HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Question: Foreign Policy Issues
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 09:25:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.195702.6333@genie.slhs.udel.edu> nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz) writes:
}I don't know about prominent libertarians, but in _Reason_ and _Liberty_
}(the two libertarian publications I follow), I've seen altogether too
}much of the "asshole conservative humor" aren't-feminists-ridiculous
}sort of articles, and no countervaling stuff. I don't feel entirely
}welcome as a result.

Very good point!  About all they've done is cover Camille Paglia in Reason
and print Carol Moore's stuff in Liberty.  And I haven't seen a review of
Joan Kennedy Taylor's "Reclaiming the Mainstream" in either yet!

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
From: gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: For your "amusement" (except it's not funny)
Reply-To: gak@wrs.com
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:42:20 GMT

Reprinted from the 12/10 Newark (NJ) Star-Ledger with neither
permission nor comment (for now)...

		    TAKING LICENSE ON LOST LEVIES

New York (AP) - It's another War Between the States, with a twist:
Freewheeling tax agents scribbling New York license plate numbers at
shopping malls in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

New York's Department of Taxation and Finance said yesterday that 300
letters will be mailed this week - almost 2,000 by the end of the month
- as a result of a sales-tax reconnaissance in New Jersey last
weekend.

"A vehicle registered to you was recently observed parked at a State of
New Jersey shopping location", says the form letter. "If you have
incurred a use-tax liability, please return the enclosed ST-130 from."

On Tuesday, the department mailed letters to 600 upstate New Yorkers
whose cars were spotted at malls in Erie and Warren, Pa., said
spokesman Paul Rickard.

For now, compliance is voluntary - although customers should be aware
that names and addresses occasionally emerge during store audits.

"Our purpose is to make people aware of the fact that they have a
responsibility," Rickard said. "We're not out there to torment people
who are doing their Christmas shopping or driving an aunt who lives in
New Jersey to the mall."

---
gak			Der Herr Buergermeister gibt bekannt, dass ab
gak@wrs.com		Donnerstag Bier gebraut wird und deshalb ab
attmail!gakhaus!gak	Mittwoch nicht mehr in den Bach geschissen
107/H/3&4		werden darf.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: jfmcbray@sacam.OREN.ORTN.EDU (Jason F McBrayer)
Subject: Re: Labor Standard
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:00:48 GMT


	The standard of one currency unit=one hour of unskilled labour has
been proposed before.  In fact, many of the implications are worked out in
_The_Stainless_Steel_Rat_Gets_Drafted by Harry Harrison.  One is that
since there is no "value added", prices fall to match the amount of labour
needed to produce them.  In an industrial society, this is VERY small!  In
Harrison's description, however, no distinction was made between skilled
and unskilled labour.
	I feel I must make it clear that I do not have enough info to make
any judgements on this proposal yet.

-----------------------------------
Jason F. McBrayer
jfmcbray@sacam.oren.ortn.edu
"No comment"

Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden)
Subject: Re: Federal Indictment Against Bobby Fischer
Organization: University of North Carolina
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 01:11:57 GMT

In article <BzD52v.7r3@wrs.com> gak@wrs.com writes:
>Heard a piece of a story on NPR this morning about a federal indictment
>against Bobby Fischer for playing chess in one of the former
>Yugoslavian republics.  Dershowitz for the Defense said that the right
>to play chess is a subset of the right of free association and of the
>right of free speech, and is therefore Constitutionally protected.  The
>prosecutor (whose name I didn't catch) said that it would have been no
>different if he had played in South Africa, and besides, he made five
>million dollars at the chess match.
>
>I didn't hear the beginning or the end of the story, so I don't know if
>
>	- an indictment has been presented,
>	- an indictment will be presented, or
>	- an indictment is being considered.
>
>Comments?  Opinions?  Facts?
>
>gak, who got some interesting looks from people as he slammed his car
>     door and shouted about fascists this morning...
>
>---
>Richard Stueven        gak@wrs.com         attmail!gakhaus!gak        107/H/3&4
>
>How can you be ignorant of something you didn't know in the first place?
>                                                      - Choo
>

	As far I know, he's not in trouble for playing chess.  He's in hot
water for conduction a commercial transaction (a professional sports
exibit / match) in violation of UN sanctions.  Bobby's a US cit. so we
have to enforce it on him.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Are recent Libertarian crusades not libertarian?
From: dgross@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Dave Gross)
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 19:26:31 GMT
 <1992Dec19.084522.21316@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> <1992Dec19.102325.12203@genie.slhs.udel.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mousebat, Follicle, Goosecreature, Ampersand, Spong, Wapcaplet,                 Looseliver, Vendetta & Pang

According to starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr):
>Let's take this to absurdum, too: suppose studies showed that WASPs tended
>to pass Nazi policies (which is false as far as I know).  Would you so
>readily support their worth to serve lifetime sentences in Congress?

