Are libertarians our enemies?

Post Reply New Topic

The economic change in India wasn't very slow after 1991. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... labels.PNG
That's not slow progress. Look up the "economic liberalization of India". The specific changes which occurred in 1991 was a decrease in taxes, deregulation of the market, and an increase in foreign investment.
That's only the market alone, however. Much of their government is corrupt.

I think there are some libertarians who come as cross as b*****s because every time they see government interference their response is f**k that s**t. The fact is governments do rely on highways and they do rely on social security.

Libertarians have some good idea but they are f*****g idiots in some respects. Alright, fine. let' get rid of government. What do you propose to take its place and why the hell are you running for president? you hypocrite?

Libertarians don't want to get rid of government. Well, not by definition, at least. Yes, they do want to limit government involvement in the social sphere (legalizing gay marriage and pot are actually supported by most libertarians; if they're not, well then they're not libertarian and are just calling themselves that) but that doesn't mean abolishing it.
It is an umbrella term, however, and I don't know which form of libertarianism you're talking about.
A nation without government would of course be chaotic (in theory) and is an anarchist goal, though it is also the ultimate goal of communism in theory...a communist society where there is no state, no class, no money, and people don't have to work to survive. That would of course end up in chaos because less and less people would be willing to work and we need someone to pave the roads.

Yes, India has experienced phenomenal growth and also enormous inequality and corruption.

Here's an example of the Indian free market in action;
http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0406/217/

Corruption of the India government in action, more like.
Free market isn't end all, be all. It addresses one part of a country, and that's the market.
Picking a random country and blaming all the problems on a free market when every other part of the government is broken is ludicrous.
"We have only five ration cards altogether. The ration shop dealer never opens his shop regularly. It is open only one or two days in a week and that too during evening hours. We work in a kiln about 10 kilometers away. By the time we finish our work and return, the shop is closed. The food grains that are to be supplied for a very low price are also sold at a higher price. We are not able to afford such high prices. We know it is illegal. But we cannot complain. The ones who dare to complain will never live to see the result of the complaints. The police, health officer and district administration officers are all teamed against us. Who cares for us?"
Yeah; that's called f***ed up authority.

The thing is, though, it's conservative libertarian Republicans like Fox' John Stossel, and his ilk, who will always say that the free market will in time cure all corruption and social inequities. I hear the John Stossel's of the world bloviating about a pie-in-the-sky utopia where the free market rules, but rarely if ever do I hear libertarians with common sense in the media challenging those fantasies.

And that's the reason I hate Fox News and most politicians; big abstract fantasies with little attention to detail. There is no cure-all for corruption and social inequities. When can we have an honest politician? But of course, "honest politician" is something of an oxymoron, just as "transparent government" is.
Media and common sense just don't go together...and that's unfortunate, because that's where so many people get their information and it's perpetrated with pseudoscience and misinformation (and wacky politic-preachers like John Stossel)

The thing is, though, it's statist authoritarian Democrats like Elizabeth Warren, and her ilk, who will always say that government compulsion will in time cure all corruption and social inequities. I hear the Barack Obamas of the world bloviating about a pie-in-the-sky utopia in which they wield absolute power, but rarely if ever do I hear anybody with common sense in the mainstream media challenging those fantasies.

Exactly!

Government compulsion certainly was necessary with ending segregation, enforcing labor laws, and now might be called into action again with LGBT rights. And how is ending corruption possible without the power of the law to enforce it? Seems to me Warren and Obama are right. And when did the President ever want absolute power?

Of course we need government. I don't think anyone here is saying we don't.

The amount of government dependency is increasing as more and more people are leaving their jobs because they can depend on a welfare check. There are also more people attempting to qualify for disability so they don't have to work anymore and parents are using their children's learning disorders as well for benefits.
We're in enough debt as it is. People need to get off their asses. I'm all for healthcare for those who need it, but many don't. This is why America has become a symbol of laziness and greed for many.

Could you please provide sources for these claims?

Well, one big reason for workers shifting into joblessness and the resulting government-assistance programs is Obamacare itself ( http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacar ... ers-2013-9 ).

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/ ... in-america

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/ ... ve-to-work

Good article, AspieUtah