How Many Libertarians on this Board Were Born Into Poverty?

I'm not sure about this.

Corporations are not natural, and depend on the government for regulations-so why not regulate them in a sensible way that's not evil? A lot can be accomplished with groups, and free will doesn't do much if you're just one person. Corporations and government have no problem existing alone, corporations generally just want government to leave them alone, and with a fair system the government would be isolated from corporations and so would not come to depend on ludicrous "donations".

I urge you to consider the idea that everything can be reformed, being a libertarian does not mean wanting the abolishment of everything, it means putting personal freedom and sovereignty as high priorities.

I realize you also said you're anarchist, but the fact is that by human nature, whenever you get rid of the power structure, some asshole goes and makes one. Sad but true.

Poor people are not always hurt by government, only if it has been hijacked by greedy fucks without any care for others. Poor people should benefit, rich should be brought down, but only to a level-chronictom has a great thread where he describes a fair socialist tax structure that does NOT hurt poor people. And socialism can be executed with complete respect for personal freedoms, so long as corporate hijacking can be prevented.

 

yeah, we were poor. I remember when welfare was bags of government commodities, like dried split peas, and something that resembled cheese. The old man left when I was about 5, Mom was an office worker and in those days that sort of work was definitely low pay. She would take us kids (4) to these warehouses where they handed out bags of stuff. We also picked cherries, that sort of thing.

 

Consider though, that a lot of money went to taxes, union dues, and all the other assorted fees that have to be paid under the sort of system we have now. In a free market with little or no government, more of your earnings would be kept by you. Prices for everything would be pretty low, so your dollar would buy more. Hopefully, anyway. I believe it would be.

Once I quit the union I worked out of for a time, I made a lot more money negotiating my own earnings, and I wasn't supporting a bunch of parasites "working" in air conditioned offices either, just me and my family.

 

At work so dont have time. I will respond later.

 

im an independent but libertarian is the party i most closely agree with out of all of them.
as for how poor we were, i mentioned on another thread how i wore hand me downs a few times, and i only had two older sisters. we did the bag of government cheese thing one year and were on food stamps a couple of times, but my mom didnt want to be and whenever we could make ends meet we would. my mom i think voted republican when i was a kid, i know she does now. yet one time she called the white house to tell Ronald Reagan that she didnt like what he was doing. I heard that she called the white house many times but only a couple of weeks ago i found out why. it was because she needed help but was willing to work if she could do it on her own, and apparently a law that Reagan put in was that if your receiving government aid and make a certain amount of money then they take that extra money out of you pay. (this sounds to me exactly what all the Obama haters are saying, ironic huh how Reagan is the rights hero and here they are bashing Obama for what Reagan did) so pretty much he made it so it wasnt worth my moms time to work that extra day because she would just lose it in place of food stamps.

back in those days my views were on the side of communism although i didnt know what that was yet, i thought it meant dictatorship, "the ruskies are mean to their people they make them wait in line for toilet paper them damn communists" when i started actually getting into politics i was an independent that leaned to the right. my M.O. in voting the first 5 years and in general since was 3rd party for prez, republicans for state, congress, and senate, and democrats for city level. i have seen the government screw up enough times over the years that i wished it were gone. common sense says that wont work out but that never changed the fact that i wanted no government interference where it didnt need to be, and then i learned about the libertarian party and liked what they were doing so started voting for them for prez.
as for the union comment i dont see how that has anything to do with government, even if like some people suggested, that the government backs unions. dosnt matter because unions dont need the government if it is strong enough. and if people are starving they will create a stronger union. and that is the public assistance issue right there, people will do what it takes to feed their kids and its in the best interest of the employee, employer, and neighbors to make that possible....yeah the government too, which is why i suppose they got involved in that in the first place. i think quig might be gone though so i guess i posted this for nothing.

 

I am somewhat Libertarian, in that I don't believe in our current government, and do not believe we should have fake paper money.

But my real "Political alignment" is "Texan". I just think we need to secede, tax the canameximerican highway they're building, legalize weed for the Mexicans to bring over on trains and throw in the streets, and start some kind of program where you can turn extra weed into the government to make money, like an "everymans" welfare system. So that all Texans can live comfortably. We can sell the weed to America legally or illegally I don't give a fuck, but once we secede the Mexicans will call Texas "New Mexico", and once weed is legal we will OWN the weed trade. And once the cartels don't have to spend so much money on hiding and guns, they can spend money making their weed better, or even just making shitty bud into good hash. AndI think there should be a hash bank... Sorry I kinda went off on a tangent there... But yeah, I'm Texan

 

Oh yeah, and I'm pretty broke... But working on that.

 

Come to think of it, when I was born I didn't even have a shirt on my back or a pot to piss in. Thankfully, I had responsible parents who quickly brought me out of poverty, although they were unable to make me wealthy they did the best they could with what they had.

 

Indie

No one is born with a shirt on their backs, maybe you need to study up on basic biology

But you have already pointed out that your family had above average incomes (grandfather, father and yourself) so rather than bringing you out of poverty it would seem you were never in poverty as you yourself point out.
Post 16 of this thread –

In 1906 I’m told the average U.S. worker “made between $200 and $400 per year”.

Your grandfather on $468 was making a very good wage – didn’t you tell me he’d been a coal miner, which I though was a rather a low paid job at that time?

I believe the average wages in 1935 was about $1,600 a years which is around $30 a week so again your father on $75 - over double the average - would seem to be getting a very good wage, what did he do?

