4 ms·
> the broader point of "if we put our heads to it we might be able to avoid an expansion in government power while not making any unacceptable sacrifices." And
by asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
> the broader point of "if we put our heads to it we might be able to avoid an expansion in government power while not making any unacceptable sacrifices."
And I guess my point is that I admit that possibility, but I consider the likelihood very low.
- whatshisface 7y ago>but I consider the likelihood very low. But you just said that the tort scheme would do the same thing in a more inconvenient way! Surely inconvenience is not an unacceptable sacrifice.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y agoThat's not all I said. "You're just using a more convoluted, less effective route to get there. As an added drawback ..." To be very explicit: I think the tort scheme would achieve lower compliance, cause excess deaths, and would also be more expensive and less just in implementation. And atop all that I don't consider the libertarian ideal to be a goal worthy of pursuit. So yeah. Not a fan.