3 ms·
First, the Libertarian Party is not "all libertarians". Second, environmental regulation falls out of property rights, since pollution spreads onto people's pr
by grandalf 9y ago
First, the Libertarian Party is not "all libertarians".
Second, environmental regulation falls out of property rights, since pollution spreads onto people's property. If you pollute a stream, the stream carries the pollution to someone else's property and damages it.
- vacri 9y agoAnd the libertarian response to that issue is not the ounce of prevention, but the pound of cure. Rather than have a priori environmental legislation, the libertarian position is to wait until the (possibly irreversible) damage is done, then try and find the person who did it (if you can, and good luck if it was a variety of entities), then take them to a court, then prove them at fault (not a given, especially if more than one party), get a judgement of fiscal damages against them (hopefully they have enough money for recompense, but not enough money to tie you up for years), then actually get the money from them, and finally put that money towards cleaning up the spill (again, if it's not irreversible).
- demilicious 9y agoNot at all. A perfectly viable libertarian response to your hypothetical is a carbon tax or pollution tax - some cost applied to a negative externality.
- greglindahl 9y agoDid I miss the stampede of Libertarians advocating that?