The supposed average yearly wage in 1955 was $4.130 which is around $80 a week again you on $170 are nearly double the average what were you doing?

Maybe I’m wrong but this would seem to indicate your family were always rather comfortably off and wouldn’t have actually needed any assistance?

Oh and by the way you never did answer my questions


*

 

I was basically born into poverty. Lived in a trailer with no AC, no cable, no internet, no nothing.

 

Mael

Are you saying you are a right wing libertarian and if so why?

 

Bal,

So we are all born relatively equal, but I can't find anything in biology related to putting a shirt on my back.

While your income averages may be close, the cost of living in the U.S. can vary by quite a bit depending upon 'where' you live. And looking back at what I posted, I should have been a little more careful as the years ago relate to when my Grandparents, Parents, and I began a family on our own, and the year my Granddad was earning $9 a week was after WWI or about 1918, and my Dad who I confirmed was when we moved into our first house after he began working as a machinist in 1951 or 1952, and myself after discharge from the service and began working in 1969 for the company I retired from after about 30 years. But you spend too much time and effort trying to denigrate me or others than you do trying to reach any accord in which the issues presented might be solved consensually.

I had two Grandfathers, didn't you have two also? And yes, one was a coal miner, but that's irrelevant.

 

You know, I live in a shitty place.

It's called reality.

But whatever it's not, it makes up for by being real.

What you describe is literally farther from reality than starwars.

It's also obnoxiously ignorant, immature and drug obsessed.

You have a warrant in texas, as I recall.... texas is backwards, and CO is legalizing pot. You just have some lone star state fantasy, but they don't want anyone anything like you around here. And as a rational texan for serious reform, neither do I.

At least I faced my legal music, instead of running from the state, like you.

 

Indie

How do you come to the conclusion that we are all born relatively equal, I mean we have been through this many many many many many many times – some are born into advantage and others into disadvantage.

As you say you were born into relative advantage.

Fine where were you living?

Average wage in 1918 was I’m told $1,518, so at $468 you are claiming your granddad was earning a third of the average wage? That does seem low but as you point out I don’t know what he did or where (was this one the coal miner or what?)

1955 was $4.130 so your dad was basically on the average wage (average wage for US in 2011 was 42,979)

Pay in the military is had to calculate as it seems to be determined on scales according to rank and length of service. It could be lower or higher than average it seems.

http://www.navycs.com/charts/1969-military-pay-chart.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_were_soldiers_paid_to_fight_in_Vietnam

Average wage in 1969 was I believe 5,893 now at $170 for 52 weeks it would be 8,840 well above the average wage for an entry level job?

First the is no need for me to denigrate you – you do a fine job of that yourself.

And as I’ve told you many many many many many many times – I’m trying to work out why you promote ideas you seem unable to defend from criticism.

 

Bal,

All this thread asks is "How many Libertarians on this board were born into poverty", and although I can't state that I'm 100% a Libertarian, I do tend to agree somewhat with many Libertarian views, and regardless of what you "think", I know exactly how my family and I lived during my childhood.

End of discussion.

 

Indie

Oh Indie why is it you spend so much time trying to end debates rather than entering into them?

But this is a discussion board – if you just want to tick YES / NO boxes you need to go somewhere else.

You posted that –

The implication being that your ‘responsible parents’ brought you and presumably them out of ‘poverty’ (how are you defining poverty?). But as you admit elsewhere you and they were never, in your opinion, in ‘poverty’.

It seemed to me a misdirection that needed correcting.

As to ‘wealthy’ again how are you defining it, I mean in relative terms your father on an average wage would have been ‘more wealthy’ than many others while other would have been ‘wealthier’ than him.

I also find it interesting that you seem to have been a government employee for a lot of your working life and then seemed to step into a reasonably well paid job, may I ask again what you did?

The thing is that I wouldn’t bring up your family or life if you didn’t seem to want to use them as examples of your political viewpoint.

 

Bal,

I've yet to see the issues discussed in any depth, only more so the persons who post in disagreement with your interpretation of what the issue is, 'the rich stealing from the poor' or 'being undeserving of what they have', which I disagree with as taking everything from them and redistributing it equally would still not resolve any problems except for a very brief moment in time.

 

Indie

Oh hell indie we’ve been through his hundreds of times I have never said that everything should be taken from ‘the rich’ and then be redistributed equally - that is your misrepresentation and it seems to be what you accuse anyone of wanting who is to the left of your extreme right wing views.

This is why you are a dishonest debater; you know this is a misrepresentation but you still go ahead and say it.

If you have any genuine criticisms of my views please present them (If you think you have done so, link to them) but to complain that issues are not discussed in depth when you actively evade answering so many criticisms seems a bit hypocritical.

 

Bal,

Have you ever considered that anyone on the right only appears to be 'extreme' simply because you are so extreme left?

And as often is the case, you base your response on a rewording of what I wrote which differs greatly from my actual words. And then have the gall to call ME dishonest?

 

Indie

LOL – OK I’m game I have given many examples of why I think you have rather far right views from your Social Darwinist leanings to your seemingly extreme free market thinking to give just two examples.

Now can you produce evidence that I’m of the extreme left?

We have been here many times before it is an old trick of yours and I will reply the same as I have all the other times you’ve tried it –

Please produce some evidence to back up this claim

Every other time you have been unable to do so, but please prove me wrong.