Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: The Environment  (Read 8495 times)

Uhuru

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
The Environment
« on: November 08, 2006, 01:15:54 pm »

The principles of this project are great and I'm ready to jump in the movement.  One question I have though, is about the Environment.  As individuals we have the responsibility to protect ourselves and to not cause harm to others, but that leaves out the wildlife that has lived peacefully in New Hampshire for millenia and is unable to defend itself.  What is the policy with protection of the environment from harmful agents?
Logged

RalphBorsodi

  • Guest
Re: The Environment
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2006, 01:26:37 pm »

The principles of this project are great and I'm ready to jump in the movement.  One question I have though, is about the Environment.  As individuals we have the responsibility to protect ourselves and to not cause harm to others, but that leaves out the wildlife that has lived peacefully in New Hampshire for millenia and is unable to defend itself.  What is the policy with protection of the environment from harmful agents?

good luck trying to get folks here who believe all natural resources are "unowned" until claimed and only become valuable as capital after ownership rights are assigned via privilege.

the only result of this type of thinking is negative externalities (costs shifted to society) where they reject the regulatory state and would rather adjudicate via torts, contracts, and courts instead of dealing with root cuases.
Logged

Uhuru

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: The Environment
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2006, 01:37:16 pm »

Suppose I lived on one side of a small lake that has other residents sharing the lake.  They fished and recreated on the lake, and I use my property to dump toxic chemicals and waste.  The chemicals from my property leech into the soil and lake making it toxic for the other residents to fish, swim or get their drinking water from.
     Would it be okay to do that in the Free State idea?
Logged

RalphBorsodi

  • Guest
Re: The Environment
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2006, 01:49:32 pm »

Suppose I lived on one side of a small lake that has other residents sharing the lake.  They fished and recreated on the lake, and I use my property to dump toxic chemicals and waste.  The chemicals from my property leech into the soil and lake making it toxic for the other residents to fish, swim or get their drinking water from.
     Would it be okay to do that in the Free State idea?
theoretically you have three options as to how to address this issue....

1. privatize the lake and then sue in court for damages to property.
2. collectivize the lake and have a bureaucratic, regulatory agency that tells people what they can and can not do.
3. common ownership of the lake as an individual equal access right where the state insures the integrity of the common asset (use only the sustainable yield) as the public trustee and prevents infringement of individual equal access/use rights.

luckily here in NH we have selected #3 for all lakes over 10 acres.
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5725
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re: The Environment
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2006, 02:01:51 pm »

As a libertarian, I think that pollution should be strictly regulated, as it violates individual freedom and property rights. As for wildlife, the most successful approach seems to be "privatizing the commons" by allowing local residents, for instance, to sell hunting licenses for local herds, so that they then have an incentive to maintain the health and population of the herd. This approach has worked wonders in southern Africa and is now being implemented on a trial basis in Kenya:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6091334.stm
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

Uhuru

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: The Environment
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2006, 03:08:41 pm »

Interesting Ideas.  I was thinking that to make a simple regulatory law that required as little govt. as possible could be something where, you can do what ever you want on your land as long as that action does not cause harm to anything or anyone outside of the property.  So a small self contained nuclear reactor for instance would be okay, as long as it had no effect on the environment.  Growing Kudzu that spread and killed off the surounding wildlife outside of your property however would be illegal.

To inforce this type of law, it would take community action where a problem is noted and then a team of specialists identify the harm.  Then the owner must correct any damage done, or pay for it to be corrected.  i.e. requirement to hacksaw and uproot all the kudzu not on the owners property.

Does that sound about right?
Logged

RalphBorsodi

  • Guest
Re: The Environment
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2006, 03:21:53 pm »

Interesting Ideas.  I was thinking that to make a simple regulatory law that required as little govt. as possible could be something where, you can do what ever you want on your land as long as that action does not cause harm to anything or anyone outside of the property.  So a small self contained nuclear reactor for instance would be okay, as long as it had no effect on the environment.  Growing Kudzu that spread and killed off the surounding wildlife outside of your property however would be illegal.

To inforce this type of law, it would take community action where a problem is noted and then a team of specialists identify the harm.  Then the owner must correct any damage done, or pay for it to be corrected.  i.e. requirement to hacksaw and uproot all the kudzu not on the owners property.

Does that sound about right?

why not assess the amount of impact that could occur from a problem and require either insurance or a bond be posted for clean-up purposes?

the nuclear industry would not be able to sell it's product if not for the Price-Anderson limited liability act in '57.
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5725
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re: The Environment
« Reply #7 on: November 08, 2006, 03:23:52 pm »

Interesting Ideas.  I was thinking that to make a simple regulatory law that required as little govt. as possible could be something where, you can do what ever you want on your land as long as that action does not cause harm to anything or anyone outside of the property.  So a small self contained nuclear reactor for instance would be okay, as long as it had no effect on the environment.  Growing Kudzu that spread and killed off the surounding wildlife outside of your property however would be illegal.

To inforce this type of law, it would take community action where a problem is noted and then a team of specialists identify the harm.  Then the owner must correct any damage done, or pay for it to be corrected.  i.e. requirement to hacksaw and uproot all the kudzu not on the owners property.

Does that sound about right?

Sounds about right to me, with the caveat that neighboring property owners should be permitted to make deals with polluters to allow the pollution to take place, so long as no non-consenters are harmed by it.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

Uhuru

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: The Environment
« Reply #8 on: November 08, 2006, 03:31:36 pm »

Pollution sharing contracts.  Nice!
Logged

RalphBorsodi

  • Guest
Re: The Environment
« Reply #9 on: November 08, 2006, 03:35:04 pm »

you have to get the money upfront for clean-up and it gets passed along to consumers otherwise people will just walk.

you can't squeeze blood from a stone.
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5725
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re: The Environment
« Reply #10 on: November 08, 2006, 03:36:31 pm »

you have to get the money upfront for clean-up and it gets passed along to consumers otherwise people will just walk.

you can't squeeze blood from a stone.

Yeah, that would be the idea - there would have to be a contract in place before the polluting process begins.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

Uhuru

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: The Environment
« Reply #11 on: November 08, 2006, 04:08:40 pm »

Thats a great idea.  Probably a deposit on "Unforseen" hazards also!
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5725
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re: The Environment
« Reply #12 on: November 08, 2006, 04:12:59 pm »

Thats a great idea.  Probably a deposit on "Unforseen" hazards also!

Careful... You take that idea too far, and it would shut down the whole economy - or even human life.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

RalphBorsodi

  • Guest
Re: The Environment
« Reply #13 on: November 08, 2006, 04:40:28 pm »

Thats a great idea.  Probably a deposit on "Unforseen" hazards also!

that is the basis of the "precautionary principle"and the critique of limited liability privileges...
Logged

rsdasvis9

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: The Environment
« Reply #14 on: June 10, 2013, 07:29:06 pm »

Libertarians believe in having a police force? Right. So why not have an environment police association (EPA).
They would do the things we can't do for ourselves. Prevent drunk driving, prevent somebody from pissing in the stream. We need to have a dedicated police force because who is going to spend years studying the nitrogen levels and its sources in Great Bay and determining its killing the eel grass. No private foundation will have the money nore the political power to do that. We need to have an organization funded by everyone and voted on by everyone that polices our lazy polluting asses. Sounds like taxes and govt to me.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up