Search results for query: *

Yes, but the alternatives to these agreements is more regulation, not less. And the hostility to free trade/globalism is something that won't bring about libertarianism. I wasn't saying you were advocating this. I was trying to say that this would not be inline with a supposed libertarian...

They are significantly better than not having them. That's the point: the lack of free trade and the presence of tariffs is stopping people from trading. That's anti-libertarianism. Free trade agreements, while not perfect, improve freedom overall. It's not statist to allow people to trade...

The USMCA is pretty good, TPP was eh, but would have been great geopolitically (it was fuck China, the treaty). But I'm talking America's general lack of tariffs vs. Trumps constant use of them, which has definitely harmed the economy (basically, he would have done even better without them). If...

These two are in direct contrast. 'Globalism' to the extent it means free trade, is something all the early libertarians agree with. It's also something unions hate. It was also a vital part of the US strategy to defeat the USSR, and is a definite good. So this could cause some harm. See, I...

Oh, it's definitely alive, but also constantly disproven. The key thing is that it sounds right. That's the thing with most economics: what sounds right isn't, so people's defaults are wrong until they study it. Also, it doesn't have a huge effect either. Abortion and the pill are the major causes.

Eh, while clearly disproved, it was junk science at the time too. On top of that, it wasn't what had the effect. It was the pill and abortion that did it. The pill will still be there, but abortion? I think that Roe won't happen.

Yes, this basically what I'm saying. I really don't know about the first stuff. I'm not too worried about uptime currency: it's identifiably different, and there's not endless amounts of hard currency either. They're will probably be a conversion law passed sorta like with the introduction of...

Yes, specifically the Mulford Act. Specifically to retaliate against the Black Panthers, who were wearing guns to protest. He sounds just like a gun grabber when he talks about it to: From wikipedia: So yeah, fuck Reagan. Fortunately, we won't need him, cause there's no way Carter is winning.

Yeah, I was just talking socially. Honestly, the US was more free economically then than now. They weren't. That allowed them to get restricted without much opposition. More importantly, I blame Reagan. He started it in California for explicitly racist reasons. So hopefully he's stopped this time.

Oddly, the US gets suddenly a lot more liberal vs. the 1970s, but no where near all the way. Racism is dead, 100%. Gays, who just started their protests en masse in 1969, suddenly have a ton of relatively hugely accepting people, in redneck places, but at the same time, the gays from uptime look...