Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 90 of 90

Thread: Fuzzy Thinking Among Libertarians

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The difference is that intervention will be wrong and even disastrously wrong but happen anyway sooner or later and that is not acceptable for an activity that is being forced on unwilling participants.


    I don't know what that means; intervention is wrong because...it's inevitable...?

    Let's try substituting "defensive war" for "intervention" in that statement:

    intervention defensive war will be wrong and even disastrously wrong but happen anyway sooner or later and that is not acceptable for an activity that is being forced on unwilling participants

    Is that an argument against defensive war?
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post


    I don't know what that means; intervention is wrong because...it's inevitable...?

    Let's try substituting "defensive war" for "intervention" in that statement:
    intervention defensive war will be wrong and even disastrously wrong but happen anyway sooner or later and that is not acceptable for an activity that is being forced on unwilling participants

    Is that an argument against defensive war?
    I don't mean it will happen no matter what, I mean that if the rulers are thought to have the power to intervene they will sooner or later make a disastrous error, that's why they don't have the right.

    If they don't have the right and never intervene they will never make a disastrous error by intervening.

    The difference with defensive war I already explained:

    The second is a case of choosing to fight a losing battle or not when exercising the rulers' duty to manage the defense of their country, they have no choice to leave things as they are because the enemy is choosing to conquer them.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  4. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I don't mean it will happen no matter what, I mean that if the rulers are thought to have the power to intervene they will sooner or later make a disastrous error, that's why they don't have the right.

    If they don't have the right and never intervene they will never make a disastrous error by intervening.
    Let's see if I follow:

    --even though rulers always have the power to intervene
    --we shouldn't talk about it
    --because that might encourage them to intervene
    --and sometimes (you've admitted not always) intervention will be harmful?

    That (very silly argument) applies also to defensive war:

    --even though rulers always have the power to fight a defensive war
    --we shouldn't talk about it
    --because that might encourage them to fight a defensive war
    --and sometimes defensive war will be harmful.

    The difference with defensive war I already explained: "The second is a case of choosing to fight a losing battle or not when exercising the rulers' duty to manage the defense of their country, they have no choice to leave things as they are because the enemy is choosing to conquer them."
    In either case they have a choice: intervene or not, defend or surrender.

    The choice to intervene might be disastrous.

    The choice to defend might be disastrous.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  5. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Let's see if I follow:

    --even though rulers always have the power to intervene
    --we shouldn't talk about it
    --because that might encourage them to intervene
    --and sometimes (you've admitted not always) intervention will be harmful?


    I didn't say we shouldn't talk about it, I said they didn't have a right to do it, they have the power to do many things they don't have a right to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    That (very silly argument) applies also to defensive war:

    --even though rulers always have the power to fight a defensive war
    --we shouldn't talk about it
    --because that might encourage them to fight a defensive war
    --and sometimes defensive war will be harmful.

    In either case they have a choice: intervene or not, defend or surrender.

    The choice to intervene might be disastrous.

    The choice to defend might be disastrous.
    But if they choose to do nothing about intervening nothing bad will happen to their citizens while if they choose to do nothing about the invasion something bad will happen and it might be worse than if they defend.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  6. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  7. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Let's see if I follow:

    --even though rulers always have the power to intervene
    --we shouldn't talk about it
    --because that might encourage them to intervene
    --and sometimes (you've admitted not always) intervention will be harmful?

    That (very silly argument) applies also to defensive war:

    --even though rulers always have the power to fight a defensive war
    --we shouldn't talk about it
    --because that might encourage them to fight a defensive war
    --and sometimes defensive war will be harmful.



    In either case they have a choice: intervene or not, defend or surrender.

    The choice to intervene might be disastrous.

    The choice to defend might be disastrous.

  8. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    But if they choose to do nothing about intervening nothing bad will happen to their citizens
    Untrue; they won't get the benefits (recall the reduced taxes) which they otherwise might have gotten.

    while if they choose to do nothing about the invasion something bad will happen and it might be worse than if they defend.
    Or it might be better.

