Why are you a right wing libertarian?

The american consumer is pretty much been led by the nose into credit buying,keeping up with the Jones's, and wasting our lives buying gadgets. An ignorant populace is a compliant populace and that's what we are or else all this monetary trouble would not have happened. ----You're right about being well armed--there are humans out there. I'm sure I don't understand libertarianism as well as I should, but it seems to me that to use libertarian policies gets us to the same place republicanism has gotten us. "Get out of the way and let business take care of policing itself". Isn't that what we have had? How can a few humans(CEOs, right-wing politicians ,corporations)be trusted with the welfare of millions of other humans?

 

i can only speak for myself, but i buy food, pay rent, utilities

i also feed a bunch of stray and rescued cats

there's really nothing left over for alcohol, even if i were so inclined

it's not a fucking paradise

 

My contention is that having a drink of alchol is greedy...and that's just the start of it!

 

Who gives a flying fuck what time magazine said? They're not a libertarian publication.

 

It depends on what area of life we're talking about. I'm not a Libertarian that belives in unregulated pharmaceutical industry. So they shouldn't be trusted but most other things imo are not dangerous if unregulated in a direct way.That's the key thing. You can say the lack of regulation of financial institutions was primarily responsible for what went wrong with the economy but my contention is that the problem wasn't that it went wrong but that when it did go wrong it was rescued and the financial instutions knew they'd be rescued so it didn't matter what they did...they could afford to take risks. Under Libertarianism they wouldn't have had that luxury.
Liberarianism is a fightrengin thing and that fear is it's key for making the world a better place in all walks of life. It scares societies into taking as much responsiblity for themselves, their families and their buisness's as possible.

 

What's your point?

 

So what have they got to do with libertarianism? No more than a non libertarian government. They don't see things from a libertarian point of view, and don't write or choose as though they do.

I am a libertarian. And corperations are not people, and don't have peoples rights. Furthermore, people heading high grossing businesses do not have the rights of that business, and should not get dozens of millions of dollars because of something that was ACTUALLY done by many other people.

People have rights, business does not. Government is to protect people, and this includes protecting the environment that people LIVE IN AND OFF OF, and defending those people directly, from corporate/business destruction.

I decided I'll post in this thread, it's a worthy conversation. however, individual has added NOTHING to this other than frustration. NO good points, NOTHING but disgracing his own best interests and making it look as though everyone in his corner of the political plane is incapable of making a coherent argument. I'd encourage everyone to debate honestly in this thread, and ignore his insanity greed.

 

there all the same puppets of world bank,we are given our canadates so we fill as tho we have a choose.we get to choose which of there boy s get the job,and then thy play one side against the other ,when all the time thy are wining.all that can run are tho`s that have the money ,and the media ,
what we need is someone that is for the people and the country,not selling us out by throwing money and power to all there coneys or playing war with the lives of our families ,but someone that will clean up, our mess first ,instead we play the hand the crooked dealer dealt and accuse each-other of cheating https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3fzbgxobFo

 

Marchfool

But you then in the next breath contradict that very argument (see below)

I don’t know the details please produce them and your source.

As I say I don’t know the details - but denying a child an education is to me child abuse.

But who’s laws and who’s order?

Try reading Free market = Plutocratic Tyranny
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=353336&f=36

So you are now contradicting what you asserted earlier, as I’ve pointed out right wing libertarian views don’t seem that well thought through.

If you can only afford crap you can only expect crap. If you can only afford a half educated person to teach your kids then at least you get a half educated kid. If Islamic fundamentalists pay for your kid to have a good education, do you go for that?

The Taliban grew out of schools financed by Saudi’s that pushed a rather harsh fundamentalist form of Islam. Many went to such schools because they were free.

And anyway I’m still confused over your educational policy First - you think parents or guardian shouldn’t have to educate their children – Second – you said education would be unregulated – third you said it would b – Now you are saying it would be a fee paying business?

Please back this up with rational and reasonable argument.

‘Frees’ them up from what?

 

Marchfool

You said – “the point is for a Libertarian is that people should be free to choose how they want to live”

So it’s not about people choosing how they want to live you would wish to have rules and regulations and some forms of retribution or punishment for non compliance?

Please back this up with rational and reasonable argument.

Again the ‘lifestyle’ thing – please back it up.

