| >>claiming it was because the law not conducive to the greater good No, I never claim the greater good, that is what people that support government and regulations claim. We need all these laws, regulations, taxation, etc "for the greater good" Anyone that claims to be doing something for the greater good chances are is evil. >>Robbery is illegal even if you steal from a criminal, or if people are BEGGING for someone to do it. Some how I bet you would not agree in all situation, income taxation as an example... That said, I do not place much stock in an argument "well that's illegal", as an Individualist libertarian I assess things based on the ethical foundation of liberty or the principle of self ownership.. So I base my support or rejection of a public policy, law, or regulation based on that ethical foundation. I do not outsource my thinking to a legislature. >>I'm trying to assume good faith but replying to me while completely ignoring the content of my comment or twisting my words to imply the exact opposite I was not "completely ignoring" your content, it seemed to me then, and continues to be my belief now based on this further comment that you desire increased regulations on Uber to make them fall inline with existing regulations, to "close the loop hole" as it were This is in stark contrast to my belief that the regulations are the problem and adding regulations to uber is not the solution to the problem Eliminating regulations on everyone is the solution. |