    [P.S. To make that even more clear:

    Defend or Surrender?
    -defend (might be good, might be bad)
    -surrender (might be good, might be bad)

    Intervene or Not?
    -intervene (might be good, might be bad)
    -not (might be good, might be bad)]


    I'm not seeing any meaningful distinction here, but you seem hung up on pro-active (intervention) v. reactive (defensive war) choices.

    So, let's run with that.

    How about the choice to make or not make an alliance with a foreign power?

    That, like the choice to intervene, is pro-active - they don't "have" to do anything - the initiative is theirs.

    Is that therefore always wrong, states shouldn't have the power to make alliances?
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 07-25-2019 at 08:48 PM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  9. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Untrue; they won't get the benefits (recall the reduced taxes) which they otherwise might have gotten.



    Or it might be better.

    [P.S. To make that even more clear:

    Defend or Surrender?
    -defend (might be good, might be bad)
    -surrender (might be good, might be bad)

    Intervene or Not?
    -intervene (might be good, might be bad)
    -not (might be good, might be bad)]


    I'm not seeing any meaningful distinction here, but you seem hung up on pro-active (intervention) v. reactive (defensive war) choices.
    Not getting benefits is not something bad happening, as long as you equate the two I don't think we will get anywhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    So, let's run with that.

    How about the choice to make or not make an alliance with a foreign power?

    That, like the choice to intervene, is pro-active - they don't "have" to do anything - the initiative is theirs.

    Is that therefore always wrong, states shouldn't have the power to make alliances?
    Something bad might happen if they fail to make a necessary alliance against a stronger enemy or it might not.

    Alliances are a middle ground between intervening and choosing whether or not to defend, it is wise to avoid them but you might need to make them.


    If you are going to insist that not getting benefit is the same as something bad happening then we have come to the absolute end of our ability to debate this topic.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  10. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Not getting benefits is not something bad happening, as long as you equate the two I don't think we will get anywhere.
    If the state fails to prevent 3rd parties from robbing its citizens, that's "something bad."

    But, if the state itself robs its citizens (i.e. taxes them more than is necessary), that's not "something bad"?

    Seems to me that the "something bad" consists in the citizens getting robbed - no matter by whom.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  11. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If the state fails to prevent 3rd parties from robbing its citizens, that's "something bad."

    But, if the state itself robs its citizens (i.e. taxes them more than is necessary), that's not "something bad"?

    Seems to me that the "something bad" consists in the citizens getting robbed - no matter by whom.
    If the state takes more money than the minimum possible required to run a state, that is something bad happening, if it doesn't avail itself of the opportunity to take less than the minimum by taking from someone else that is not something bad happening, it is something possibly good not happening.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  12. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    If the state takes more money than the minimum possible required to run a state, that is something bad happening
    Right

    if it doesn't avail itself of the opportunity to take less than the minimum by taking from someone else that is not something bad happening, it is something possibly good not happening.
    ...er, it can't take less than the minimum, by definition, right?

    The intervention isn't an opportunity to take less than the minimum.

    The intervention is an opportunity to stop taking more than the minimum.

    The minimum isn't whatever the state is taxing at the moment.

    The minimum is the lowest amount the state could tax.

    And, in our scenario, that would be the reduced tax allowed by the intervention.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  13. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Right



    ...er, it can't take less than the minimum, by definition, right?

    The intervention isn't an opportunity to take less than the minimum.

    The intervention is an opportunity to stop taking more than the minimum.

    The minimum isn't whatever the state is taxing at the moment.

    The minimum is the lowest amount the state could tax.

    And, in our scenario, that would be the reduced tax allowed by the intervention.
    It could take less than the minimum and fail to perform its duties and the minimum is whatever it takes to perform its duties.

    And the theoretical lower rate it could charge as a result of intervention is far from certain, it might end up having to charge more after entirely wasting money.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  14. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It could take less than the minimum and fail to perform its duties and the minimum is whatever it takes to perform its duties.
    Before the intervention, L requires $100 in taxes to provide sufficient security.

