JeanPaul

After having spent a few weeks on this board, I went from supposedly libertarian, to a true statist. The arguments I was exposed to and the experience I had made me realize that the state, as an abstraction, not the way it is implemented, is far preferable than dealing with individual libertarians. This whole experience was an eye opener.

And if I publish what you wrote under my name on my website, is it binding?

Why would your conspirationist blow building 7?

Anyone who is familiar with Madoff. If the guy has to reimburse people, he will never get the $100. So this is a fraudulent claim.

If you cannot convince someone that 2+2=4, then, you must not be a good teacher. Besides, I was always a good learner.

You know what, I came to this board after having listen to Stefan’s podcast. I thought that I was a libertarian. Thanks to all the discussion over these past few weeks, I realized that I am no longer a libertarian. I find this very strange. How can one become less libertarian after having listened to brilliant libertarians? Do you have a comment about this? What about other people, who are even less receptive to libertarian ideas, how will you convince them that we should go stateless? You succeeded in making me completely skeptical about libertarianism, and no longer willing to look into this direction. I am now beginning even to question peaceful parenting with my own kids. Thank you all.

How can I personally defend these women and kids who are being butchered?

Did the American land on the moon? This may sound like a trick on my side but the incentive to stage it for the Americans at the time, during the cold war, was even higher than for 9/11.

How do we defend the civilians that are being butchered in the Middle East and Africa?

How do you help people defend themselves without killing the aggressors?

I meant, with more tyre companies, there would not be more tyres sold. I was answering WorBlux. I was not talking about my inventions. My inventions do not make people buy more tyres. Actually, tyres last a tiny bit longer when they incorporate my improvement/technology. But the difference is not perceivable to the user.

Suppose they simply say it is their continent, just like native Indians could have said.

What if some people in this libertarian society are completely horrified by what is going on in this free world? Should they witness unarmed people, weak people, kids and women being butchered?

So, you all believe that the videos were doctored by CNN, that no planes hit the WTC, that planes were vaporized somewhere else, that a nuclear bomb was used and so on? What about the terrorists, where they all brainwashed using the most advanced techniques, so that they do not remember that they actually did not participate in 9/11?

1. What would it change, the total number of tyres would be the same. 2. I do not want to make only one million for my 10 year contribution. 3. People would donate to me? 4. I agree that there are not enough independent inventors. 5. In today's society or in a patentless society?

Suppose we have discovered a huge continent with lots of resources, and there are only 1,000 inhabitants who do not want to let us settle down. Suppose that this continent could allow half a billion people lead a great life. Is initiation of use of force acceptable in this case?

Should we intervene in the Middle East to save the innocents who are victims of the initiation of the use of force? Who should intervene? A private army? What if that Middle East country is not stateless?

I am sincere saying that this whole conspiracy theory is ridiculous. Thinking that the building s were hit by some kind disk, that the films were doctored by CNN, that the recording of callers from the planes where fake, etc. is grotesque. And now, the conspiracy theorists are sure that a miniature nuclear bomb was used. The State is very bad overall, they get do anything right, as we all know. If you all still believe in these disk, video editing and nuclear bomb, then, you should find another culprit: Roswell, ET, you name it.

Marketing is often bushitting, unfortunately. I do not invent objects than can be manufactured, I improve them. I would not need patents if the company I went to visit would be honest, and ready to pay me for my contributions if they decide to use them. No, I do the hard work. They just need to alter the rubber mix as I have described it. It takes them a couple months to run their tests to corroborate mine. It took me 10 years. I am not in favor of patents per se, I am in favor of a system where independent inventors can exist.

So now, they used a nuclear bomb to blow the WTC. The state must be very imaginative.

Our ancestors were more civilized than us.

Ribuck, if the entrepreneur fails to find 55,000 people, then, he might have to reimburse as much as 55,000*(100-50)=2,750,000. No thanks. And suppose he gets to convince these people to donate, how do you know that they will keep donating the following year, and every year, forever. To me, this is the weirdest business model I have seen. I do like the London taxis or the phone booths, but I am certainly not willing to pay £50 a year to see them.

I agree, Josh, that patent claims in court are not something one is looking into. I have had my fair share of trouble already with patents, but this never went to court. This is also because I do not use my patents myself, but give rights to companies. I will stop patenting things when the people on the board have come up with either an innovative tyre company, or come up with a new stateless society, or have set up a donation system for me that will allow me to support my little family. Needless to say that I still have many years of patenting ahead. Every time I see a tyre in the street that incorporates my little improvement, I feel quite proud. Also, my patenting has not yet caused anyone to suffer any loss, any physical violence, I never heard of someone being sent to jail because of my improvements. However, i have saved people hundreds of millions of dollars, and allowed them to drive safer. I think this is not so bad. I am not sure that everyone on this board can claim such achievement. I see my accomplishment (saving money to people, allowing people to drive safer, longer) is not immoral, it is rather a noble cause. I prefer to stay on a practical level, than on a theoretical level, because for people that drive their cars, this is what matters. I do not invent arms, I do not work for the state, I do not hit my children, I am ready to relocate to a country with less state, but sorry guys, I am not going to make my own tyres (why not spaceships), or be the first inventor living off donations, etc. You start first. Exactly, inventors try to seek compensation and value by selling what they found, their innovations. But some people here do not seem to understand. They think that there is nothing special inventing, that inventions or any other production of the mind should become domain public. Unfortunately, patenting is the only viable alternative, and I believe that they failed to prove that there could be another viable alternative. The mixtures are not of biochemical nature. These substances do not exist in nature, just like a computer does not exist in nature. Atoms exist in nature, but that is pretty much it. It is just like saying that a house exists in nature. In a free market I could not make anyone buying tyres sing anything because I do not sell tyres. Besides, you cannot ask buyers to sign 100 contracts. Anyway, what difference does it make, buyers do analyze rubber? This would not prevent any company to analyze the rubber and try to replicate the composition. They could for example use an old tyre, buy it from a buyer. Regarding someone who independently invented the same thing. Such like in science, it is the first person who made the discovery that is considered the author, here the inventor, patent or not. I do not know what you mean exactly in your last paragraph? What exactly do you suggest to make the inventor's life easier?

This is great philosophy. Once kids have been peacefully parented, then, there won't be any more conspirationists and terrorists anyway. Bush and Bin Laden were beaten and yelled at when they were kids. This is a scientific fact. But let's face it, the idea that it was not the missing planes that hit the towers is such a ridiculous claim. And what did "they" do the missing planes then, blow up with a missile? And these many terrorists that were onboard, what were they there for? And what about the phone calls given by the flight attendant describing what was going on?

I like the look of the London phone booths, but I would not pay for it.