Elias, being born into Walton's family entitles you to a chunk of his dough only inasmuch as Walton set it up that way. Being born into Gates' family for instance entitles you to only a miniscule fraction of his wealth because Gates set it up this way. I fail to see the point. Yes, remarkably capable or bright or lucky people can amass fortunes. Unless their descendants find a way to be similarly remarkable or bright or capable then those fortunes will fritter away. I don't see the parallel with aristocracy.

Oh, this must be your first time meeting Koz. Jason, Koz. Koz, Jason.

Seriously, you'd think the revolution never happened the way Americans fall over themselves at the Commonwealth accents (Canadian accents sadly excepted).

On that I'm sympathetic.

While I can understand being gobsmacked I remain somewhat dubious of the obscene qualifier. I mean Walmart is a vast and highly efficient distribution network that provides a vast quantity of consumer goods to utterly enormous number of people at low prices. I mean if the top 0.1% were looters of nations or otherwise criminals I could see the rational behind indignation but these are heirs to a system that has produced utterly epic amounts of value and utility for society world wide. I fail to see the parallel with banana republics or criminal cartels.

I guess my knee jerk reaction is "oh that's interesting, so what?" I mean beyond a left wing nerve being plucked and the deep satisfaction of the primal screech of 'they have more than most people have"; what is the value in this? Is there policy that's being proposed? Is there a crime that's been committed? Do we have nothing better to focus our ire upon?

Good job Tom old boy.

Well I'm totally down with Paul for the GOP nod. That much I can agree with happily.

Yeah there's a lot of frantic flipping in RPG books that ebooks just don't cater to quite right yet. When I'm GMing a 3.5 game I can pinch the paper of the DMG or players handbook and land aproximately where I need to be and then find what I'm looking for from there. There's a lot of non-linear parsing in RPG books.

+1 to wards' sentiment Blaise. I'm grateful you deigned to come back 'round.

Jason, I'm in a semi-swing state; Minnesota. This is a two party system, not more. I grew up in a country with a 3+ party system; I can tell the difference. My withholding my vote and support from the Dems is a enabling act for the GOP. It isn't as big an enabling act for the GOP as a direct vote for them would be obviously but it enables them regardless.

I guess I'm looking at it backwards from the way you're presenting it. The way I see it; regardless of where my vote goes; Libertarian, Green, Nazi, National Yogic Flying Party; if I as a Dem voter protest vote instead I'm supporting the only actual alternative party.

Since that is a party which is directly, unabashedly and increasingly imicidal to my direct personal well being as an individual (whereas the Dems have been a craven but mushy defender of my well being) is the only beneficiary of my not supporting the dems, the marginal cost of protest voting is too high for me to consider.

Is that any clearer?

Maybe if the libertarian party ever started looking like anything other than the cat herding exercise it has always been I'd consider it. For some of us the marginal cost of a protest vote is far too steep.

Depressing but in keeping with Obama's MO. He has run an extremely non-confrontational presidency and this is in keeping with his general behavior the last four years. A pity that his opposition is even more rabidly in favor of it than he and his party is. On this subject at least the current field looks like there won't be a candidate to vote for who's against it.

Possibly James but I'd go a step further and as James K below notes be very much for regulatory intervention that required very very clear "chain of title" if you will of the organ in question in order for it to be accepted. Property rights, yes, but the idea of organ theft is admissably hair raising.

But as my kiwi cousin below notes, of course, a market for organs would probably plummet their value to the level where stealing them was not generally rewarding enough.

Thanks James, I thought as much. Yes, we do what we can with what we have.

James, I wouldn't say that commons are the death knell of libertarianism certainly, but on a personal level it was the death knell of the emotional sympathy I have for libertarian purists which relegated it for me to the status a valuable critique of existing systems rather than an ends in of itself.

Also while intellectually libertarianism can see generally a possible commons solution (or if not solution mitigation) path I'd submit that when applied to the masses it dumbs very well down to "keep yur guberment hands outta mah fishin boat/trawler/factory trawler/drag netting ecology smashing refridgerated factory trawler). In fairness I acknowledge liberalism dumbs down to "ya wanna kill poor people" and conservatism dumbs down to "God/your country hates you unless you do what I say." as well.  