    After the intervention, L will require $90 in taxes to provide exactly the same security.

    Therefore, which amount, $90 or $100, is the minimum amount required to provide those services?

    (not a trick question)

    This is the same as with anything else, e.g. any kind of reform in the police or courts.

    Before reform, the state's having to tax x; after, it only has to tax x-1. What's the minimum? x-1

    And the theoretical lower rate it could charge as a result of intervention is far from certain, it might end up having to charge more after entirely wasting money.
    That's true for everything, and you've already acknowledged that intervention isn't so uniquely risky that it's always a bad idea - so this is moot.
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 07-25-2019 at 10:17 PM.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken



  15. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  16. #73
    Re: Iran and Venezuela.

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    ...
    They are less than perfectly libertarian, and are therefore potential targets.

    Beyond that, I have no idea; predicting likely outcomes requires more information than I have.

    If and when I propose a specific intervention, you can criticize me if I'm unable to explain how it would work in that case.

    Till then, it's moot; the debate here isn't about whether some intervention would work, it's about whether intervention is justified if it would work.
    So Iran and Venezuela are potential targets.

    You donít propose specific interventions, but this ďphilosophyĒ you advocate lays the groundwork for others to propose and justify interventions and wars. This is very convenient for neoconservatives.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    ďThey are what they hate.Ē - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  17. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by PAF View Post
    That is where An Agorist Primer comes into play.

    It would help if you shared this with other forums that you may belong, and folks around you and in your community... Common Core certainly will never cover this.
    Very few people are interested in econo-philosophy. Or philosophy in general. Most would not get past the first page.

    One thing I did learn from that essay was that when the Obama Administration kept calling Islamic State ISIL instead of ISIS, there was an inside joke involved.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    ďThey are what they hate.Ē - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  18. #75
    @r3volution 3.0

    How would you justify not allowing your ruler to force people to participate in economic/business ventures considering your logic for forcing them to participate in military ventures?

    Are you not actually advocating a form of fascism?
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  19. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    @r3volution 3.0

    How would you justify not allowing your ruler to force people to participate in economic/business ventures considering your logic for forcing them to participate in military ventures?

    Are you not actually advocating a form of fascism?
    OMG fascism is the very last recourse of the scoundrel.

    ...you ought to know better (I think you do).
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  20. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Re: Iran and Venezuela.
    That's right.

    So Iran and Venezuela are potential targets.
    That's right, that's right.

    You don’t propose specific interventions, but this “philosophy” you advocate lays the groundwork for others to propose and justify interventions and wars. This is very convenient for neoconservatives.
    I guess anything other than what's happening presently is convenient for someone.

    ...no concern of mine.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  21. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    OMG fascism is the very last recourse of the scoundrel.

    ...you ought to know better (I think you do).
    It does exist, it says that the leader is all powerful and wiser than the group and should be in charge of everything because he will do better than the individual.

    How would you justify not allowing your ruler to force people to participate in economic/business ventures considering your logic for forcing them to participate in military ventures?
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  22. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It does exist, it says that the leader is all powerful and wiser than the group and should be in charge of everything because he will do better than the individual.
    That doesn't remind you of anything..?

    How would you justify not allowing your ruler to force people to participate in economic/business ventures considering your logic for forcing them to participate in military ventures?
    Nothing we've talked about has anything to do with a real government.

    We've been talking about your bizarre theory of intervention: only allowed if it's Tuesday, and we heard a cow moo, and my left foot hurts, etc.

    Any rational government, tossing all of that right into the trash, would intervene whenever it was profitable.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  23. #80
    It occurs to me that I didn't answer your question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    How would you justify not allowing your ruler to force people to participate in economic/business ventures considering your logic for forcing them to participate in military ventures?
    My logic for intervention is that it's justified if it reduces the total incidence of aggression.

