• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are you a libertarian if...

Are you a libertarian if you support this?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 53.8%
  • No

    Votes: 12 46.2%

  • Total voters
    26
Actually, when a failed business impacts the public - it becomes a public matter inherently. Businesses, despite what libertarians would like to pretend, do not exist in vacuum. Sometimes, their irresponsible behavior screws everybody else and then it becomes society's business and since government is supposed to act on behalf of the people - the people can elect politicians who will develop policies to do just that.
You are wrong, libertarians do not think businesses exist in a vacuum. This is a straw man. Libertarians think that the taxpayer should not bear the burden of a failed business. Big difference.

As for the rest ofyour argument, it is a very succinct synopsis of the authoritarian position. Well done. I'm sure the other supporters of fascist policies like waas and Goshin agree with you. Those of us who care about essential God-given liberty remain unpersuaded by your trite authoritarian bromides.
 
Last edited:
You are wrong, libertarians do not think businesses exist in a vacuum. This is a straw man. Libertarians think that the taxpayer should not bear the burden of a failed business. Big difference.
Actually, when you say that a failed business is a "private matter" not a "public matter" without qualifying it, you are saying the business exists in a vacuum.

As for the rest of your argument, it is a very succinct synopsis of the authoritarian position. We done. I'm sure the other supporters of fascist policies like waas and Goshin agree with you. Those of us who care about essential god-giveniberty remain unpersuaded by your nonsensical authoritarian bromides.
Are you capable of speaking without hyperbole? For Christ's sake.
 
Funny, that's exactly where I part ways with all you crypto-fascist republicans. You guys talk a good game about liberty but in the same breath you'll unashamedly promote authoritarian policies, apparent with no sense of irony. You guys are perfectly cool with infringing on essential liberty and god-given rights as long as it suits your own personal prejudices. Disgusting.

There are no such things as god given rights, only those rights OTHERS ALLOW YOU TO HAVE, or are unable to remove from you. If I show up to your door tonight wit a pistol, knock you out, tie you up, and keep you in my basement, what sort of explanation would you offer me about your god given rights? Nothing convincing enough that I would let you go, I'll confidently say. Food for thought.

And so, in order to prevent that very thing, and to grant you a reprieve from the constant vigilance it would take on your part to do so WITHOUT preventative authoritarian measures in place, society...that is, a group of people living together in relative harmony...surrenders agreed upon amounts of freedom, in order to to maintain a higher standard of living.

Without cops, Guy, the moment you went to work, someone else would to get work taking what's yours. In almost all areas of your life.

Without a military, this would happen on a more continental scale.

Without the rule of law, there can be no society.

Without authoritarianism, there can be no rule of law.
 
Actually, when you say that a failed business is a "private matter" not a "public matter" without qualifying it, you are saying the business exists in a vacuum.
No I didn't. You are just repeating your vapid straw man caricature of libertarians. the word "public" refers to the matter being the proper domain of government, which a failed business is not.

Are you capable of speaking without hyperbole? For Christ's sake.

Nothing hyperbolic there, that is all very literal. Don't like being called a fascistic authoritarian? Don't be one.
 
I get your point... but I live in the South. When I was born, most people worked in factories and made a decent living doing it. Today, most of those factories are closed, and most of the people that worked in them are working lower-paying service jobs. Yes, we've managed to attract SOME factories from other parts of the country, because our state has less regs and taxes than many and no legal status for unions, but it hasn't made up the shortfall by a long shot. I'm not speaking theoretically... I'm talking about people I know, including family and neighbors.

It may "solve" some problems, but it also creates others.

Construction... well we have lots of that but it has mostly been taken over by illegals working for peanuts, a concrete mason that made $20 an hour in the 80s is lucky if he can find a job literally for anything more than minimum wage today. Again, I'm talking about people I know personally.

I've seen so many businesses close their doors and NOT reopen at all, not even under another owner, in the past decade... it worries me.

And are the houses cheaper as a result? And if not, who is to blame for that?
 
The role of government isn't to "solve problems," it is to protect essential liberty. Failed businesses and other such problems are a private matter, not a public one. As Goshin amply demonstrates in the above post, republicans haven't got the stomach for liberty.