Second – Most of the problem with the financial crisis was that money was not being invested in the production of products but in speculation. In a neo-liberal system there is an emphasis on short term profit so it is better to shunt around derivatives and subprime mortgages that bough instant returns (and a big crash in the end) but little incentive to invest in a company making widgets which would only bring in small accumulative profit over a long period.

Please read

Free market = Plutocratic Tyranny
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=353336&f=36

And

Utopia, no just Keynes
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=328353&highlight=Utopia,+Keynes&f=36

Basically there never has been and never will be a ‘free market’ system, as envisioned by right wing libertarians - until you can get around that problem what you say here doesn’t make any sense.

 

I can't be bothered. I find your questions tedious. Although you have quoted my statement that 'it might be a good idea to have an educational equivalent of the GMC' and say I'm contradicting myself. I was actually not doing anything of the sort...I was merely thinking about a way some of the problems with Libertarianism could be sorted out. You're obviously only interested in winning an argument i'm actually interested in exploring ideas.

 

Marchfool

This just sounds like an excuse; you’ve suddenly discovered you can’t back up your slogans and unsubstantiated claims so you’re running away.

Tedious or too difficult to answer?

Thing is if you find answering questions boring and you can’t be bothered to debate your views in a forum set up specially to debate peoples views – why are you here?

*

'

And I think my quires are still relevant - at first you seemed categorical about not regulating education then when criticised for that you suddenly say it would be regulated.

That seems like a contradiction.

So you’re saying that you haven’t actually given ideas much thought before you say them?

If so my comment that it seemed to me these ideas had not been thought through would seem to stand.

If someone is designing a bridge to take large lorries they do not throw up something made of twigs then when that collapses go ‘oh yes well the twigs were meant to be covered in steel and concrete’.

It is great to explore ideas but you don’t seem to be presenting them as tentative musings but as concrete assertion, and when they get criticised for not seeming as solid as you present them suddenly you become all ‘high and might’ and start telling us you can’t be bothered to talk to us lesser folk.

I’m interested in trying to understand your ideas and why you have them – debate is about learning – people can present ideas and see if they stand up to scrutiny – my question to you would be if your ideas don’t stand up to even a small amount of scrutiny, why do you have them?

 

when are going to start exploring the idea that suddenly freeing 300 million people - from a wide variety of backgrounds and experiences, with a wide variety of capabilities and assets - from a wide variety of laws, rights, obligations and safety nets; is fundamentally a bad one?

[sorry about the punctuation, weird sentence, still thinking in code]

 

Well I'm not a Libertarian because I really think the ideas stand up to scrutiny in all respects. I'm a Libertarian because Libertarianism, in the way I'd want to see it implemented, would obliterate socialist economic policies and obliterate conservative social values. EVerything else after that isn't really very important to me. I've put my points on here though mainly to explain why I want to see implemted and some of the reason's why it can do good. I'm not under any illusion about how likely it is to turn the nation in to a plutocracy. I just don't care if that happens and I'm just fed up of people who do care being all righteous about how it's wrong. I hate most things about society and want to see Libertarianism destory it. That's pretty much all there is to it really.

 

see previous post

 

marchfool

Well so far they don’t seem to stand up to scrutiny in any respects, or at least, no right wing libertarian seems able to defend the ideas from criticism.

But if the ideas are useless or bad they are unlikely to work, and if they cannot stand up to scrutiny then they are likely to be useless or bad.

But you haven’t explained why – you’ve refused to explain why.

And you don’t seem able to defend you ideas from the criticism that they seem badly thought through and don’t seem to have many (if any) positive features.

Again you don’t seem to have given this much thought.

Then you are basically a nihilist, it is not about ‘libertarianism’ it is about wishing for destruction.

 

translation:

at least you're honest about your desires

[stalin with a clean conscience and a buzz]

 

No. Not nihlism...I'm fatalistic and I just don't think things will be as bad as people think. There'd still be laws...the sun will still shine and anyone willing to maximise their potential and think for themselves would probably find lifes a lot better.

 

funny, that's exactly how i feel about the current setup

 

There's milllions of people dying now! If you said you cared about all those millions of people dying now you'd have a hell of a job convincing me that wasn't a load of rubbish unless you sacrificed all you could to help them.
r