A Question for Libertarians

[edgray]

Wow, didn't expect this to turn up so many responses.

... but monopolies are certainly a potential reality. A realistic, absolutely minimal amount of government coercement to prevent such abuses is necessary. Trustbusting, for example, has been around for generations.

Interesting that you'd ask such things when anarchy holds no guarantees whatsoever.

Thanks Accountable.

Continuing on that line, am I correct in thinking libertarians would approve of an increase in govt intervention into large corporate affairs to stop too much private power being accumulated as long as it was counter balanced with a reduction in govt intervention in the lives of individuals?

I told them they should get along since they both believe in a fictional political system....

Ok well it seems like this is going over really old ground. Aside from the communist countries of China, Cuba and the USSR on the communism front, there's these for the anarchist one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities

And furthermore Janie, you think that just because something hasn't existed yet it's not worth supporting? So you don't believe in any human progression then? I say that, because it's those who have dared to think beyond what is are the ones who have shaped our world, not the ones who believe in just what's in front of them.

But then, the biggest monopoly in the world is microsoft. And it got there by being the best

:24: :24: :24: :24: :24:

you've just made my day!

 

[Accountable]

Continuing on that line, am I correct in thinking libertarians would approve of an increase in govt intervention into large corporate affairs to stop too much private power being accumulated as long as it was counter balanced with a reduction in govt intervention in the lives of individuals?

I can't speak for libertarians, only for me. God, I hate labels, pigeonholing, and generalizations. Let's talk personal opinions and verifiable facts, okay?

Individual liberty should be considered sacrosanct, in my book. I hold these truths to be self-evident, that everyone is created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The only limitation to individual liberty is when one person's wishes unreasonably and directly impinge on another person's liberty. A corporation is not an individual, but it is owned by individuals. Personifying the corporation muddies the waters and dilutes accountability of the individuals involved ... or uninvolved but responsible.

Having said that, I'm now at an intersection. We can talk idealism or what realistically can be done in our current situation. Which way do we turn?

 

[Accountable]

Monopolies can be a bit of a problem.

But then, the biggest monopoly in the world is microsoft.

Monopoly??

 

[Codrus]

...... Cod, I hate labels,

well, i edited it for you ,...and since you got it wrong....im going to label you


i label you a free thinking American ,...congradulations :thumbup

 

[edgray]

I can't speak for libertarians, only for me. God, I hate labels, pigeonholing, and generalizations. Let's talk personal opinions and verifiable facts, okay?

Individual liberty should be considered sacrosanct, in my book. I hold these truths to be self-evident, that everyone is created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The only limitation to individual liberty is when one person's wishes unreasonably and directly impinge on another person's liberty. A corporation is not an individual, but it is owned by individuals. Personifying the corporation muddies the waters and dilutes accountability of the individuals involved ... or uninvolved but responsible.

Having said that, I'm now at an intersection. We can talk idealism or what realistically can be done in our current situation. Which way do we turn?

I know what you mean about the label thing. It can get things quite muddled. Especially the whole "liberal" vs "conservative" thing - the term liberal is so misunderstood thesedays.

We'll go with your own opinions on this one.

Ok so corporations can essentially have as many stipulations and rules applied to their actions as the people and govt see fit?

And I take it corporations cannot impinge on people's liberty too?

 

[Accountable]

I know what you mean about the label thing. It can get things quite muddled. Especially the whole "liberal" vs "conservative" thing - the term liberal is so misunderstood thesedays.

We'll go with your own opinions on this one.

Ok so corporations can essentially have as many stipulations and rules applied to their actions as the people and govt see fit?

And I take it corporations cannot impinge on people's liberty too?

So can cars, bicycle horns, and fuzzy slippers. They are owned things. Corporations are not sentient beings, and you and others try to personify them you distract from the responsible people: the owners. The people who own corporations might impinge on other people's liberty, but the corporation cannot. No one arrests the car when it plows into a house or enables bank robbers to get away; they arrest the driver. Get the picture?

 

[Alien Allen]

I don't claim to be any kind of an expert on communism but my meager understanding was that China, Russia and Cuba never have gone beyond the first stages.

 

[JanieDough]

Ok well it seems like this is going over really old ground. Aside from the communist countries of China, Cuba and the USSR on the communism front, there's these for the anarchist one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities

And furthermore Janie, you think that just because something hasn't existed yet it's not worth supporting? So you don't believe in any human progression then? I say that, because it's those who have dared to think beyond what is are the ones who have shaped our world, not the ones who believe in just what's in front of them.

you're kind of being an ass and very disrespectful...i thought you were nice???

i take this to mean you believe in these political systems and they can exist in their pure forms??

i don't believe it - and not just because it hasn't existed - because it's an IDEAL - which are meant to be strive for, but are hardly ever achieved.

and because we are human.




now you asked me for my god damn libertarian opinion and i gave it to you. don't be such a meanie poo poo head.

 

[edgray]

So can cars, bicycle horns, and fuzzy slippers. They are owned things. Corporations are not sentient beings, and you and others try to personify them you distract from the responsible people: the owners. The people who own corporations might impinge on other people's liberty, but the corporation cannot. No one arrests the car when it plows into a house or enables bank robbers to get away; they arrest the driver. Get the picture?

yup thanks.

would there be any kind of public services? Fire, police, education, public libraries etc?

and would there be any kind of welfare system?