	This still is a fairly free republic -- at least where
	voting rights is concerned.  People reserve the right to
	vote against incumbents should they so choose.  If people
	want to vote for the same idiots again and again, it is
	their perogative to do so.  It is profoundly anti-liberty
	for the government to step in and save the people from
	their own decisions.

	If people voted for the same Nazis again and again, I
	would not abolish their right to do so -- thus "destroying
	democracy in order to save it" or however you would put it.

-- 
******************* INTERNET: dgross@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU **********************
      "We should keep the Panama Canal.  After all, we stole it fair and
       square."                         -- S.I. Hayakawa
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gmw0622@venus.tamu.edu (Mr. Grinch)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: The Larger Picture (was Re: Gold Standard? No!)
Date: 15 Dec 1992 18:41 CST
Organization: GrinchCo
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: venus.tamu.edu
Keywords: Gold, zealot, oil
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1gkv9qINNjhq@armory.centerline.com>, mrh@centerline.com (Mike Huben) writes...
>In article <BzA4Fr.20r@newsserver.technet.sg> ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser) writes:
>>In article <liqedgINNra@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> kris@bsg8.Corp.Sun.COM writes:

 > 
 >One minor point: we already have competing currencies.  Every commodity that
 >is traded on the exchanges is a de-facto currency, including national
 >currencies.  With rare exceptions, these all "float".
 >
No.  First off,  you are taxed based on your gains in nominal dollars rather 
than on anything real,  so all exchanges must be tied to dollars.  Second,  
you are required by law to accept dollars as payments of debts.


 >When I lived in Ecuador, every bank provided currency exchange for a small
 >fee.  Due to rapid inflation, most kept their money either as foreign
 >cash or as acounts in foreign currencies.  That we don't do that in the
 >US is a tribute to the stability of our currency compared to those of the
 >rest of the world.
 > 
 >Mike Huben

We live on the same planet,  but different worlds.   You say,  "hey,  the 
government isn't currently severely abusing its ability to print up money 
(relative to Ecuador),  so we shouldn't worry that they can".  I would say
that the fact that governments so frequently do abuse their power to print up
money is a sign that this is a power governments should not have.

Mr. Grinch
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: rjc@devo.unify.com (Ronald Cole)
Subject: Re: Gold Standard? No!
Organization: Unify Corporation, Sacramento, California
	<1992Dec16.213849.12239@unlv.edu> <xgT=dz@engin.umich.edu>
Date: 18 Dec 92 16:22:35

In article <xgT=dz@engin.umich.edu> positron@engin.umich.edu (Jonathan Scott Haas) writes:
   In article <1992Dec16.213849.12239@unlv.edu> bright@unlv.edu (Paul Conte) writes:
   >And another thing: we are giving the government money so that they can
   >make money.  Printing presses and paper cost money.  Hell, money costs
   >money to make!  That is stupid.  Money should be electronic in this
   >day and age. 

   No way, no way, no way. The problem with electronic money is that it's
   very, very easy to trace. Do *you* want the government to have an exact
   record of your every transaction?

Check out the August 1992, Scientific American, page 96.  There is an
article entitled "Achieving Electronic Privacy" by David Chaum.  "A
cryptographic invention known as a blind signature permits numbers to
serve as electronic cash or to replace conventional identification.
The author hopes it may return control of personal information to the
individual"

--
Ronald Cole           +----------------------+  internet: rjc@unify.com
Software Engineer II  |    Lord/Genis '96    |  uucp:     uunet!unify!rjc
Unify Corporation     +----------------------+  voice:    +1 916 928 6238
          "THE BILL OF RIGHTS --- Void where prohibited by law"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden)
Subject: Re: Views? :
Organization: University of North Carolina
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:26:45 GMT

