DISQUS

DISQUS Hello!  The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.

Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.

greenish's picture

Unregistered

Feeds

aliases

  • greenish

greenish

2 months ago

in Libertarian Ideal Theory as Silent Complicity on Will Wilkinson
There are plenty of subsidies that would actually be less harmful if they were less discriminatory.

3 months ago

in Cap and Frayed on Will Wilkinson
you see, which does treat them equivalently.

You mean "doesn't"!

4 months ago

in “Never Waste a Good Crisis” on Will Wilkinson
"Thinking" is a long way from "demand", and just imagine what the percentages become if the question mentioned energy taxes.

4 months ago

in Hood’s Conjecture on Will Wilkinson
He picked a terrible social issue to counterpose, because really legalizing drugs would have vast implications for the economy, particularly health care. Daniel Klein here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N_-IHM00cc
1 reply
chmcclellan's picture
chmcclellan This was my thought as well. To counterpose Drug Legalization and economic rights suggests a profound misunderstanding of libertarianism. Putting aside the fiscal effect ($10B-$14B as estimated by Jeffrey Miron, 2005), what is economic liberty but the unencumbered right to enter into voluntary transactions? Maybe the correct posing involves trading decriminalized use with similar sale and trafficking penalties for an increased welfare state.

7 months ago

in Michael Phelps to Promote Sub-Par Sandwiches in New Ad Campaign on Crispy on the Outside
It's the comment "or the tasty meatball sub that I treat myself with" that gets me. It's completely absurd - unless, perhaps, it's a treat for him to eat a low-calorie meal?

7 months ago

in Surprise! I’m a Libertarian! on Will Wilkinson
Not much point in defining "Libertarian" to mean "me and my closest friends", even if you're right.

I've noticed there is a pretty noticeable difference between certain people that can serve as the cut-off for libertarianism: when someone feels that liberty is so important that any constraint requires rigorous and careful justification.

9 months ago

in What Books Would You Ban? on Will Wilkinson
No! Censors frequently don't read or see what they ban - get in character!

1 year ago

in Wherein I Do Not Accept Crispin Sartwell’s Challenge on Will Wilkinson
I am (as I'm sure you are) a libertarian in large part because I think these two axes (justifiable as in non-coercion vs. maximum happiness) are very closely aligned. It should be viewed as an empirical question how close they get or can get to each other, including whether they actually can lie together - whether government can be minimized to zero without losing any of those essential public goods or without a serious loss to some significant part of society. I almost agree with Sartwell: it remains to be seen (to me) if any of government is necessary, and so I would support any effort to reduce it, carefully. But if it gets to a point where we just can't get rid of some government function without serious negative consequences, then so be it.

1 year ago

in Down on the Compound on Will Wilkinson
I don't see this is a philosophical challenge to the anarchy-inclined. If you think the compound's behavior rises to the level of child-abuse, then you should think it is morally justifiable for anyone to use force to free the children, if they do it with care.

The interesting challenge is all practical: given the existence of places like this, how should we fight them? Even when violence is morally justifiable, it is often not prudent or effective.
Returning? Login