    So, could the state ever be justified in running some business (beyond the business of its core security functions) on those same grounds?

    It could if running that business were a more efficient substitute for some other form of revenue collection.

    For example, if running a lottery monopoly would raise revenue more efficiently than existing taxes, that would be justified.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken



  24. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  25. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    It occurs to me that I didn't answer your question.



    My logic for intervention is that it's justified if it reduces the total incidence of aggression.

    So, could the state ever be justified in running some business (beyond the business of its core security functions) on those same grounds?

    It could if running that business were a more efficient substitute for some other form of revenue collection.

    For example, if running a lottery monopoly would raise revenue more efficiently than existing taxes, that would be justified.
    Then you have no limits on your government at all and it will be abused.

    You are NOT a libertarian, libertarians recognize that "socialism would work if I ran it" is wrong both because the people who say that would not be able to make it work and because you will not always have Mr. Perfect to run things.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  26. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Then you have no limits on your government at all and it will be abused.
    How's that?

    You are NOT a libertarian, libertarians recognize that "socialism would work if I ran it" is wrong both because the people who say that would not be able to make it work and because you will not always have Mr. Perfect to run things.
    I said nothing remotely like that.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  27. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    How's that?
    There is nothing your government isn't allowed to do as long as you claim it's for the common good.



    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    I said nothing remotely like that.
    If the government operating a business to make money isn't socialism then what is it?
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  28. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    There is nothing your government isn't allowed to do as long as you claim it's for the common good.
    No, the state is justified in doing whatever will minimize the incidence of aggression.

    If the government operating a business to make money isn't socialism then what is it?
    This isn't about state-run enterprise v. private enterprise; this is about how the state raises revenue.

    Let's say the state needs $100 to provide the services which it ought to provide (police, courts, etc).

    How should it collect that money?

    By the most efficient possible method.

    For instance, you might tax sales of lottery tickets - i.e. rob people overtly.

    Alternatively, you might grant yourself a lottery monopoly and sell lottery tickets - i.e. rob people in a different way.

    Which is better? Whichever is more efficient.

    It's the same logic as you would use to choose between, say, income tax and sales tax as revenue sources.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  29. #85
    Any rebuttal @Swordsmyth?
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  30. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Any rebuttal @Swordsmyth?
    It doesn't need one, we both made our case above and anyone can see that you are making excuses for socialism and government intervention in the marketplace.

    I trust the readers to judge for themselves.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  31. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    you are making excuses for socialism and government intervention in the marketplace.
    In the form of tax collection, which (unless you converted to anarchism in the last week), you too support, so...?
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  32. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    In the form of tax collection, which (unless you converted to anarchism in the last week), you too support, so...?
    You supported government involvement in business and that is NOT the same as tax collection.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  33. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  34. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You supported government involvement in business and that is NOT the same as tax collection.
    Any aggression on the part of the state which is designed to raise revenue is a tax.

    Tell a business to give you money or else? That's a tax.

    Tell a business not to sell lottery tickets or else (so that you can make more money selling them)? That's a tax.

    Both involve violating property rights; both are for revenue purposes; either is potentially justified by the state's need to provide core services.

    You're grasping at straws to claim otherwise.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

  35. #90
    Alright, I guess we're done, so I'll just summarize.

    From post 25 to post 72, it was demonstrated that intervention can be justified even on SS's (ever-evolving) view of things.

    From post 80 to the post above, SS unsuccessfully argued that my position is "socialistic."

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I trust the readers to judge for themselves.
    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

    -H. L. Mencken

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


Similar Threads

  1. Tom Woods & Stephan Kinsella: Against Fuzzy Thinking--Libertarian Principles
    By Cabal in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2014, 02:28 AM
  2. All warm and fuzzy today
    By Suzu in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 11:09 PM
  3. Giuliani fuzzy math
    By james1906 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-06-2010, 10:58 PM
  4. Arguing against fuzzy numbers
    By RonPaulNewbee in forum Ron Paul: On the Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-01-2008, 02:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •