Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Libertarian

Page 2 of 6 [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:37 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Flagg wrote:
Things like roads and schools are nessesary for the survival of society as a whole. If someone doesn't have the cash to go get a private education are you saying you want them to have no chance in life? Do you like the idea of having roads so poorly maintained you go off-roading every time you pull out the garage?

I think this really comes down to a question on extremity of position. Some libertarians support having more toll-roads and a voucher system as they see the market as the ideal way of dealing with the informational problems inherent with serving the public good in certain areas, others are downright anarcho-capitalist and think that by privatizing everything that things will work better for everyone because of the ability of individuals to organize themselves for the greatest goods and directly deal with costs. Anarcho-capitalism is not something I would really believe in though, but there are intelligent people who argue for such a system.


This scares the living daylights out of me.


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:38 am

Flagg wrote:
I can see some cutbacks (Military, Prison System, Law Enforcement) but we need Schools, Hospitals, Power Plants and Roads to function as a society. It's only fair everyone float the bill for these basic services.

Of course we need those things, but from the libertarian view schools, hospitals, power plants, and roads will exist no matter what. They are considered from that point of view to be issues that can be dealt with by entrepreneurs rather than the state where money is given based upon how well these things serve the people. The question ends up being how well the market works in those affairs.



Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:40 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Flagg wrote:
I can see some cutbacks (Military, Prison System, Law Enforcement) but we need Schools, Hospitals, Power Plants and Roads to function as a society. It's only fair everyone float the bill for these basic services.

Of course we need those things, but from the libertarian view schools, hospitals, power plants, and roads will exist no matter what. They are considered from that point of view to be issues that can be dealt with by entrepreneurs rather than the state where money is given based upon how well these things serve the people. The question ends up being how well the market works in those affairs.


It'll work fine for the rich. I see this as literally creating a permanant upper class because those from poor backgrounds cannot even get a flu shot or hospital visit they need to save their lives. Even worse they couldn't get a proper education and would end at a dead end job. It sounds like a monarchy without titles of nobility to me.


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:42 am

Flagg wrote:
This scares the living daylights out of me.

The things argued by many politicians tend to be scary to a few libertarians.



Santa_Claus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,846
Location: City 17

07 Mar 2007, 12:42 am

Flagg wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
Flagg wrote:
I really don't like Libertarians. The way they deal with politics makes me feel a bit as if they want Social Darwinism.

They want people to be free to do what they want, and have their rights protected just as long as they dont violate other people's rights. Socialism like we see in America today is the unlaw spending of taxpayers money on special interest projects such as public schools, roads, utilities, programs such as welfare, etc. Whether the taxpayers want to pay for something they may or may not actually be using is unconstitutional. So we as of now are not really a free society.


Things like roads and schools are nessesary for the survival of society as a whole. If someone doesn't have the cash to go get a private education are you saying you want them to have no chance in life? Do you like the idea of having roads so poorly maintained you go off-roading every time you pull out the garage?

Actually I'd give companies the credit because I've been on privately owned roads and they are nice and well maintained, better then any government owned roads I've seen, roads in the U.S. WERE privately owned at one point but then were nationalised. I also think libertarian values are the solution to our fatass country, instead of more government programs to get people to get fit, if you cut off federal funding, people WILL get off their bums and go work to survive and prosper. This country never fell apart from being run privately and wouldnt if we had it run privately now. And when education is too expensive we have things called loans.



Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:44 am

Santa_Claus wrote:
Flagg wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
Flagg wrote:
I really don't like Libertarians. The way they deal with politics makes me feel a bit as if they want Social Darwinism.

They want people to be free to do what they want, and have their rights protected just as long as they dont violate other people's rights. Socialism like we see in America today is the unlaw spending of taxpayers money on special interest projects such as public schools, roads, utilities, programs such as welfare, etc. Whether the taxpayers want to pay for something they may or may not actually be using is unconstitutional. So we as of now are not really a free society.


Things like roads and schools are nessesary for the survival of society as a whole. If someone doesn't have the cash to go get a private education are you saying you want them to have no chance in life? Do you like the idea of having roads so poorly maintained you go off-roading every time you pull out the garage?

Actually I'd give companies the credit because I've been on privately owned roads and they are nice and well maintained, better then any government owned roads I've seen, roads in the U.S. WERE privately owned at one point but then were nationalised. I also think libertarian values are the solution to our fatass country, instead of more government programs to get people to get fit, if you cut off federal funding, people WILL get off their bums and go work to survive and prosper. This country never fell apart from being run privately and wouldnt if we had it run privately now. And when education is too expensive we have things called loans.


What about the poor and disadvantged? Are you saying because your born in a poor family you deserve to die of something as simple as the flu or end up with no education?


