HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sybalsky@parc.xerox.com (John Sybalsky)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Andre Marrou on Larry King
Date: 27 Jul 92 09:52:22 GMT
Organization: Xerox Palo Alto Research Center

In article <1992Jul24.174409.28165@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:

[re building codes]

>... Those pesky codes aren't designed to drive up the cost of housing,
>they're there to ensure safety.

That's what the unions would like you to think.  In Hayward, CA, recently,
there was a proposal to allow homeowners the option of using plastic plumbing--
which cuts the cost of plumbing work, and has been used successfully in
many other parts of the country.

The local plumbing folks lobbied the planning board (successfully) to prevent
this.  Their argument?  That in case of a fire, the plastic might emit fumes
that would harm firefighters.

Now,
  (1) PVC plumbing is in wide use in other parts of the country, with
      no widespread reports of firemen kicking off.

  (2) Firefighters go into smoky houses with Scott [air] packs, anyhow.

You'll be pleased to know that Hayward is safe for its firefighters, but that
building a house there is still a couple THOUSAND dollars more expensive
than it needs to be.


-- 
--John
Venue
I OWN the company.  Of COURSE they're official opinions!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: rab@well.sf.ca.us (Bob Bickford)
Subject: Re: What is Marrou's position on research and space exp?
Keywords: Marrou, policy, space
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:23:09 GMT

In article <1992Jul26.124517.4859@techbook.com>,
 szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:
>I'm not sure of the exact platform, but the general goal of libertarians
>is to reduce or eliminate non-defense government funding for research, and 

This might be misconstrued, so let me point out that libertarians also
oppose most of the current so-called Defense budget, including much of
the "defense research" items.  I don't have particulars handy, and the
specific issue of defense research is not addressed in the platform,
but I think you'll find that most Libertarians endorse significant
reductions in the defense budget.  We usually talk about making Japan
and Germany pay for their own defense (gee, have I heard some other
candidates finally picking this up from us recently?).

--
        Robert Bickford                       rab@well.sf.ca.us
 Vice-Chair, Libertarian Party    /-------------------------------------\
      of Marin County (CA)        | Don't Blame Me: I Voted Libertarian |
                                  \-------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: mece3d@jane.uh.edu (Chris Struble)
Subject: Re: Libertarian ticket supported on Rush Limbaugh show
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 21:58:00 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.161346.2451@arbi.Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>,
wayne@mathematik.uni-Bremen.de (Wayne Tvedt) writes...

>What evidence is there that the two parties have tried to "suppress"
>the Libertarians specifically?  I've never heard so much of a peep
>of recognition towards the Libs from them.  

Actually they do know about us, they just have more to lose than to 
gain by mentioning us on television, since we don't get any other
coverage. If the networks started covering us they would have to
start talking about us - or if we become a significant electoral
threat, in which case we would get the coverage anyway.

They DO talk about us in New Hampshire. I read an article from a NH
paper this morning that had excerpts from radio interviews with local
Democrat and Republican party officials who said the LP candidates
could have an impact on close races this time. I think they're right.
Heck, they've even got several primary races between NHLPers who want
to run for the same office this time, including the race for governor
(both Miriam Luce and Calvin Warburton want the position). 

There was also the last minute anti-term limits media blitz in 
Washington state, which mentioned that the pro-term limits campaign 
was got funding from "far right libertarian billionaires" David
and Ed Koch. And the attack article on Marrou written by George Will
recently.

Someone on the net has written that there are three stages for how 
the non-ideological major parties will treat an ideological party
like ours: 1) ignore; 2) attack; 3) emulate and absorb. We are close
to the beginnings of stage 2, in New Hampshire if not nationally.

>Wayne Tvedt                             wayne@mathematik.uni-bremen.de
>                                      ...fold globally, expand locally

------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Christian Struble       |  The true civilization is where every     |
|  Mechanical Engineering  |  man gives to every other every right     |
|  University of Houston   |  that he claims for himself               |
|  mece3d@jetson.uh.edu    |                  --  Robert Ingersoll     |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:251 alt.politics.elections:9268
From: el27166@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Lex Luthor)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: What is Marrou's position on research and space exp?
Keywords: Marrou, policy, space
Date: 28 Jul 92 01:18:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas J. Nugent) writes:

>>Meanwhile, the most productive inventions since WWII: the transistor, 
>>integrated circuit, CPU, RAM, handheld calculator, personal computer, 
>>VCR, relational database, electronic spreadsheet, etc. were developed 
>>in the private sector, at a cost orders of magnitude lower than 
>>Federal projects.  The most exciting technological threads of today 
>>are also being driven by the private sector; for example most of the recent 
>>nanotechnology breakthroughs (eg moving individual atoms with atomic
>>force microscopes) have been made in IBM's Almaden and Yorktown 
>>labs. 

