Libertarian

Post Reply New Topic

I dont think theyre alone in selling products..

That is not how supply and demand works.

In turns of quality and quantity, the free-market system provides both. Once governmental interference (or attempts at corporatist connivance) is attempted efficiency drops. In socialist economies it is common to see too much provided of unneeded items and too few of needed items, and nothing that is up to meets reasonable standards. This is because the government bureaucracy lacks certain essentials that the market provides.

Why would doctors and teachers necessarily fight over meager wages? I don't see how this is sure to happen. Hospitals are not a part of the government, and doctors don't have anything like teacher's unions. The public schools under an all libertarian system would be replaced largely in the new market environment. I don't deny it may not be a smooth and clean transfer over though.

I don't endorse such a "complete libertarian system," BTW.

Right, I do not consider libertarians anti-education. They just distrust government provision of such. The question there ends up being how well the poor will do under free market education. Libertarians claim that schools currently suffer under stagnant bureaucracies and a lack of competition and that by opening up markets then education will improve for everyone as new ideas will be tested.

The question on healthcare is also a big issue as well, given that many libertarians take a more open border stance, they tend to see a welfare state as a danger that will cause an inflow of people seeking free goodies from the government. Libertarians argue that the current health problems in America are often due to the laws we have in place that do not help our system and the fact that Americans are seeking insulation from costs rather than protection from risk from insurance agencies, I think Arnold Kling argues this, they might also point out that some of the issues with the current system are overstated in some manner by pointing out successes that deal with costs. Of course, it can be argued that some government welfare for the poor that can be generically used in such manners can be desirable.

Really, I'd say that the heart of the issue on libertarianism is how well markets work. Market failure does exist and it can create areas where businesses fail to provide the ideal services but on the same level governments also fail. The question ends up being which fails more in this regard. I will admit that I am more on the libertarian end of things, but I do not claim that markets are magic, the invisible hand can be somewhat blind of course but governments are not known to be all-wise.

I do not consider myself hardcore either but I am more libertarian than the average person. I am apparently libertarian enough to feel a chill in my spine whenever politicians speak on policy and use their rhetoric.

Sorry, St. Nick, but George Washington disagrees. When western Pennsylvania farmers revolted over taxes owed the federal government (The Whiskey Rebellion), Washington led the army to defeat them if necessary. Fortunately, Washington's mere eloquence was enough to end the rebellion.

The colonists objection to taxes was based on lack of representation. You have the right to vote for representatives who decide such measures. A government could not function if individuals could decide what whether they not they wanted to pay taxes/tariffs, ect...The founders would not have designed so incompetent a system.

I think that the market provision of goods actually goes deeper than supply and demand as seen by the lines and graph though. It involves information and selection, I think of Hayek when this is brought up. As you said, planning boards to lack a certain something but this something is the inability to deal with the information that is provided by markets and put it together in a meaningful way, this leads to inferior products and poor measures of matching up the goods with those who prefer them because the prices and profits play an integral role in providing information in a market economy. Supply and demand do not often deal with the differentiation of products like we both think of to some extent.

Of corse we got to pay taxes, because the government needs money to fufill its obligation by the Constitution to protect our rights. Im talking about using tax dollars for government special interest projects like roads, utilities, public schools, and sometimes things like stadiums and parks, which is misuse of taxpayer dollars.

Jeez, just like you guys to go on bickering over what I said after I give up.

Santa: Are you really saying you support Social Darwinism?

Im saying I support protecting people's rights against government infringing upon them.

Are you saying that if someone doesn't have the money for a proper education and an ocassional doctor visit and they contribute to society that they don't deserve it?

Answer this question yes or no, no more of your snaking out of an answer.

Well of course we do stuff like that. There is a need for accuracy in terms of what everyone thinks and to express what the comments of others remind us of. If the purpose is to enlighten then there is nothing wrong with bringing more illumination rather than denying it as the latter would be the greater evil.

Agreed, Now I'm just trying to get a straight answer from Santa here.

I dont think someone deserves to die because theyre poor, but I also dont think others should be forced to pay for them. I guess thats life.

And the true beast emerges.....

People pay for each other all the time. ALL rights are "Positive Rights" because ALL rights require outside action for protection. So let's take a away free will with force and kill the weak shall we?

You make me sick you Sociopathic-Social Darwinist, If you end up on a street corner begging I hope you see why society must help the downtrodden.

Life is crap altogether and its what you make of it, if someone doesnt want to pay and has things they need to be doing with their money if thats what it takes to make them happy then good for them, its their right. In the United States, i've heard many stories of people who come from totally dirt backgrounds who rose to become billionares and millionares so dont say theyre all helpless, because theyre not. And I wouldnt classify myself as sociopathic, I simpathise with the poor and opressed so I respect your point of view, I just dont think anyone has an obligation to pay their hardearned money to others willingly or unwillingly. (but I do think they should choose to do so because its the right thing to do)

You here these stories because the media needs them for ratings. Besides for every new millionaire another has to be dethroned because society cannot support an infinite upper class. The myth that if you work hard you always get ahead is utter dreaming, My grandfather had an IQ of 145 and worked every day of his life. He got nothing, zilch, nadda. he didn't even have the money for his Diabetes shots on many occasions and ended up dying from diabetic shock at the age of 67, just two years after he should have retired, working his second job.

Humans are pack animals, not loners. If one human starves or dies because of some disease that could be cured with cheap medicine and care then society as a whole has failed. Man's objective is to elevate everyone. In a completely "Free Market" an upper class that rules with complete control is born, the governemt becomes a pawn to the interests of business. Your "perfect world" is easily illustrated by the book The Space Merchants.

A completely free market always breeds massive social injustice.