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:46 am

Flagg wrote:
It'll work fine for the rich. I see this as literally creating a permanant upper class because those from poor backgrounds cannot even get a flu shot or hospital visit they need to save their lives. Even worse they couldn't get a proper education and would end at a dead end job. It sounds like a monarchy without titles of nobility to me.

We have a greater level of wealth now than ever before, and even the people who cannot get the hospital visit according to this situation still had a better chance than generations before. I am not arguing for that point, it must be recognized that some industries can protect against risk. There does end up being a question on proper education though, if these people are being given up to a high school education then they have most of the tools necessary for continuing. A major question really ends up being on the effectiveness of capitalism at pursuing the socially acceptable and what policies are really justifiable.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:48 am

Flagg wrote:
What about the poor and disadvantged? Are you saying because your born in a poor family you deserve to die of something as simple as the flu or end up with no education?

What extreme of libertarianism are we arguing??? Are we all the way into anarcho-capitalism? I do not think that anyone is arguing for death from the flu, it really depends on how extreme Santa Claus is.



Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:48 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Flagg wrote:
It'll work fine for the rich. I see this as literally creating a permanant upper class because those from poor backgrounds cannot even get a flu shot or hospital visit they need to save their lives. Even worse they couldn't get a proper education and would end at a dead end job. It sounds like a monarchy without titles of nobility to me.

We have a greater level of wealth now than ever before, and even the people who cannot get the hospital visit according to this situation still had a better chance than generations before. I am not arguing for that point, it must be recognized that some industries can protect against risk. There does end up being a question on proper education though, if these people are being given up to a high school education then they have most of the tools necessary for continuing. A major question really ends up being on the effectiveness of capitalism at pursuing the socially acceptable and what policies are really justifiable.


The problem is a basic tenant of business.

"Cut quality and increase quanity"

This would lead to poorly trained doctors and teachers fighting over meager wages while quality suffers.


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:49 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Flagg wrote:
What about the poor and disadvantged? Are you saying because your born in a poor family you deserve to die of something as simple as the flu or end up with no education?

What extreme of libertarianism are we arguing??? Are we all the way into anarcho-capitalism? I do not think that anyone is arguing for death from the flu, it really depends on how extreme Santa Claus is.


From what's he's said he's at far end of the specturm.


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:51 am

Flagg wrote:
The problem is a basic tenant of business.

"Cut quality and increase quanity"

This would lead to poorly trained doctors and teachers fighting over meager wages while quality suffers.

The basic tenet of business is to make a profit. Profits can only be made by providing services which must be agreed upon by both sides. They cannot cut quality if their customers are not willing to accept such a drop, otherwise another business will take the place of that old one.

The other argument is that the basic tenet of politics is to promise your voters the world and never provide.



Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 07 Mar 2007, 12:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:52 am

Flagg wrote:
From what's he's said he's at far end of the specturm.

It seems that way, I tend to think that Milton Friedman is very libertarian but he argued for a welfare system and an education system, just one that was less government oriented.



Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:52 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Flagg wrote:
The problem is a basic tenant of business.

"Cut quality and increase quanity"

This would lead to poorly trained doctors and teachers fighting over meager wages while quality suffers.

The basic tenet of business is to make a profit. Profits can only be made by providing services which must be agreed upon by both sides. They cannot cut quality if their customers are not willing to accept such a drop, otherwise another business will take the place of that old one.


What about Big-Box stores like Wal-Mart and Target? I certainly don't see them selling good products.


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Mar 2007, 12:55 am

Flagg wrote:
What about Big-Box stores like Wal-Mart and Target? I certainly don't see them selling good products.

They sell decent products at a low low price and I do not mind going there for a good deal. They are meant for bargain buyers not for high class shoppers and they provide what is basically promised. People who care more about quality goods tend to shop at different places than Wal-Mart and Target. I am by nature a penny pincher though, so I do not go to higher class places. Wal-mart is becoming popular in Mexico due to the fact that most Mexicans are not rich and desire cheap good above most else though.



Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

07 Mar 2007, 12:58 am

I Accede to you Awesomelyglorious.

I just everyone to get a good education and good healthcare no matter who they are as long as they contribute (If they can contribute that is) without having to worry about being able to pay for it.


_________________
How good music and bad reasons sound when one marches against an enemy!


Santa_Claus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,846
Location: City 17

07 Mar 2007, 1:02 am

Flagg wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Flagg wrote:
What about the poor and disadvantged? Are you saying because your born in a poor family you deserve to die of something as simple as the flu or end up with no education?

What extreme of libertarianism are we arguing??? Are we all the way into anarcho-capitalism? I do not think that anyone is arguing for death from the flu, it really depends on how extreme Santa Claus is.


From what's he's said he's at far end of the specturm.

The founding fathers of the US were considered extreme and this is the same things they believed in. And you think I should have no choice but to pay tax dollars for others willingly or unwillingly? I probably would help someone pay for health insurance to save them from dying but I dont want the government to take the unlawful action of forcing me to do it.