I don't claim to be any kind of an expert on communism but my meager understanding was that China, Russia and Cuba never have gone beyond the first stages.

Whether or not China, Russia or Cuba are even communist is very much up for debate. My cuban friend tells me that Cuba, for example, isn't communist, but Castroist. Marx I'm sure would have been appalled at both China and Russia.

you're kind of being an ass and very disrespectful...i thought you were nice???

i take this to mean you believe in these political systems and they can exist in their pure forms??

i don't believe it - and not just because it hasn't existed - because it's an IDEAL - which are meant to be strive for, but are hardly ever achieved.

and because we are human.

now you asked me for my god damn libertarian opinion and i gave it to you. don't be such a meanie poo poo head.

Sorry Janie I didn't realise correcting someone or challenging their opinion would make me a meanie poo poo head! And disrespectful. My apologies if you took what I said that way, it was unintentional. And no, I'm generally not nice.

To answer your question, I believe that anything is possible in political terms. The human race is pretty smart overall and given the right frameworks, the right balances of freedoms and responsibilities, and with the right education, anything can be achieved.

Again, for anarchist communities that have existed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities

 

[Accountable]

yup thanks.

would there be any kind of public services? Fire, police, education, public libraries etc?

and would there be any kind of welfare system?

I feel like you've jerked the wheel onto a completely different road. We went from individual liberty, to corporate tyranny, to singing These are the People in Your Neighborhood."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdHQ7Rb47Go&feature=related

 

[edgray]

I feel like you've jerked the wheel onto a completely different road. We went from individual liberty, to corporate tyranny, to singing These are the People in Your Neighborhood."

I was wondering what provisions, if any, a libertarian society would make for it's less fortunate.

 

[Azazel]

​

 

[Alien Allen]

I was wondering what provisions, if any, a libertarian society would make for it's less fortunate.

You mean how did the US get by without the nanny state for the first 150 years I guess?

 

[edgray]

You mean how did the US get by without the nanny state for the first 150 years I guess?

What I was asking was if there would be any provisions made for the less fortunate in a libertarian society in this current era? Also, I'm more interested in the public services. Obviously I'm guessing healthcare most definitely wouldn't be provided, but what about other public amenities (anything from refuse collection to the fire department)? How would that be managed?

 

[Alien Allen]

What I was asking was if there would be any provisions made for the less fortunate in a libertarian society in this current era? Also, I'm more interested in the public services. Obviously I'm guessing healthcare most definitely wouldn't be provided, but what about other public amenities (anything from refuse collection to the fire department)? How would that be managed?

I would think fire and police would be part of what we would expect to be govt services paid thru taxes

As to refuse it would be paid directly to the company doing the pickup. In effect right now you have a city acting as the middle man.

Health care would be paid by people directly. Right now it is paid mainly by businesses. It raises the cost of doing business which is passed on to the customer. And there is no incentive for one to curtail the medical costs they incur

 

[Francis]

Sorry, apparently I wasn't clear. The ideal of communism that Marx described is not the government system we know as communism today.

Marxist communism does not and cannot exist.

I believe Cuba is the closest you can find to Marxist Communism.. Especially now that Fidel has stepped down I understand the system is even closer.. No system will ever be exactly as wanted because people will always adjust the damn thing to suit political needs.. :willy_nilly:

 

[Accountable]

I've been thinking recently about Libertarianism and have a question for the libertarians/govt minimalists here:

In a libertarian world who's economic model is capitalism, how do you guarantee liberty when there's the potential for capitalism to create concentrations of unelected power (private/corporate tyranny)?

Thanks Accountable.

Continuing on that line, am I correct in thinking libertarians would approve of an increase in govt intervention into large corporate affairs to stop too much private power being accumulated as long as it was counter balanced with a reduction in govt intervention in the lives of individuals?

Ok so corporations can essentially have as many stipulations and rules applied to their actions as the people and govt see fit?

And I take it corporations cannot impinge on people's liberty too?

What I was asking was if there would be any provisions made for the less fortunate in a libertarian society in this current era? Also, I'm more interested in the public services. Obviously I'm guessing healthcare most definitely wouldn't be provided, but what about other public amenities (anything from refuse collection to the fire department)? How would that be managed?

yup thanks.

would there be any kind of public services? Fire, police, education, public libraries etc?

and would there be any kind of welfare system?

I was wondering what provisions, if any, a libertarian society would make for it's less fortunate.

Forgive me, but it smells like an ambush, like you have your agenda you're trying to lead me/us in so you can "AHA!" us. Why don't you just lay out your theory? You might be exactly right.

 

[JanieDough]

I feel like you've jerked the wheel onto a completely different road. We went from individual liberty, to corporate tyranny, to singing These are the People in Your Neighborhood."

seriously.

out with it.

 

[edgray]

Forgive me, but it smells like an ambush, like you have your agenda you're trying to lead me/us in so you can "AHA!" us. Why don't you just lay out your theory? You might be exactly right.

No ambush, I'm genuinely trying to understand the purpose, if any, of libertarian beliefs, and what a libertarian world would look like, how it would function and so forth.

 

[Alien Allen]

No ambush, I'm genuinely trying to understand the purpose, if any, of libertarian beliefs, and what a libertarian world would look like, how it would function and so forth.

Go back 150 years and look at US history and you would be pretty close IMO