PDA

View Full Version : "response for Ron Paul's BS. Frack him and his evil offspring!"




Reason
06-21-2010, 03:13 PM
This was posted as a response to RP's post today re: the oil spill.

You can read it at the forum thread here

http://forums.precentral.net/showthread.php?p=2517920#post2517920

Your response?


Here is a thoughtful response for Paul's BS. Frack him and his evil offspring!:)

"Consider the purely hypothetical case of a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The traditional libertarian would argue that regulation is unnecessary because the tort system will hold the driller liable for any damage. But what if the leak is so vast that the driller doesn’t have the resources to pay? The libertarian would respond that the driller should have been forced to post a bond or pay for sufficient insurance to cover any conceivable spill. Perhaps, but then the government needs to regulate the insurance contract and the resources of the insurer.

Even more problematically, the libertarian’s solution requires us to place great trust in part of the public sector: the court system. At times, judges have been bribed; any courtroom can be influenced by the best lawyers that money can buy. Andrei Shleifer and I have argued that the early regulations were appealing precisely because of a sense that the courts couldn’t be counted upon to protect private property."

Edward L. Glaeser is an economics professor at Harvard.

teacherone
06-21-2010, 03:16 PM
private property owners suing private companies in private courts...

Live_Free_Or_Die
06-21-2010, 03:23 PM
Here is a thoughtful response for Paul's BS. Frack him and his evil offspring!

Frack you too!



"Consider the purely hypothetical case of a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The traditional libertarian would argue that regulation is unnecessary because the tort system will hold the driller liable for any damage.

Basically.



But what if the leak is so vast that the driller doesn’t have the resources to pay?

Government is somehow going to change the fact the people are going to have to pay the difference?



The libertarian would respond that the driller should have been forced to post a bond or pay for sufficient insurance to cover any conceivable spill.

Yup.



Perhaps, but then the government needs to regulate the insurance contract and the resources of the insurer.

Libertarians do not assert it has to be a fractional reserve performance bond or fractional reserve insurance only that when determined by the market it will be the correct performance bond or insurance.



Even more problematically, the libertarian’s solution requires us to place great trust in part of the public sector:

What libertarian public sector are you referring to?



the court system. At times, judges have been bribed; any courtroom can be influenced by the best lawyers that money can buy. Andrei Shleifer and I have argued that the early regulations were appealing precisely because of a sense that the courts couldn’t be counted upon to protect private property."

No shit. That is why libertarians advocate eliminating the public sector and the evil monopoly stranglehold it has on law and justice. Obviously you agree with me the public sector is incapable of consistently delivering justice and justice should have to compete in the market so people can vote everyday with their feet and wallets.



Edward L. Glaeser is an economics professor at Harvard.

Edward L. Glaeser is an economics professor at Harvard idiot.

Anti Federalist
06-21-2010, 04:49 PM
Edward L. Glaeser is an economics professor at Harvard

All I needed to read.

tsopranos
06-21-2010, 06:50 PM
All I needed to read.

An exception I'm sure, but we do have some friendly people in Harvard...
http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/miron

silverhandorder
06-21-2010, 07:00 PM
Early regulations can not foresee these things happening either. You think BP would want to pay out 20 billion that it is being forced to now?

axiomata
06-21-2010, 07:08 PM
All I needed to read.

and is not named Jeffrey Miron seals the deal for me.