>Pardon me, but wasn't the transistor invented by John Bardeen and colleagues?
>(Here at the U of I as a matter of fact.)  It may have been improved and
>marketed by private industry, but the original idea and transistor were
>invented at a public university.

I think that they were working for Bell Labs at the time.  They were 
supposed to be developing some sort of switching system better than the
old electromagnetic ones which were slownoisy, and sparked.

>Also, are you sure that IBM, or even the researchers there, get no support
>whatsoever from the government?  

Do they really need it?  IBM ain't no Chrysler.

>>Even privately funded pure science, like the Keck telescope, has produced 
>>more science per dollar than government funded projects like the much-hyped 

>Have we yet received any science from Keck yet? (Is it the first to use
>the x number of independent mirrors to simulate a larger single mirror than
>is possible to create?  This might be considered science produced by it.)

>"To be average scares the hell out of me." -- Anonymous
>Tom Nugent		e-mail: tjn32113@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu

What exactly IS a Libertarian?  If I knew, I might be one.  Then again,
I might say the same for Fascism.  Would a Libertarian be someone in
favor of a pornographic magazine featuring scantily-clad neo-nazi blondes
in brown-shirts entitled "Fashion in Fascism Today"?  Then again, a Fascist
might be in favor of the same... Hmmm.

-- 
Eu-Ming Lee (aka CyberGeek)                      el27166@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
"Nobody told me there'd be .sigs like these."
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-&{&gp% +/)@ooooooo
NO CARRIER
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Subject: Re: What is Marrou's position on research and space exp?
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 644-8135
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 09:42:13 GMT

In article <AeQjeK600h5y4jBu9e@andrew.cmu.edu> Conrad Poelman <cp2w+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Since the government
>actually buys our defense systems from private companies, shouldn't the
>companies be doing the research to develop technology for the
>next-generation fighter/ship/satellite/communications systems/whatver
>themselves instead of some bureaucratic government agency?

They do this now, to some extent, and the incentives for that might be
increased.  Potentially, we could set up a system where the government 
competitively buys finished products, instead of giving detailed 
specifications.  That might get on the Libertarian list of experiments to 
try, but for now I don't think it's a major priority.  The major Libertarian 
defense plank for reducing defense costs is to stop defending Germany and 
Japan.


-- 
szabo@techbook.COM  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400, N81) 
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:155 alt.politics.clinton:615 talk.politics.misc:35745
From: szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politic.perot,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Demopublican or Republicrat ?
Date: 23 Jul 92 07:33:55 GMT
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 644-8135

In article <Brsn0p.BDK@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:

>  (although as I've said earlier, I think they're wasting their time
>  in politics anyway; they have to make grass roots changes in social
>  values before they can have a libertarian government.)

One of the ways to do this is to use elections, and political office
when elections can be won, as "bully pulpits".  I agree we need other
efforts, more P.J. O'Rourkes and Cato Institutes to spread the word to 
rest of our society.

-- 
szabo@techbook.COM  Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 644-8135 (1200/2400, N81) 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc
From: berenson@cookie.enet.dec.com (Hal Berenson)
Subject: Re: unfair treatment of LP (getting better in New Hampshire)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: alt
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:17:29 GMT


In article <1992Jul21.145747.2252@alliant.com>, werme@alliant.com (Ric Werme) writes...
>2) We have a contested primary for governor!  This makes it harder for
>   pollsters to ignore us.  (This is a whole other subject and sore point.)
>   Miriam Luce won 5% of the vote in the last election and got us major
>   party status.  Cal Warburton is a State Rep who switched from R to L.
> 

This is GREAT news!  One reason I've found for people not registering (or
staying registered) as Libertarians is that they want to vote in
the republican or democratic primaries.  Our participation in a primary
gives people a reason to stay registered Libertarians.  It will also, as
mentioned, generate more pollster and press interest!

I'm not thrilled about my pending move to NH, but the progress the NH LP
has been making is one bright point.  I just hope it continues after Bill
Winter moves on.
.............................................................................

Hal Berenson	

Home: 71640.3535@compuserve.com
Work: berenson@cookie.enet.dec.com

-- Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are my own, not my employer's! If
I happen to communicate with you from work rather than home, its just
for convenience (just like asking for a "daytime phone number") and should
not be construed as representing the views of my employer or its
employees, officers, directors, or stockholders. --
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: tsf@CS.CMU.EDU (Timothy Freeman)
Subject: What's a person? (was Re: Why is the LP platform pro-choice...)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 14:49:07 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: tsf@U.ERGO.CS.CMU.EDU

In article <Brpu6u.5By@acsu.buffalo.edu> sulkom@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Philandros) writes:

   I personally believe that the appearance of brain wave activity is a
   good cut-off point for abortions.  That way, murder only applies to a
   PERSON.  What better way to determine personhood other than brain wave
   activity?  