Also, of course, the solution requires force, either by government or some impartial quasi-governmental agent indistinguishable from government in my mind. You don't keep non-compliant trawlers off the Grand Banks in mid December with signed paper but rather with very determined ships and people.

I'm not trying to snark mind, I deeply value libertarianism intellectually but it just can't, ya know, hook the heartstrings on this fisherman's grandson. Have there been any international fishing stocks that are being successfully managed by libertarian based solutions? I only have heard in passing about tuna which migrate in international waters and thus inhabit what'd be considered one of the great libertarian frontiers (seasteading!) and are being fished to commercial extinction. But then I don't follow international fish matters very closely anymore, it's painfully depressing.

Incidentally, for the record, I'm a rabid supporter in (statist regulated!!) mostly open organ markets.

Some things cannot be easily parceled out and owned Jason. Who owns the water table? Who owns the atmosphere? Who owns the North Atlantic Cod fishery? Mighty wars have been fought over epically smaller issues than questions such as those. It is a matter of unhappy (or arguably happy) fact some things are not practically possible to parcel out and own, at least not unless you involve the hand of the statists.

It seems to go two ways; either a government or near governmental entity says “we on behalf of the people own this fishery or this commons and we’re gonna restrict its free market use (by a variety of ways including permit ownership in some cases) or, as happened with the cod in the North Atlantic and as is happening with the international commercial tuna fishery, the governments are kept out (usually by being at loggerheads with other governments rather than free market principals mind) and the free market very efficiently strips the commons bare.  

Now the Icelandic’s have government with its heavy foot on the fisheries but they also have cod. Heck, they even have the free market to a degree since the system they use is owned and traded fishing permits. The lefties groan “the permits let big evul companies get most of the fish” and the righties groan “the gummint is oppressing the masses by putting its statist paws on the market” but at the end of the day they still have fish and that’s not a small thing. At the rate things are going it might end up a luxury item.

My thirty two year old self remembers my nine year old self surveying a baked haddock captured by my Grandfather and prepared by my Grandmother, wrinkling up his little nose and groaning “we’re eating fish again?!?!” My thirty two year old self writhes at the recollection.

 Speaking personally I'd say environmentalism and libertarianism is an excellent topic.

My witnessing firsthand the tragedy of the commons as a youth (the implosion of the North Atlantic Cod Fishery and the wave of economic devastation that swept away the communities of my childhood) was probably the singular event that put a stake through the heart of my most libertarian inclinations before I even knew what libertarianism was.

Oh and I've not been round much. Work is a madhouse right now and the site seems to be loading slow for me. Odd. I'm sorry I mostly missed Jasons rip on the GOP. I'd have loved to have been involved in that scrum.

 At the League specifically at this point in time this is unfortunately true. But in general; different story there though the entire subject is likely irredeemably anecdotal.

 At the very least try and do some reading comprehension and self awareness. For example, you're lumping Jason in with the GOP in the comments section of a post by him where he rips on the GOP most emphatically. I mean what are you thinking??

 Mike, please stop lumping the libertarians in with the GOP. Some of ‘em are but Jason most emphatically isn't. The debate is hard enough as it is without ceding entire spectrums of political philosophy and groups of people to the other side.

It'd really help your arguement and our positions, Mike, if you could lose the profanity, up the content and generally improve your arguement. Beyond the fact that you're violating the commenting policy you're also making us liberals look bad. Your comment below this one was a lot better so it's obvious you're capable of actually debating and arguing rather than frothing and foaming.

Seriously though, please improve your game. I prefer my mouthbreathers on the right where they belong.

Second Jaybirds decision. This was entirely beneath the comment floor. No arguement, just a pointless (and worse: boring) assertion.

I'll quibble in another direction. While I agree that calling for assassination is not cool it should also be noted that Santorum is no Marat. He isn't consequential enough to warrant a glitter bomb let alone a knife in the bathtub.

Likewise, I physically winced. Thanks be that I've never had to experience something so personally devastating.