In article <37947@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> jfh@beach.cis.ufl.edu (James F. Hranicky) writes:
>In article <1992Dec13.022756.3194@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec12.173017.21527@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec12.044058.16557@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>>>>In article <1992Dec12.012334.3472@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>>>>In article <11339@prijat.cs.uofs.edu> bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>>>>In article <1992Dec9.221200.20158@athena.mit.edu>, cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>
>>
>>	Well on that you and I agree completly.  I think the gold standard
>>is really not worth much.  It was useful in ancient times, because gold
>>was relativly rare and highly prized.  In modern times, who really needs
>>gold for anything.  The best thing we could do is sell of all that
>>worthless garbage in Fort Knox.
>>	Givin all this though can you think of a good commidity for the
>>modern world?
>
>What a commodity-based standard does is prevent the arbitrary increase of
>the supply of money (the original meaning of inflation) by government
>officials. If private minting were open to everyone, and there existed a
>system of free banking, the increase in the supply of money would be 
>minimal (%-wise), and as time goes on, for the supply to increase at a
>constant %, more gold must be found per year (an exponential amount), which
>means that the supply of money will tend to remain nearly constant,
>resulting in a nearly constant value for the unit of currency backed by
>the said commodity.
>
>The U.S. and Britain while under the gold standard experienced rapid
>increases in productivity and the standard of living. The gold standard
>kept interest rates low (3-5%), and prevented the consumption of capital
>which results from inflation.
>
>Jim Hranicky (jfh@reef.cis.ufl.edu)
>
>


Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden)
Subject: Re: Feminism and Libertarians
Organization: University of North Carolina
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:12:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.092711.20817@genie.slhs.udel.edu> starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.205810.5848@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>}
>}	I think this is topic worth discussing.  Why are so many
>}libertarians opposed to feminism?  
>
>I wouldn't say that it's that we're opposed to feminism per se, but that
>we don't do enough to emphasize the individualism in feminism, and spend
>all our time attacking the statism in it.
>
>Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu
>

	But why not emphazide the individualism.  In other words, why is
that magazines like liberty do tend to target feminism; and take the
anti-feminist position on zillions of issues.


Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Are recent Libertarian crusades not libertarian?
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 06:05:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.192631.23217@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> dgross@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Dave Gross) writes:
}According to starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr):
}>Let's take this to absurdum, too: suppose studies showed that WASPs tended
}>to pass Nazi policies (which is false as far as I know).  Would you so
}>readily support their worth to serve lifetime sentences in Congress?
}
}	This still is a fairly free republic -- at least where
}	voting rights is concerned.  People reserve the right to
}	vote against incumbents should they so choose.  If people
}	want to vote for the same idiots again and again, it is
}	their perogative to do so.  It is profoundly anti-liberty
}	for the government to step in and save the people from
}	their own decisions.

It's wrong for the majority to vote for incumbents that oppress me and you
and others over and over again, and it's right for us to cut down on their
recidivism rate.  This is pro-liberty, not anti.

}	If people voted for the same Nazis again and again, I
}	would not abolish their right to do so -- thus "destroying
}	democracy in order to save it" or however you would put it.

What's so great about democracy?  What if the majority passes an initiative
banning all forms of sex except heterosexual sex in the missionary position
for the purpose of procreation?  What if the majority passes legislation
against your right to self-medicate?

This would be majoritarianism, and unworthy of being saved if liberty could
be had instead.  Majoritarianism deserves to be destroyed not to save it,
but to save us!

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: wchen@beirut.berkeley.edu (William Chen)
Subject: Re: Non-consensual force and abortion
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:05:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.221231.20995@cbnews.cb.att.com> jap@cbnews.cb.att.com (james.a.parker) writes:
>In article <1992Dec9.121446.403@uoft02.utoledo.edu> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
>>i find that Libertarians are generally opposed to abortion, but don't
>>want to outlaw it. 
>
>This isn't correct.  According to "The _Liberty Poll" (subtitled "What
>Libertarians Think"), The following two questions were asked of libertarians
>in two groups:  350 LP members at the 1987 National Convention, and 200
>subscribers of _Liberty_.  The results were:
>
>                         LP Convention                _Liberty_ Subscribers
>   Abortion is wrong:    35% agree (65% disagree)     37% agree (63% disagree)
>   Abortion should be
>     made illegal:        7% agree (93% disagree)     13% agree (87% disagree)
>
>Although a sizable majority of libertarians in both groups who believe abortion
>is wrong also believe it should not be made illegal, libertarians in both
>samples disagree that abortion is wrong by almost a 2-1 margin.
>
>                                      James Parker
>                                      jap@cb1focus.att.com


Would a reasonable summary of the libertarian position on abortion be that 
most are not against it, and the vast majority thinks there should be 
no law against it (which is really the pro-choice position), but that
someone could reasonably be pro life and still argue that they were consistent 
with libertarian views?


William 


Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: jfh@beach.cis.ufl.edu (James F. Hranicky)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Views? :
Date: 17 Dec 92 04:44:25 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.

