User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 105

Thread: Libertarians?

  1. #61
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    It depends on the terms of the welfare. I live in a place where grandmothers, mothers and children are receiving welfare in the same household - it's generational. Those kids will grow up expecting handouts, too. There is no incentive to work. I am against state welfare but have accepted it as part of our society. But do you honestly think there should be no reasonable limits, more than what we have now? Would you understand and support the concept of workfare instead?

    A woman lives upstairs from me and she has the same exact apartment as me. I pay a lot of money to live there, while she has paid nothing - not one penny - for over 8 years. She just keeps having children by a multitude of different fathers. She drives a Benz.

    What system do you think can prevent this level of abuse? Because I would just yank it away...
    What abuse?

    It does not matter who the father is.
    If the woman takes care of the kids, there is no abuse.
    It is her work. Children need someone to take care of them.
    Preferably their mother.

    She does her job.
    You do your job.
    You both pay rent.
    Be happy and content.
    Smile when you confront her in the staircase. Be friendly.
    Ask her to come and see your flat. Give her coffee and bisquits.
    Be a Mensch.

  2. #62
    half mystic, half skeksis jenocyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    6,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    What abuse?

    It does not matter who the father is.
    If the woman takes care of the kids, there is no abuse.
    It is her work. Children need someone to take care of them.
    Preferably their mother.

    She does her job.
    You do your job.
    You both pay rent.
    Be happy and content.
    Smile when you confront her in the staircase. Be friendly.
    Ask her to come and see your flat. Give her coffee and bisquits.
    Be a Mensch.
    No we both do not pay rent. She does not take care of her children, she does drugs all day long and sends her kids off for public babysitting, by way of school, and then locks them out of the house until she decides to let them in at night. In Brooklyn, a lot of women make money by "dropping bombs", this is what they call it. Her 4 year old screams the same obscenities at me, as his mother screams at him. Ask questions if you must, but spare me the lecture.

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    That's the main problem I have with modern libertarianism - it's much too dogmatic.
    Dogmatic? You act as if it's the only party or philosophy with a semblance of structure. And if you want to speak about dogma, ask yourself why gays still can't be married...

  3. #63
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    Dogmatic? You act as if it's the only party or philosophy with a semblance of structure. And if you want to speak about dogma, ask yourself why gays still can't be married...
    I really do not understand what you are getting at here. For one, I am completely in favor of marriage equality for all adults - not only does it meet standards of fairness that I personally have, it also just works better in the context of why married couples have special benefits in the first place. No matter the composition of the couple, the promoted ideal is that the mutual support of the two strengthens society as a whole, and in recognition of this strength, society will grant certain benefits to promote this. If it were just about reproduction, we wouldn't have marriage in the first place. The institution only exists to promote social cohesion.

    When I mention libertarianism being too dogmatic, I mean the consistent idea that the best government is the least government, and that free markets are the ideal forum of human exchange. Familiarity with concepts such as the tragedy of the commons clearly demonstrates that such things are categorically untrue, and that certain goods are public goods, as the marginal benefit is either difficult to quantify, or too diffuse to concentrate. Roads and highways in the United States are very difficult to calculate marginal benefit from, but try to run one of our cities without them.

    Likewise, on issues like healthcare, the dogmatism comes from the unwillingness to conceive as healthcare as possibly being a public good, even as healthcare works best with an immense pool subsidizing its sick members, with the expectation that the group will do the same for you when your number is up. The way to secure the largest pool is a nationalized system. The free market will not work in this system, as the insurance model works by limiting payouts, while the goal of healthcare is exactly the opposite.

    By going down lists like these and understanding which setup provided better outcomes, I found that my previous hard libertarian mindset became more and more like that of the modern US liberal outlook. I'd consider myself a social democrat nowadays, but the ideal of personal freedom is still paramount to me... as long as it doesn't involve interaction between people. Some people just need rules, or they will break them.

  4. #64
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    No we both do not pay rent. She does not take care of her children, she does drugs all day long and sends her kids off for public babysitting, by way of school, and then locks them out of the house until she decides to let them in at night. In Brooklyn, a lot of women make money by "dropping bombs", this is what they call it. Her 4 year old screams the same obscenities at me, as his mother screams at him. Ask questions if you must, but spare me the lecture.



    Dogmatic? You act as if it's the only party or philosophy with a semblance of structure. And if you want to speak about dogma, ask yourself why gays still can't be married...
    Libertanianism is about a dogma.
    A blind eye.

    Look at the facts.
    The authorities have not taken her kids away from her.
    The authorities have Menschkeit.
    Brooklyn is not libertarian yet.
    New York is not America.

    Read Talmud.

  5. #65
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Outside of a utilitarian viewpoint and a marginal cost/benefit analysis, how is this issue rectified on what in essence are subjective opinions?

