and those who don't>.." Well, I think Ayn Rand is that way. So a lot of us like to poke fun at what is basically a floating "Gault's Gulch".

As for losing freedoms. I am thankful for the pressure valves. I don't see life in this country as being that bad. If most of the discontent is about taxes and the bills, then it could be worse. Not that that is supposed to be inspiring. But the fact that we can all whittle away our lives saying whatever the fuck we want means we got it pretty good.

If your chief complaints are taxes and bills, then yes, your right. Of course, if those are the chief complaints then you are not looking at reality and are all right with a slide into fascism as long as 'the trains are on time.' That attitude is exactly why we are sliding from a free nation to one that does not even understand what freedom is. The rights within the constitution are little more than a wisper of what they were supposed to be. Not one single right remains anymore that has not been chopped up to the point of irrelevance and what little remains is in constant attack. Right to free speech and assembly, only with a government permit. Religious freedom? Only if someone is not offended. The press still exists, at least until Uncle Sam can get the 'fairness' doctrine through. Second amendment? Did you not hear that it is a collective right? Secure in your person and property? Don't make me laugh. Not only are no knock warrants becoming common place but illegal searches without a warrant whatsoever are used far more often than an actual warrant. The ninth and tenth are completely ignored. I guess you don't need to quarter troops and there are still trials though I don't know if I would call them 'fair' trials.

We don't have a fascist government, knucklehead.

Get back to me when they are kicking down your door for speaking against the government. We'll probably share a cell.

Being Anti-War Is Not a Crime -- But That's Not Stopping the FBI From Raiding Activists' Homes. Activists who organized anti-war protests at the 2008 RNC have been targeted with raids, subpoenas and government spies.

Being Anti-War Is Not a Crime -- But That's Not Stopping the FBI From Raiding Activists' Homes | Activism & Vision | AlterNet

I'll go out on a limb and assume that the original raid wasn't authorized by a judge due to Montes exercising his first amendment rights.

Even though you seem to not like Ayn Rand, there is a passage from Atlas Shrugged that fits your ability to waive this off very well:

The only power any government has is the power to crack
down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes
them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible
for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding
citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws
that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted --
and you create a nation of law-breakers -- and then you cash in on guilt.

So, no, I also doubt the judge issued the warrants based off the use of free speech but that fact is rather meaningless today. It is far worse that warrants were attained then if they were not in this situation. It shows how far the government can go with or without reason.

 

[Charles_Main]

It will prove just how well the "Magic" market works in real life.


.

Umm, the underground economy proves "the "Magic" market works in real life" every time people score illegal drugs doesnt it?

TM gets every single thing wrong. You can basically listen to what she says, and assume the opposite is true.

 

[Charles_Main]

What roofs did you see ripped of in Orlando? If you saw any, you saw them ripped off of houses built prior to the new codes going into effect.

The State building codes are much stronger than the various local building codes were. That's a fact. And if they had been in place prior to that Lenar home project being built in south Dade the damage would have been hugely smaller from Andrew. And our insurance premiums would be hugely smaller as well.

I Lived through Charlie in 04. In Punta Gorda it didn't matter if it was new, or old. It came down and was blow apart. We were 14 Miles south of where the Eye mad Land fall. Scary shit.

 

[FA_Q2]

What roofs did you see ripped of in Orlando? If you saw any, you saw them ripped off of houses built prior to the new codes going into effect.

The State building codes are much stronger than the various local building codes were. That's a fact. And if they had been in place prior to that Lenar home project being built in south Dade the damage would have been hugely smaller from Andrew. And our insurance premiums would be hugely smaller as well.

I Lived through Charlie in 04. In Punta Gorda it didn't matter if it was new, or old. It came down and was blow apart. We were 14 Miles south of where the Eye mad Land fall. Scary shit.

Anyone that believes you can make a home hurricane proof or even hurricane resistant and still keep it affordable enough for middle class Americans is nuts. At least at this point. Maybe some future tech will enable it but hurricanes are impressively destructive and there is nothing we can do about that.