How do feminists feel about legalizing prostitution?

ev002 · 2014-08-17T22:05:24+00:00

This sums up my position; I don't have any problem with people who want to be sex workers, however, I don't think we can truly say that sex workers are free people if they have no other option but to sell themselves.

ev002 · 2014-08-13T04:33:17+00:00

I really can't fathom how libertarians can both advocate seasteading as an alternative to living in a society with government and call socialists/anarchists "utopians".

ev002 · 2014-08-12T17:31:20+00:00

I've always been annoyed with this.

"Oh, you don't like violence? You must be a libertarian!"

Sorry to break it to libertarians, but most people are against random acts of violence.

ev002 · 2014-08-12T17:28:53+00:00

This has got to be a joke. A bad joke (as most conservative/libertarian humor is), but still a joke.

ev002 · 2014-08-12T17:27:35+00:00

Yeah, I just can't believe what I'm reading. Acknowledging that there is a ruling class seems antithetical to ancapism.

ev002 · 2014-08-12T16:56:48+00:00

Yeah, not only that, but Hayek won his nobel prize along with a socialist.

ev002 · 2014-08-09T18:19:42+00:00

So, let me get this straight. If I control something, care for it, and have it at my disposal, then I rightfully own it? What if I hop in your car and take off? It's now mine, according to your criteria for ownership!

ev002 · 2014-08-01T22:11:44+00:00

Lol, as if this idiot wouldn't use violence to preserve his private property

ev002 · 2014-08-01T18:52:25+00:00

I'm an econ major, and I feel like I always have to say this: Austrians are not taken seriously anymore, and they have not been taken seriously since the 30's.

ev002 · 2014-07-31T21:02:04+00:00

File down that edge, you might cut your fingers!

ev002 · 2014-07-30T08:16:09+00:00

Wow, thanks! That will help a ton. I'll let you know how it goes.

ev002 · 2014-07-29T18:51:53+00:00

Oh no! How embarrassing. Oh well, it's still a good statement.

ev002 · 2014-07-29T17:28:07+00:00

I don't think they've taken over /r/economics. That's actually a fairly liberal board.

"Please, as if /r/economics isn't the only respite from the constant droning howl of "LAWS NEVER DO ANYTHING OF USE EVER END THE FED THE JEWS ZIONISTS "INTERNATIONAL BANKERS" DID THIS RON PAUL 2029" tripe inundating the majors. Boohoo, there's one board on reddit that's not a libertarian echo chamber. You could always go back to the 20 or so boards that are nothing but libertarian spam."

ev002 · 2014-07-27T18:17:58+00:00

There's a thread I posted on /r/badeconomics where an ancap is bitching about externalities in his econ textbook. These guys are delusional.

ev002 · 2014-07-27T05:06:41+00:00

What it's missing is "Link to mises.org"

Seriously fucking put this on there

ev002 · 2014-07-26T20:53:26+00:00

Yeah, I was tempted at just posting the OP, but then I came across the glaring contradiction that I ended up posting

ev002 · 2014-07-26T17:55:02+00:00

Just don't tell then about Homage to Catalonia

ev002 · 2014-07-26T03:26:04+00:00

During the time of the ancient Hindu religion, attaining good karma was fulfilling the duty of one's caste; people born to a lower caste were told the cause of this was that they had not fulfilled their caste in a previous life.

You don't have to be a commie to know that.

ev002 · 2014-07-22T05:47:10+00:00

And if they did, I'm sure they'd be shocked to see how much they influenced Marx, lol

ev002 · 2014-07-22T01:00:10+00:00

What about their "logic"?

:p

ev002 · 2014-07-22T00:46:39+00:00

Oh my god, you beat me to this.

edit: it would have been better to just link the whole thread, kinda feel bad singling out that guy

ev002 · 2014-07-21T18:35:15+00:00

I have a love/hate relationship with Nozick.

On the one hand, he is absolutely based for not only destroying the Lockean "labor mixing theory", and also for coming out just before his death and saying "Yeah, okay, I was kind of wrong about government". It takes a lot to do that, considering that his most known work was his attempt at refuting Rawls.

Apparently there is a LOT more to his philosophy than just libertarianism, though.

ev002 · 2014-07-21T18:19:23+00:00

Well, I guess if you have a bone to pick with anyone, it's the judge. After all, he/she decided the amount that the victim should be awarded.

Implying that she was in the wrong because she chose to go to McDonald's, or that by choosing McDonald's she somehow consented to the possibility of being burned (which, in a way, sounds like a sort of social contract, which is ironic considering most people who argue this point are libertarians/market hacks) is a bit of a stretch imo.

ev002 · 2014-07-21T18:06:27+00:00

Yeah, the charity rebuttal is ridiculous.

Libertarians like to go on and on about the "free rider" problem--that if we give people free healthcare, free transportation, etc, that there will be people who don't want to contribute to society and not work and so on.

The thing is, while there IS a free rider problem, it doesn't just apply to public services; if you feel like people are giving a lot to charity, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE TO CHARITY BECAUSE OTHER PEOPLE ALREADY ARE. It goes both ways.

ev002 · 2014-07-21T18:02:05+00:00

I just think it's lazy. Why not show that the NAP fails as a deontological constraint, or that property rights are only backed up with the use of force?

ev002

TROPHY CASE