People who have taken large doses of barbiturates don't have brain
waves, but they can sometimes recover consciousness without brain
damage.  I think that looking for physiological signs of personhood is
a bad idea.  If we look for behavioral signs instead, we run a chance
of finding a way to make a rational choice, because a person's
behavior makes a difference to our society but subtle physiological
signs don't.

I propose this criterion: Something is a person if you can negotiate
with it.

Or, we can try this: Something is a person if it can understand
property rights.

Neither of these give the intuitively right results for infants or
for, say, people with acute Alzheimer's disease.  But our society
already distinguishes comptent people from incompetent people who need
a guardian.  Hmm.  Maybe I should change "person" to "legally
competent person" in my criteria above?

   It does leave open the question of whether cryogenically preserved
   (i.e. frozen, with the intent to be revived by future technology) people 
   can be murdered (it might be a contractual matter).  

As I see it, since there's no guarantee that they can ever be thawed,
destroying the suspendees would be property damage (although a
large penalty should be attached because they are irreplaceable).
Hmm, I also think of murder as property damage, so I guess that's not an
important distinction.  One difference is that living people own
themselves but the cryonics organization owns the suspendees.

--
Tim Freeman <tsf@cs.cmu.edu>
When they took the fourth amendment, I was silent because I don't deal drugs.
When they took the sixth amendment, I kept quiet because I know I'm innocent.
When they took the second amendment, I said nothing because I don't own a gun.
Now they've come for the first amendment, and I can't say anything at all.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Andre Marrou on Larry King
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 05:32:24 GMT

In article <168338643.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com> MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com writes:
}In article <TSF.92Jul28151354@U.ERGO.CS.CMU.EDU>
}tsf@CS.CMU.EDU (Timothy Freeman) writes:
}>Regulations won't keep your kids safe in this case.  The builder can
}>lie to the regulator as easily as he can lie to you.
}>
}No, he cannot.  I am not an expert in home construction, nor is it
}realistically possible for me to become one.  A building inspector has
}a better chance of knowing what to look for, and the legal clout to
}back up his findings.  The builder can just as easily lie to the
}inspector, but he has a much better chance of getting caught.

If your goal is to have efficacious building inspection, then why assume that
this service can best be provided by statist means, when you must have
observed such means failing to provide efficacious goods and services elsewhere?

It has been pointed out in this thread that there is a very clear reason why
private building inspectors will tend to be more efficacious than statist
ones: statist ones are unaccountable, probably because they're covered by the
invidious legal doctrine of "sovereign immunity," stemming from the idea that
1) the King can do no wrong, therefore 2) suing him for wrongdoing breaks this
rule, which isn't to be broken.  Private inspectors, however, are accountable,
and therefore have greater incentive to perform well.


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: thant@void.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman)
Subject: Re: Andre Marrou on Larry King
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 23:16:35 GMT


In article <168318A82.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com>, MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com writes:

[...]

> I do not buy the program of either party totally.  I even acknowledge
> the Libertarians have some good ideas, especially in the field of civil
> liberties.  You do, however have a hard time with economics.

He he!  There are, of course, people who have come to exactly the
opposite conclusion.  How convenient for the State.

But seriously, libertarians don't expect the homeless problem to 
disappear.  What libertarians want people to acknowledge is the
costs of regulations that purport to promote safety.  This is 
good economics.  They also want people to acknowledge that 
government solutions haven't worked, and that operationally the 
main functions of organizations like HUD is to provide welfare 
for politically well-connected construction companies.

[...]

> I personally believe Libertarians are hopeless, but that is not what I
> said in my post.  Saying that logical arguments are useless is not
> necessarily the same thing.  You start from a Libertarian set of
> premises, from which you draw conclusions.  I start from a different
> set that leads to different conclusions.  Neither of us has the
> slightest chance of being convinced by the other.

The only premise that libertarians start with is that people have
a right to decide for themselves what the appropriate balance of
costs to benefits is.  (This premise doesn't mean issues like
abortion are automatically solved for you.  But it does provide
a foundation from which rules for social interaction can be
derived and institutionalized.)

The alternate premise is that certain people have a right to decide
for others against their will what is best for them.  Is that what
you really believe?

thant


Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
From: shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro)
Subject: Re: Libertarian ticket supported on Rush Limbaugh show
Organisation: SKS Computer Consulting, Inc.
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Date: 22 JUL 92 12:30:05 EST


In article <1992Jul21.234135.2058@techbook.com>, szabo@techbook.com (Nick
Szabo) writes...

