51–54 of 54 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People in the US are now forced to buy health insurance (or pay a fine/tax).
> (or pay a fine/tax) Then you're not forced into one course of action.
You're being forced into parting with your money. So, yes, you are being forced into a course of action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably don't realize it, but the interstates were built over an earlier system of federal highways (heard of Route 66? That's I-40.). Before federal highways, you could buy "maps" along the lines of "when you see an intersection that looks like this picture, turn right." That thuggish federal jackboot stomping on your face forever can be kind of helpful, eh?
The interstates were built over an earlier system of federal highways... Which is a complete misnomer, as US numbered highways were and still are maintained by state and local governments [1]. I grew up near the "birthplace of Route 66" so yeah, I've heard of it. It was maintained and improved by a private organization (imagine that!) [2] until the federal interstate push of the 1950s. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…
I feel like the reasonable middle ground here is simply what Fred Turner is insisting: the two components are intertwined and symbiotic. Why is that so hard to accept?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> (or pay a fine/tax) Then you're not forced into one course of action.
> Then you're not forced into one course of action. You're being forced into parting with your money. So, yes, you are being forced into a course of action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an odd argument to make against libertarians when libertarians support defense spending as a key role of government. The Highway Interstate system was driven mainly by defense needs. It's also known as the "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways"[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System
Where does a libertarian draw a clear line between defense and non-defense spending? Couldn't food stamps be considered a defense policy if it ensures an able bodied population of potential conscripts? Where is the philosophical line?