no

@Tero don't compare firefighting with importing goods.

being on fire != not having a TV

What are you talking about?

I might as well be on fire if I don't have a damn TV.

Are you crazy?

No way I am going to miss Eastenders.

@Wizord no there are actually people who think the government shouldn't make you pay for a fire department

for the same reason

"my choice"

Kids ...

If you can't get along we'll put you in the get-along shirt again.

the arguments for public fire fighting are quite different from the arguments for protection of local industry

`the arguments for public fire fighting are quite different from the arguments for protection of local industry`
right but the argument against in this case is identical, which is "my choice"

the neutral position is the state not doing either

you need to build arguments to justify the state doing something

The problem is that principles like that are quick lost in a tangled web.

Once you put the state in charge of one thing, you must also give it compensatory power.

We want one but not the other.

.
"I choose to have my home on fire and my neighbor's home on fire"
"I choose to buy a TV from a foreign company"

We want to be protected and cared for, but we don't want a protector with the power to also become abusive.

I hear people agreeing with libertarian principles all day long. It's easy to get them to agree to the premises.

Watch the rubber meet the road, though, and libertarian principles give way the moment people want something from someone else.

that might be true, but it also doesn't seem to leave us with a coherent framework for finding the lines to draw around the role of the state

https://twitter.com/ChildOfEurope/status/1117921887647084544

if we don't start from those libertarian principles, what do we use instead?

We all start from those principles.

Just like you start from a fresh, clean system after you re-install your bloated Windows computer.

A week later, it's back to the same flaming pile of trash as it was before.

Look around you. We all go forward with the best intentions.

the best way to defrag is to ask people to make good justifications for each aspect of the state's actions

in this case: why should we use the tax system to protect native industry, when it harms native consumers

Good doesn't change the state's powers. Passion does.

ok buddy

It's tragedies that make the biggest changes of law.

You think I'm wrong? Show me to be wrong.

you're not wrong

but all this is doing is clogging the discussion

`why should we use the tax system to protect native industry, when it harms native consumers`
i would argue it doesn't harm native consumers, except in the short term

in the long term it helps them quite a lot

nah