JP
Upload

Block v Grubel debate part 1

CLibrtrn CLibrtrn·59 videos
163
546 views
Like     Dislike 0

Sign in to YouTube

Sign in with your Google Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to like CLibrtrn's video.

Sign in to YouTube

Sign in with your Google Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to dislike CLibrtrn's video.

Sign in to YouTube

Sign in with your Google Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to add CLibrtrn's video to your playlist.

Uploaded on May 23, 2011

No description available.

  • Category

  • License

    Standard YouTube License

Loading icon Loading...

Loading icon Loading...

Loading icon Loading...

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading icon Loading...

Loading icon Loading...

Ratings have been disabled for this video.
Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.

Uploader Comments (CLibrtrn)

  • CLibrtrn

    Walter Block replies: I don't think I fully understand what you're saying, and, until and unless I do, I can't respond to it.

    ·

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate CLibrtrn's comment.

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate CLibrtrn's comment.

All Comments (6)

Sign in now to post a comment!
  • jibbi4one

    Anarcho-cap weaken fair property rights law.

    If the property owner is an apartment building and the owner under suspicious passive negligence (incentive to collect insurance funds) to obstruct firefighters from extinguishing blaze resulting in death, injury & destruction of tenant property. The plaintiff would lose since this means the burden-of -proof would shift to defendant. The case would be dismissed in favor of the defendant (building owner). That's not fair law.

    ·

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate jibbi4one's comment.

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate jibbi4one's comment.
    in reply to stealthswimmer (Show the comment)
  • stealthswimmer

    Strawman. If the fire were endangering the lives and property of the neighbors property rights come into play and negotiation needs to occur because he's imposing a cost on a 3rd party.

    ·

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate stealthswimmer's comment.

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate stealthswimmer's comment.
    in reply to jibbi4one (Show the comment)
  • jibbi4one

    anarcho-caps (Block) R impractical.

    Case in point: If a private property owner & nefarious set fire decides it's an advantage to let his/her property burn down 2 ground 2 collect insurance preventing fire department from putting out blaze endangering the lives and property of the neighbors (community).

    Does this act make it legal?

    Of course not!

    IT'S ILLEGAL TO SET MALICE FIRES & PREVENT FIREMEN FROM DOING THEIR WORK TO PUT OUT BLAZE.

    You can't benefit from a PUBLIC SERVICE if it's BAD!

    ·

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate jibbi4one's comment.

    Sign in to YouTube

    Sign in with your YouTube Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to rate jibbi4one's comment.
  • Loading comment...
Loading...
Loading...
Working...
Sign in to add this to Watch Later