    Just because someone doesn't like the idea of the government owning, say, the nation's roads, doesn't mean that the maximum amount of benefit relative to costs comes from private ownership of roads. That's the main problem I have with modern libertarianism - it's much too dogmatic.
    I see what you mean here, but there isn't a single type of government that doesn't make the mistake of adhering to its ideal when the better answer would be to do something else. A lot of people here seem to be using the extreme forms of each governmental ideal, when I think we all know extremes just don't really work. When I say I'm a Libertarian, I'm not looking for an absolute abolition of government ownership of everything, and for the essentials of infrastructure to be sold to the lowest bidder. Government has a purpose. It needs what is necessary to fulfill its role. But once again, that comes down to interpretation of "role."



  6. #66
    Senior Member dga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    No we both do not pay rent. She does not take care of her children, she does drugs all day long and sends her kids off for public babysitting, by way of school, and then locks them out of the house until she decides to let them in at night. In Brooklyn, a lot of women make money by "dropping bombs", this is what they call it. Her 4 year old screams the same obscenities at me, as his mother screams at him. Ask questions if you must, but spare me the lecture.
    as bad as all that is, do you think things could be worse without the safety net of social assistance? The alternative to the mother receiving financial help to raise her kids is potentially even more expensive and violent.

    I think of tax money being used for people on the dole as an alternative to paying for more police or personal protection as society would obviously not have teh same safety standards if generations of people survive only from street mentality.

    if you suspect she is in fact abusing the children, call whichever agency that is responsible for the well being of children.

  7. #67
    half mystic, half skeksis jenocyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    6,387

    Default

    It's so crazy to me how scared people are about the Libertarian party here, when most of you have apparently never read a stitch of literature about it. And the scary part is that Bush can be elected (twice) and that is somehow acceptable? Please read a book, or at least look at the parties by-laws before spewing such nonsense. No one is talking about anarchy, no rules and letting babies do heroin in the gutter. This level of ignorance is shocking. Get a grip on your imagination, folks.


    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    The free market will not work in this system, as the insurance model works by limiting payouts, while the goal of healthcare is exactly the opposite.
    I think you are confusing topics. Gay marriage is equality for all, but others would have you believe that it is the dogma of their party to prevent it. That was my point in bringing it up.

    I never said we should do without public roads and I don't believe the Libertarian party stands for that either. That would be ridiculous. Smaller government doesn't mean no government. Do you agree that we should have troops in over 130 countries, or is your only problem with libertarians is that you think we will take away your roads? Why do people insist on the most extreme apocalyptic ideas about libertarianism? My goodness, you are reminding me of the "end is near" guy on the subway...

    About healthcare, this is highly debated in every party, not just the libertarian one. I don't think any one person or party has the answer. In addition, there is a huge difference in supporting health care and supporting the health insurance business. If you really want to get into this argument, please pm me and I will start a new thread.


    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    Libertanianism is about a dogma.
    A blind eye.

    Look at the facts.
    The authorities have not taken her kids away from her.
    The authorities have Menschkeit.
    Brooklyn is not libertarian yet.
    New York is not America.

    Read Talmud.
    No libertarianism is not about turning a blind eye. And even the Talmud is a dogma.

    Yes, New York is America. So is Houston, San Diego, Wichita and Tampa. We are. No, the authorities have not taken her kids away, nor have they taken the kids of all the other bomb dropping mothers across the ghettos - there is no way they could. So, you look at the facts. The fact is that you have no idea who I am or who she is. The fact is you have no idea how much or little of a Mensch I am. The fact is that I am wasting my time dialoging with you, since you take a few paragraphs, cast your judgment and apparently think that I am what's wrong with America.

    Read the Organon.

    Quote Originally Posted by dga View Post
    if you suspect she is in fact abusing the children, call whichever agency that is responsible for the well being of children.
    I am not against a safety net, but I am against abuse of it. It's true that Libs would rather there be no government assistance, but I am not of that mindset.

    You are acting like I am talking about a woman down on her luck, rather than someone who deliberately has children to get more government money. And yes, we have reported her to agencies, but the "government" is not as responsible as you would like to believe.

    People think welfare is such a great idea and that the prison system really does reform criminals. Ignorance is bliss. So you know what? After having this discussion, I believe most people deserve to be shepherded.

  8. #68
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jenocyde View Post
    It's so crazy to me how scared people are about the Libertarian party here, when most of you have apparently never read a stitch of literature about it.
    That's a fairly rash assumption. Considering that I got my undergraduate degree in poli sci (yes, start flinging the jokes around) and particularly emphasized political parties, including third parties and their motivations, I'm pretty sure that I'm more well-read about the LP than you might imagine.

