<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Please Allow Me to Introduce Myself . . .</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 03:52:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: FreeDem</title>
		<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/#comment-2563</link>
		<dc:creator>FreeDem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 01:10:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theartofthepossible.net/?p=189#comment-2563</guid>
		<description>TGGP:

Here are some gay rights--in fact rights for everyone, not just gays: http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/opinion.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-01-30-0033.html

"In a state that ostensibly is a bastion of capitalism, government intervention in the marketplace turns up surprisingly often. Two parties who are negotiating a contract for a good or service often find a third party -- the commonwealth -- sticking its nose in where it doesn't belong.

For decades, Virginia law prevented insurance companies and policyholders from deciding who could receive health coverage. Not until three years ago did the General Assembly pass legislation allowing group accident and sickness policies to cover any class of persons mutually agreed upon by the insurance company and the policyholder.

Before then, health-insurance coverage was limited to spouses and dependent children. If a worker wanted to include someone else in his or her coverage, the law said he couldn't -- even if the worker's employer and the insurance company both were happy to fulfill the request.

This year Del. Adam Ebbin is sponsoring legislation (HB 865) that would open up life-insurance coverage in much the same way: It would allow insurance companies to offer group coverage to anyone policyholders wished to cover -- brother or sister, elderly parent, life partner, or third cousin twice removed -- not just spouses and children.

Note well what this bill is not: a mandate. Insurance companies would not be required to cover anybody they did not wish to. They would remain free to reject coverage they did not care to offer. They simply would not be prohibited from covering persons they are willing to cover.

In a free market, that is precisely how insurance ought to work: The buyer and the seller of the policy work out the terms between themselves. The state's job is merely to enforce the contract -- not to write it. Ebbin's bill deserves a resounding and unanimous aye."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TGGP:</p>
<p>Here are some gay rights&#8211;in fact rights for everyone, not just gays: <a href="http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/opinion.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-01-30-0033.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/opinion.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-01-30-0033.html</a></p>
<p>&#8220;In a state that ostensibly is a bastion of capitalism, government intervention in the marketplace turns up surprisingly often. Two parties who are negotiating a contract for a good or service often find a third party &#8212; the commonwealth &#8212; sticking its nose in where it doesn&#8217;t belong.</p>
<p>For decades, Virginia law prevented insurance companies and policyholders from deciding who could receive health coverage. Not until three years ago did the General Assembly pass legislation allowing group accident and sickness policies to cover any class of persons mutually agreed upon by the insurance company and the policyholder.</p>
<p>Before then, health-insurance coverage was limited to spouses and dependent children. If a worker wanted to include someone else in his or her coverage, the law said he couldn&#8217;t &#8212; even if the worker&#8217;s employer and the insurance company both were happy to fulfill the request.</p>
<p>This year Del. Adam Ebbin is sponsoring legislation (HB 865) that would open up life-insurance coverage in much the same way: It would allow insurance companies to offer group coverage to anyone policyholders wished to cover &#8212; brother or sister, elderly parent, life partner, or third cousin twice removed &#8212; not just spouses and children.</p>
<p>Note well what this bill is not: a mandate. Insurance companies would not be required to cover anybody they did not wish to. They would remain free to reject coverage they did not care to offer. They simply would not be prohibited from covering persons they are willing to cover.</p>
<p>In a free market, that is precisely how insurance ought to work: The buyer and the seller of the policy work out the terms between themselves. The state&#8217;s job is merely to enforce the contract &#8212; not to write it. Ebbin&#8217;s bill deserves a resounding and unanimous aye.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TGGP</title>
		<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/#comment-2554</link>
		<dc:creator>TGGP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 21:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theartofthepossible.net/?p=189#comment-2554</guid>
		<description>What exactly is mean by "gay rights"? I think John T. Kennedy explains the libertarian position on marriage well &lt;a href="http://www.no-treason.com/archives/2003/11/24/marriage-the-institutional-man-and-the-sovereign-individual/" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. Libertarians qua libertarians have never supported "hate crime" or "non-discrimination" laws. Texas did use to have a law against sodomy, but it was not much enforced and has been ruled unconstitutional.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What exactly is mean by &#8220;gay rights&#8221;? I think John T. Kennedy explains the libertarian position on marriage well <a href="http://www.no-treason.com/archives/2003/11/24/marriage-the-institutional-man-and-the-sovereign-individual/" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Libertarians qua libertarians have never supported &#8220;hate crime&#8221; or &#8220;non-discrimination&#8221; laws. Texas did use to have a law against sodomy, but it was not much enforced and has been ruled unconstitutional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ka1igu1a</title>
		<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/#comment-2550</link>
		<dc:creator>ka1igu1a</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 20:04:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theartofthepossible.net/?p=189#comment-2550</guid>
		<description>IMHO, I would propose that Libertarian Class Theory is the ideological framework to best unite Libertarians and Liberals. Liberals would have to distance themselves from the implied authoritarianism of "progressivism" and libertarians would need to acknowledge that you first address the State propping up of the strong before you go after the weak.

