This opinion is brought to you by the Koch Brothers. Proud members of the genetically superior master race. Please enjoy your life as production equipment and the cancer you'll get from it.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Problem is when people use this kind of argument to justify runaway capitalism and unrestrained raping of the environment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
bless you
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Markets, tech, and abstinence only education have worked great so far
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A beautiful and timely sharing... Thanks...!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Apart from the challenge of air pollution, in what way do robust property rights fall short and necessitate regulation of pollution?
-
Regulation of pollution IS a way to enforce robust property rights, be they the rights of and in the commons, or private property. Markets are powerful forces, but they have been terrible at pricing in pollution. Externalities are a great boon to the powerful and thus encouraged.
-
Setting aside the commons (which apart from air shouldn't really exist in a free society) pollution regulation would be redundant at best on top of property rights imo. With basic prop rights negative externalities would be grounds for the aggrieved party to seek recompense, no?
-
You'd have private ownership of rivers that flow through multiple countries, states, & cities, including the water and all it carries? You'd privatize the oceans? You'd privatize all species other than humans?
-
That commons shouldn't exist in a free society presumes a first principle. Can't free people freely decide to collectively coordinate in the management of a broadly distributed, boundary-less resource?
-
Seeking legal recompense after-the-fact is absurdly expensive and time-consuming, and puts a huge burden on an individual aggrieved party. Also, it's after-the-fact, so there may be no "real" recompense.
-
Any law is only broken after the fact. Violating property rights is still illegal before the fact
-
Lol, of course, so it's a matter of enforcement, and if you put the burden on an individual, it won't happen. Peter Thiel sued Gawker on behalf of Hulk Hogan because Hogan was "only a millionaire" and thus didn't truly have access to the justice system to seek redress.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.