Frreeeeeedoooooom in the US: State by state

[Faeelin]

Ah, Libertarians:

Marriage and civil union laws are coded equally with asset forfeiture and arrests for victimless crimes because of the high salience of the issue. However, we do not consider same-sex marriage to be a freedom concern either way. Instead, it seems to be a football in the so-called "culture wars." Nevertheless, we do think that state attempts to enhance the ability of
same-sex partners to make voluntary contracts that affect life or death decisions unequivocally enhance individual liberty.

Land and environmental regulations make up just one-fourteenth of the regulation score. We weight
this category low because we recognize that there are real public goods issues with respect to 1) wild fauna
and flora that do not respect property boundaries, 2)common water and air resources, and 3) nuisancecreating
land uses. We would argue that property owners can solve most problems of the second and third types with various contractual arrangements, such as homeowners' associations. Additionally, some land-use planning could be seen as a legitimate response to distorted incentives created by road subsidies. However, we still include these regulations as negatives in the index because we prefer Coase-style bargaining solutions to top-down, command-andcontrol regulations that may not meet the real needs of local people.22

Can somebody explain to me why libertarians consider less restrictions on pollution a sign of freedom? If all pollution remained only on your property, then sure, I can buy that. But since that's not the case, ISTM that states which have laxer regulations are actually less free, because my health, aesthetic enjoyment of the environment, and quality of life are now being infringed upon somebody else, no?

[jimmy olsen]

Ah, Libertarians:

Marriage and civil union laws are coded equally with asset forfeiture and arrests for victimless crimes because of the high salience of the issue. However, we do not consider same-sex marriage to be a freedom concern either way. Instead, it seems to be a football in the so-called "culture wars." Nevertheless, we do think that state attempts to enhance the ability of
same-sex partners to make voluntary contracts that affect life or death decisions unequivocally enhance individual liberty.

On the other hand, many states perform quite poorly in providing a liberty-friendly environment for their
citizens. New York is the least free by a considerable margin.

Can somebody explain to me why libertarians consider less restrictions on pollution a sign of freedom? If all pollution remained only on your property, then sure, I can buy that. But since that's not the case, ISTM hthat states which have laxer regulations are actually less free, because my health, aesthetic enjoyment of the environment, and quality of life are now being infringed upon somebody else, no?

ISTM?

[Neil]

Is that what libertarians think?

At any rate, environmental regulation doesn't really have much of a freedom component.

[alfred russel]

Is that what libertarians think?

At any rate, environmental regulation doesn't really have much of a freedom component.

It does if the government is taking away your right to dump toxic waste in a river.

[Valmy]

ISTM?

It Seems To Me

[PDH]

Can somebody explain to me why libertarians consider less restrictions on pollution a sign of freedom? If all pollution remained only on your property, then sure, I can buy that. But since that's not the case, ISTM hthat states which have laxer regulations are actually less free, because my health, aesthetic enjoyment of the environment, and quality of life are now being infringed upon somebody else, no?

hthat?

[The Larch]

Ah, Libertarians:

Personally, I founf this part quite puzzling:

Libertarians generally support rules of the road that facilitate optimal flow
of traffic and prohibit reckless and intoxicated drivers from imposing risks of harm on others, but oppose laws that punish private behavior that does not violate
the rights of others. For that reason, seat belt laws and sobriety checkpoints count as notable infringements on individual liberty.

So, passing a breathalizer test is a notable infringement on your individual liberty?  I also don't get the obsession with homeschooling.

[Ed Anger]

•1.       Abraham Lincoln (1861-65)

Caused the Civil War, Burned the South, Started the First Draft Ever, Huge Protection Tariffs, Income Tax, Corporate Welfare, Cotton Trade Takeover, Huge Deficits, US Bank/Ended the Gold Standard with the Greenback, Censorship of the Press, Imprisonment/Deportation of Political Opponents, Deported African-Americas to Liberia

I do declare! I got myself the vapors as the dream of a new south rising flashed before my eyes. squee!

[jimmy olsen]

Jeff Davis started the first American draft.

[Valmy]

So, passing a breathalizer test is a notable infringement on your individual liberty?

It is a notable infringement on my right to be killed by a drunk driver you fascist monster

[alfred russel]

So, passing a breathalizer test is a notable infringement on your individual liberty?  I also don't get the obsession with homeschooling.

I agree with them that it is annoying to be in a hurry and have to wait 10 minutes at a random checkpoint to pass a sobriety test. Also, as I recently got a seatbelt violation ticket on a trip that was a couple of blocks, I sympathize with them there.

The homeschooling? When you are worried about government schools indoctrinating your children with lessons passed down from the UN's black helicopters (possibly involving heresies such as evolution), they are an important defense of liberty. I'm less sympathetic on that front.

[Ed Anger]

I also don't get the obsession with homeschooling.

I reserve the right to warp my kids.

[Valmy]

I reserve the right to warp my kids.

Yeah but you are too lazy to homeschool.

[Ed Anger]

I reserve the right to warp my kids.

Yeah but you are too lazy to homeschool.

That is woman's work.

[Neil]

Is that what libertarians think?

At any rate, environmental regulation doesn't really have much of a freedom component.

It does if the government is taking away your right to dump toxic waste in a river.

To do so is not a right, it is a privilege.