In article <1992Dec13.022756.3194@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>In article <1992Dec12.173017.21527@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec12.044058.16557@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec12.012334.3472@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>>>In article <11339@prijat.cs.uofs.edu> bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>>>In article <1992Dec9.221200.20158@athena.mit.edu>, cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:

>
>	Well on that you and I agree completly.  I think the gold standard
>is really not worth much.  It was useful in ancient times, because gold
>was relativly rare and highly prized.  In modern times, who really needs
>gold for anything.  The best thing we could do is sell of all that
>worthless garbage in Fort Knox.
>	Givin all this though can you think of a good commidity for the
>modern world?

What a commodity-based standard does is prevent the arbitrary increase of
the supply of money (the original meaning of inflation) by government
officials. If private minting were open to everyone, and there existed a
system of free banking, the increase in the supply of money would be 
minimal (%-wise), and as time goes on, for the supply to increase at a
constant %, more gold must be found per year (an exponential amount), which
means that the supply of money will tend to remain nearly constant,
resulting in a nearly constant value for the unit of currency backed by
the said commodity.

The U.S. and Britain while under the gold standard experienced rapid
increases in productivity and the standard of living. The gold standard
kept interest rates low (3-5%), and prevented the consumption of capital
which results from inflation.

Jim Hranicky (jfh@reef.cis.ufl.edu)


Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Labelling laws.
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 10:46:12 GMT

In article <11336@prijat.cs.uofs.edu> bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
}In article <1992Dec9.080931.4995@genie.slhs.udel.edu>, starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
}|> 
}|> Wrong.  We can't secede even if we want to and are justified in doing so.
}|> The American Empire won't let us.
}|> 
}
}Actually, it would be interesting to see what the reaction both within the US
}and without if one of the states (I nominate Pennsylvania) decided to secede.

Several counties in Kansas have declared their independence from the rest
of the State.  Funny how this isn't national news, isn't it?  Just like the
election fraud in Nevada...

}After all, when the former USSR was breaking up didn't we say it was their right
}to secede if they so desired??  And what about Yugoslavia??  Hasn't the US made
}it their official policy that secession of the various states is their right??

Bush opposed the secession of the Baltics until it was a fait accompli,
the bastard.

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Views? :
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 10:22:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.134148.26485@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
}	I think your discription of gold is slightly off.  The demand for
}gold is relativly small.

What?  Including such industrial uses as an electrical conductor?

The supply is huge, the major holders of gold
}and the major suppliers, are the people who maintain the high price by
}chocking off supply.  The natural supply of is very big.  As for golds
}physical properties that's true. What I would tend to think might be a
}good medium for exchange that does have an intrinsic value is oil.
}	Sort of like in early America where we used tabacco.

This seems patently false to me.  If you collected all the gold on the
planet into a cube, it would be much smaller than the Washington Monument.
It only occurs non-anthropogenically as a result of novae.

However, we can synthesize it now.  If the "holders" raised the price too
high, mining and synthetic gold would be booming growth industries!

Remember how the Hunts tried to corner the silver market?  What happened
was that the price of silver went so high that people started melting down
their jewelry and silverware, etc., to sell.  There's an enormous amount
of this stuff around to keep the price stable.

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian
From: positron@engin.umich.edu (Jonathan Scott Haas)
Subject: Re: Views? :
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 21:45:51 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

In article <1992Dec13.022756.3194@samba.oit.unc.edu> bolden@beta.math.unc.edu (Jeffrey Bolden) writes:
>
[why gold-backed currency?]
>
>	Well on that you and I agree completly.  I think the gold standard
>is really not worth much.  It was useful in ancient times, because gold
>was relativly rare and highly prized.  In modern times, who really needs
>gold for anything.  The best thing we could do is sell of all that
>worthless garbage in Fort Knox.
>	Givin all this though can you think of a good commidity for the
>modern world?
>

Look at the free market, pal, look at the free market. It doesn't really
matter what gold is *used* for, what matters is that there is a demand
for it, and that there is a supply of it. The most useless thing in the
world has value if people want it and people can supply it. Gold is a
good store of value because it's durable, doesn't rot, decay, or dissolve,
and is relatively rare. If you can come up with something else on which
to base currency, sounds good to me. As long as it's *something* concrete.
I want a guarantee from the government along the lines of, "We're giving
you these green pieces of paper to use as currency, and we assure you that
you can always exchange five hundred of them for an ounce of gold" or
something like that. Without any backing, the government can just print
more currency, causing inflation.

-- 
__/\__  Jonathan S. Haas         | Jake liked his women the way he liked
\    /  University of Michigan   | his kiwi fruit: sweet yet tart, firm-
/_  _\  positron@engin.umich.edu | fleshed yet yielding to the touch, and
  \/                             | covered with short brown fuzzy hair.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,osu.opinion.libertarian,osu.opinion,alt.politics.marrou,cmh.opinion,alt.politics.elections,alt.president.clinton