>JIm complained that Libertarians "did not bother" to get their message in
>the media, so that he hadn't even heard who their presidential
>candidates were this year.  The caller then mentioned their names, 
>Andre Marrou and Nancy Lord.

Acutally the problem is with the 'popular' media. They virtually ignore the
Libertarian party. They just won't cover it. 

Where all kinds of left-wing whackos get lots of press, the more conservative
libertarians are all but ignored or supressed.

>They also had on several 
>Bush supporters, so perhaps a larger number of Libertarian callers will 
>show that Rush's fans either support or are interested in learning about 
>the Libertarian phenomenon.

Since when is a party that is 20 years old considered a 'phenomenon'?

The democrats and republicans have been trying to suppress the libertarian
party since the beginning. Apparently they take it seriously.

Regards,
Steve.

/*********************************************************************
*                               *                                    *
* Steve Shapiro                 * All views and opinions expressed   *
* SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and do not neccessarily *
* Specializing in:              * reflect those of my clients,       *
* DEC/VAX/VMS/ULTRIX, Unix & PC * employers or employees             *
*                               *                                    *
**********************************************************************
* Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org                             *
* FidoNet 1:101/440 (508) 664-6354                                   *
* The Contract Professional BBS, North Reading, MA                   *
*********************************************************************/

Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: mlee@esd.dl.nec.com (Michael Lee)
Subject: GETTING ON THE BALLOT - LIBERTARIAN
Organization: NEC America, Engineering & Support
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 21:37:40 GMT


People to call if you can help with petitioning:

   CO  Chris Bogart     303 449 6327
   CT  Rich Loomis      203 745 2848
   DC  Stuart Reges     202 543 1988
   IL  Sue Walton       708 475 0391
   MA  Lee Nason        617 286 1719
   MN  Bob Kuhn         612 377 9888
   MO  Steve Schaper    314 481 1776
   ND  Terry Spath      701 280 0641
   NJ  Dan Karlan       201 444 2846
   NY  Jeff Russell     518 233 1344
   OH  Mark Ginter      513 671 2339
   PA  Richard Schwarz  215 854 8137
   RI  Stephen Lonardo  401 273 9079
   VA  Roger Menner     804 276 2438
   WV  Chris Fishbeck   304 263 0148


-------------------------------------------------------------------
It is often stated (and certainly true) that the poor have no right
to the wealth of the rich.  It is seldom stated (but equally true)
that the rich have no right to the wealth of the poor.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I prefer a small government which may permit some evil to
a large government which promotes evil at my expense.
---------------------------------------------------------

Michael Lee
mlee@esd.dl.nec.com
214-518-3807
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politic.perot,talk.politics.misc
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Demopublican or Republicrat ?
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:02:49 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Jul22.021646.4576@esd.dl.nec.com> mlee@esd.dl.nec.com (Michael Lee) writes:
>From article <BrrCyK.AEz@wrs.com>, by gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven):
>>
>> Why is this so hard for people to understand?  NO NON-DEMOPUBLICAN WILL
>> WIN THE PRESIDENCY IF EVERYONE VOTES DEMOPUBLICAN!  That goes for
>> elections at any level, really...the very very low number of
>> independent, Libertarian, or any other third-party holders of partisan
>> offices is a testament of that.


  This is simply wrong.   Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is a
  socialist independent.   If you can elect a socialist in one of the
  most capitalist countries on earth, you ought to at least be able
  to elect a libertarian congressman or two.   The libertarians in my
  experience are political idealists who are more concerned with
  ideological purity than with running an effective, practical, down
  to earth political campaign.    They refuse to soften their message
  at all for political expediency, and so come across as extremist
  nuts to most of the few voters who have ever heard of them.

  (although as I've said earlier, I think they're wasting their time
  in politics anyway; they have to make grass roots changes in social
  values before they can have a libertarian government.)


---peter


  
  


Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: Andre Marrou on Larry King
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 17:39:00 GMT

>Of course regulations cost.  Who ever said they do not?  The
>Libertarian alternative of removing these regulations costs too.  You
>assume builders would only cut corners on housing for poor people?  I
>don't.  I assume they will cut corners on my house given the chance.
>Without standards, they would have no reason not to do so.  I don't
>want my kids sleeping in a firetrap because the builder could save a
>few dollars on the electrical system, while charging me for more
>expensive parts.

So don't buy it. Commision a house and/or inspect it yourself. Don't
buy it if you don't like the way it is built. With the regulations
gone you could even build your own.

				mike
Newsgroups: alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.elections