Isn’t it amazing what we have stopped questioning?! Perhaps, so elated to have the right to legally drink alcohol after the repeal of prohibition, we accepted any circumstances or cost put to us and let them just keep taking more and more of our rights. Sure, we’ll pay those extra taxes oh great state, as long as we can still buy our booze…

And now for our restaurants and event halls like mine to resell the alcohol in a profitable way the price has to be marked up so high so as to allow us to pay those extra fees to the ABC, the taxes and the insurance premiums, that it is ridiculous!

Good point! I didn’t even talk about the issue of the destruction of wealth, which accompanies every government action.

And yes, drive-through liquor stores would be sweet.

As for the tragedy of the commons, that only occurs with (by definition) property that is owned in common. If the government was not there to use its guns to prevent private ownership of certain ‘commons’ like bodies of water, air space, all those national and state parks, etc, all those things would be privately owned and would remain in much better condition since the owner would not want his property to lose value (not to mention the vast improvements in productivity, growth, and resource conservation that would result from market forces acting on things like water and public land).

The whole global warming scare has even got the most skeptical of audiences devoted to it. Those audiences that have no problem critically thinking about mystical claims, but don’t touch the global warming because Gov’t paid scientists says global warming is there.

I could care less about whether global warming is real or not. If it is real and due to pollution, then shouldn’t people want to get rid of the biggest polluter of all: the State? Of course that’s never even brought up in these debates. It’s like the supposed problem of the commons. If there is a POTC, then having a State around only compounds the problem rather than fixing it.

It just boggles the mind how people run around in circles with pointless shit while ignoring the root of the problem.

The few in control of the many is a definition of the state. Those who are greedy and want to exploit others either become politicians or lobby the state for to do those two things for them. How’s that different from their fears of anarchy or a free market? In a sense, we already have anarchy and it is the bad kind.

Not to undermine your article, just trying to approach the question from a different view.