    I think you are confusing topics. Gay marriage is equality for all, but others would have you believe that it is the dogma of their party to prevent it. That was my point in bringing it up.

    I never said we should do without public roads and I don't believe the Libertarian party stands for that either. That would be ridiculous. Smaller government doesn't mean no government. Do you agree that we should have troops in over 130 countries, or is your only problem with libertarians is that you think we will take away your roads? Why do people insist on the most extreme apocalyptic ideas about libertarianism? My goodness, you are reminding me of the "end is near" guy on the subway...
    You sort of broach the difference of opinion there in the first paragraph - I don't support marriage equality because it's fair. I support it because it works better. The current system leaves a huge chunk of the population with no incentive to conduct themselves with pro-social behavior, such as stable monogamy and developing a sense of home, while rewarding those who do not, such as those engaged in serial marriages, simply because they're attracted to their own sex, and not the other sex. That's something that can be fixed, and pretty easily.

    While you state that the LP doesn't stand for a minarchist system, I've seen no evidence otherwise. There would be nothing separating them from the two major parties at that point. Of course I do not like the US's neo-imperialism, but that's very consistent with my identification with the political left. I also find it to be incredibly unpragmatic. Libertarians aren't the only ones who can claim a non-interventionist bent.

    My main problem with libertarians is just what I stated - much too dogmatic about certain issues. While you may not believe in privatization of infrastructure, the concept is a fundamental aspect of Austrian economics, something many, if not most, libertarians espouse and advance (just look at how much the von Mises institute and Cato have had overlapping staff).

    If you claim to be a libertarian, and still tolerate a high level of government regulation in the economy, you're actually a liberal (high social liberalism, low economic liberalism). Likewise, if you make the same claim, but can tolerate a high level of regulation of human behaviors, you're actually a conservative (low social liberalism, high economic liberalism). In order to be a libertarian, you have to advance both points - high social and economic liberalism. This generally reflects minarchism.

  9. #69
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Why hasn't anybody showed up and whined about how mean everyone is being/how it's all just a matter of opinion anyway yet?

    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  10. #70
    half mystic, half skeksis jenocyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    6,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    That's a fairly rash assumption. Considering that I got my undergraduate degree in poli sci (yes, start flinging the jokes around) and particularly emphasized political parties, including third parties and their motivations, I'm pretty sure that I'm more well-read about the LP than you might imagine.

    You sort of broach the difference of opinion there in the first paragraph - I don't support marriage equality because it's fair. I support it because it works better. The current system leaves a huge chunk of the population with no incentive to conduct themselves with pro-social behavior, such as stable monogamy and developing a sense of home, while rewarding those who do not, such as those engaged in serial marriages, simply because they're attracted to their own sex, and not the other sex. That's something that can be fixed, and pretty easily.

    While you state that the LP doesn't stand for a minarchist system, I've seen no evidence otherwise. There would be nothing separating them from the two major parties at that point. Of course I do not like the US's neo-imperialism, but that's very consistent with my identification with the political left. I also find it to be incredibly unpragmatic. Libertarians aren't the only ones who can claim a non-interventionist bent.

    My main problem with libertarians is just what I stated - much too dogmatic about certain issues. While you may not believe in privatization of infrastructure, the concept is a fundamental aspect of Austrian economics, something many, if not most, libertarians espouse and advance (just look at how much the von Mises institute and Cato have had overlapping staff).

    If you claim to be a libertarian, and still tolerate a high level of government regulation in the economy, you're actually a liberal (high social liberalism, low economic liberalism). Likewise, if you make the same claim, but can tolerate a high level of regulation of human behaviors, you're actually a conservative (low social liberalism, high economic liberalism). In order to be a libertarian, you have to advance both points - high social and economic liberalism. This generally reflects minarchism.
    Why is it a rash assumption - are you assuming that I was only addressing you? Congrats on your degree, would you like to see all of mine?

    I don't care about your stance on gay marriage. I brought it up as an analogy to illustrate a point, which went over your head twice, so forget it.

    Whether some libertarians in theory don't support infrastructure, the Libertarian Party has made no such claim. And we are talking about the party.

    So now I am claiming to be a libertarian, but your undergrad polisci degree gives you the authority to tell me what I really am? When the hell did I ever say I want a high level of government regulation?

    Conversation over. See ya.

Similar Threads

  1. The Honest-to-Satan Libertarian Test
    By Speed Gavroche in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-03-2010, 10:01 AM
  2. More fascinating Libertarian stuff
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: 06-16-2008, 05:04 PM
  3. Libertarian Purity Test
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 04-23-2008, 05:24 PM
  4. I have no Libertarian Socialist!
    By booyalab in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-23-2008, 05:16 PM
  5. Engaging Economica on Libertarian Ideology
    By reason in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-25-2007, 08:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO