- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 67,218
- Reaction score
- 28,530
- Location
- Lower Hudson Valley, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Probably because, it's not the libertarians who are "looney", but the individual, who for some reason, didn't get what the libertarian was talking about when he discussed liberty...
Here let me help you with a definition, so that you may up your status in this conversation, and join us at the level everyone else is.
personal liberty
noun
the liberty of an individual to do his or her will freely except for those restraints imposed by law to safeguard the physical, moral, political, and economic welfare of others.
Personal liberty | Define Personal liberty at Dictionary.com
I hope that this endeavors you to find what you are so obviously, missing.
You have an odd understanding of what insurance is
True, overweight people are at a higher risk, but insurance is meant to spread and equalize the costs.
That definition is definitely not what those libertarians were referring to because they clearly rejected the restraints imposed by law. In fact, they completely rejected the idea that the law had any legitimacy and authority to "rule" them. Maybe you should try actually reading what's been posted in this thread.
I hope that this endeavors helps you to find what you are so obviously missing.
That definition is definitely not what those libertarians were referring to because they clearly rejected the restraints imposed by law. In fact, they completely rejected the idea that the law had any legitimacy and authority to "rule" them. Maybe you should try actually reading what's been posted in this thread.
I hope that this endeavors helps you to find what you are so obviously missing.
You have an odd understanding of what insurance is
True, overweight people are at a higher risk, but insurance is meant to spread and equalize the costs.
But either way, it seems we can can agree a few things
1) Limiting liberty is not inherently wrong
2) Limiting liberty is a legitimate function of govt (depending on the circumstances)
3) Limiting choice is not inherently wrong and is a legitimate govt function (again, depending on the circumstances)
Not an odd understanding, a perfect understanding actually. In any insurance situation higher risk means the person pays higher premiums.
A bad driver pays higher car insurance rates.
Healthier, younger people pay lower life insurance rates that old unhealthy people.
Hell bad credit can make you pay higher car insurance rates.
Why should health insurance be any different?
Limiting liberty, limiting choice is only acceptable if that liberty impinges on the rights of others.
That's right!! If I choose to rape a little girl, why do we need the govt to step in and stop me? :roll:
And people who think realize that the mayor doesn't make the law
My ability to drink a soda does not infringe on your rights.
personal liberty
noun
the liberty of an individual to do his or her will freely except for those restraints imposed by law to safeguard the physical, moral, political, and economic welfare of others.
How does a drinking sugary drinks affect OTHERS? it doesn't. It affects the person consuming the beverage.
It would mean I would have to read more of your posts.... No thanks man. I can see it's been clearly explained to you, discussion, is not your motivation here.
Your ability to drink soda is not impeded in any way by this legislation.
Why is that?
It is a free market violation. I want to purchase 32 oz of coke. They can't sell me 32 oz of coke, not because they don't make it, because of legislation. My purchase has been impeded.
It is a free market violation.
This is utterly idiotic.
If you want 32 oz of soda and can only buy it in 16 oz drinks, you will buy two sodas.
This accomplishes nothing.
If it was even goobermint's business to start with, and it isn't.
As for the impact of obesity... make everyone pay for the own healthcare and all the sudden your neighbor's weight is not your problem!
You have to ask?
Because this is a country founded on freedom.
You have to ask? Because this is a country founded on freedom. If we value freedom, then we can't allow the government to be making personal decisions for us, as that is the opposite of freedom.
...It is to secure those rights that governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
If government is not securing our rights, then it is not doing its job, not fulfilling its purpose.
I sometimes wonder if it is a back handed attempt to get people to spend more money because now they will have to purchase multiple cups,. bottles whatever. So in a fast food joint, even more people will opt to go thru the drive thru and will not bother with the drinks at all and take their meal home and crack open however many cans of soda they want to drink. Just like everything else, the idiots that have bought their way to the top don't know shyt and it will backfire.
Just like the wicked cig tax increases, which led so many to do the roll your own thing at a price per pack that would be equal to about 1990 prices lol. It didn't curb smoking as much and the gov't ended up taking a huge hit twice tax wise, because now they are getting less revenue from business that sells factory packed smokes as well as so much less that is being bought that way. NYS has among the highest in fees for commercial trucking, so companies hire out of state for their shipping needs. NYS loses twice because they are supposedly so clever with their stratospheric taxes and fees.
I am sure most people at one point watched a business go under because they priced themselves out of the market and ended up going belly up. Liberal government does the same exact thing.
So? There's no right to a free market.
Since you mark yourself as Libertarian-Left, let me ask you this. How do you justify this legislation as a libertarian?
Would you be more for a "sin tax"?
The govt makes personal decisions all the time for us, and that's a good thing. For example, govt has decided that you do not have the freedom to rape people.
Most of us realize that this is A Good Thing...libertarians, not so much
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?