The libertarian vote at this point is lost for the GOP. In fact, Obama is going to rely on a Mountain West strategy while McCain is going to try to win by trying to pry away the rust belt. If McCain gets clobbered, you are going to see quite a bit wailing by the GOP. Every GOP pundit and his brother will talking about resurrecting the conservative-libertarian axis and just waiting for Majority Dems to overstep. I have absolutely no doubt about this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IMHO, I would propose that Libertarian Class Theory is the ideological framework to best unite Libertarians and Liberals. Liberals would have to distance themselves from the implied authoritarianism of &#8220;progressivism&#8221; and libertarians would need to acknowledge that you first address the State propping up of the strong before you go after the weak.</p>
<p>The libertarian vote at this point is lost for the GOP. In fact, Obama is going to rely on a Mountain West strategy while McCain is going to try to win by trying to pry away the rust belt. If McCain gets clobbered, you are going to see quite a bit wailing by the GOP. Every GOP pundit and his brother will talking about resurrecting the conservative-libertarian axis and just waiting for Majority Dems to overstep. I have absolutely no doubt about this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FreeDem</title>
		<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/#comment-2536</link>
		<dc:creator>FreeDem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 17:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theartofthepossible.net/?p=189#comment-2536</guid>
		<description>Ben, the historic flexibility of the Free Democrats in Germany should be an inspiration to American classical liberals/moderate libertarians.  Unfortunately, the United States seems stuck in a two party system that makes it difficult for classical liberals to organize in a way that would enable them to swing back and forth effectively.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ben, the historic flexibility of the Free Democrats in Germany should be an inspiration to American classical liberals/moderate libertarians.  Unfortunately, the United States seems stuck in a two party system that makes it difficult for classical liberals to organize in a way that would enable them to swing back and forth effectively.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mona</title>
		<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/#comment-2535</link>
		<dc:creator>Mona</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 17:01:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theartofthepossible.net/?p=189#comment-2535</guid>
		<description>I've had extensive interactions with Jon Henke, and he's a smart and decent man. I simply cannot imagine how on Earth he expects to establish non-neocon, libertarian space in the GOP. Really, I believe he is deluding himself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve had extensive interactions with Jon Henke, and he&#8217;s a smart and decent man. I simply cannot imagine how on Earth he expects to establish non-neocon, libertarian space in the GOP. Really, I believe he is deluding himself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.theartofthepossible.net/2008/05/07/please-allow-me-to-introduce-myself/#comment-2510</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 04:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theartofthepossible.net/?p=189#comment-2510</guid>
		<description>I agree with FreeDem regarding the marriage of (American) liberals and libertarians.  However, I would like to add (from a European perspective) a word about the unique position of liberals/libertarians.  The unique ability of liberals/libertarians to "marry" both conservatives/Christian Democrats and progressives/Social Democrats is of the utmost importance.  This has made the Free Democrats in Germany a disproportionately powerful party.  We should concentrate our efforts on influencing BOTH parties to make them more moderate/classically liberal.  When libertarians in America become as influential as liberals in Europe, then the United States will be much better off.  Not to mention, its politics will be more inclusive and representative.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with FreeDem regarding the marriage of (American) liberals and libertarians.  However, I would like to add (from a European perspective) a word about the unique position of liberals/libertarians.  The unique ability of liberals/libertarians to &#8220;marry&#8221; both conservatives/Christian Democrats and progressives/Social Democrats is of the utmost importance.  This has made the Free Democrats in Germany a disproportionately powerful party.  We should concentrate our efforts on influencing BOTH parties to make them more moderate/classically liberal.  When libertarians in America become as influential as liberals in Europe, then the United States will be much better off.  Not to mention, its politics will be more inclusive and representative.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