And my right to not drink mercury poisoned water is defended and enforced by that very government, which impedes and eliminates a private companies' "right" to pollute the well.

Waiting till AFTER I've been poisoned to do something about it is a tad late for me.
 
No I didn't. You are just repeating your vapid straw man caricature of libertarians. the word "public" refers to the matter being the proper domain of government, which a failed business is not.

Nothing hyperbolic there, that is all very literal. Don't like being called a fascistic authoritarian? Don't be one.
For the record, your posts are a caricature of libertarians. They are the embodiment of the libertarian stereotype - the reason libertarianism is not taken seriously. And I really don't mind being called a "fascist authoritarian". It's like saying gravity doesn't exist. It's just not true so all it does is reflect badly on you, in my mind.
 
And my right to not drink mercury poisoned water is defended and enforced by that very government, which impedes and eliminates a private companies' "right" to pollute the well.

Waiting till AFTER I've been poisoned to do something about it is a tad late for me.

If you didn't drink poisoned water how can justify the argument your rights were violated? It would seem to me that the water is undrinkable, but until you actually drink it there isn't much to say about your rights being violated because of you right not to be poisoned.
 
A company without the power of government coercion can not infringe on liberty. People have a right to enter into voluntary contracts for work. How can one voluntarily have one's rights infringed?

Because hunger is not voluntary and neither is homelessness. FDR put it this way.....

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made."

Obama touched on it in his inauguration speech today too....

"The commitments we make to each other -- through Medicare, and Medicaid, and Social Security -- these things do not sap our initiative; they strengthen us," Obama said. "They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great."
 
Last edited:
And my right to not drink mercury poisoned water is defended and enforced by that very government, which impedes and eliminates a private companies' "right" to pollute the well.

Waiting till AFTER I've been poisoned to do something about it is a tad late for me.

This is the point I would drive home over and over. Legal remedies after the fact can do nothing to mitigate damage like that and is why we need government regulation to prevent it. Regulations covering clean air and water, injuries on the job and product safety keep us from being killed by poor standards and operating conditions.
 
Because hunger is not voluntary and neither is homelessness. FDR put it this way.....

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made."

No one cares how FDR put it. His statement is contradiction anyway. You can't call for coercion and freedom at the same time.

Obama touched on it in his speech today too....

"The commitments we make to each other -- through Medicare, and Medicaid, and Social Security -- these things do not sap our initiative; they strengthen us," Obama said. "They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great."

Except that they lower wages and raise prices, yeah, lets go with that nonsense he said there. Oh wait, we still have to face the fact that gifts don't motivate people. Crap.
 
No, the houses are not cheaper.

And this is, essentially, why I no longer buy this tired, lame argument put forth by both libertarians and republicans...that cheaper labor = cheaper goods. The idea that out quality of life becomes cheaper, and thus, increases, when the cost to manufacture goods stays low, or goes lower.

The only thing going up these days are the salaries of the wealthy.

And I see it more and more and more. Economic trouble hits, so companies rein in the payroll, cut hours, etc...forcing the salaried staff to work more and more hours, and kicking the hourlies out earlier and earlier, forcing them into hardships of their own. A salaried worker (of which I am one) used to get by working, say, 45-55 hours per week, sometimes more during the busy season, what have you. Then we started being told to cut our subordinates, turning that work week into a 55-75 hour week, with no extra pay to show for it. And we did it, thinking, well, this is what it takes, and when the economy picks back up, things will go back to normal, and those of us who stuck it out will be recognized. Well, things are picking up. Companies are posting RECORD profits, even when adjusted for inflation against historical measures. But the pay rolls are staying gouged, the skeleton crews are just as lean now as they were 4 years ago. Still working those 60+ hour weeks. Wages are still frozen, or at best, increasing in pathetic increments, like 3 percent per year. In short, once they (the corporate class) take something, even an inch, they never get it back. Prove you can do the work of two, and that's what you'll be stuck doing for the rest of your career.

The standard issue liberal response is to say "You need a union".

The standard issue republican response is to say "If you don't like it, find another job, sell yourself, use market competition to garner better wages."

Well, the problem with unions are many, and besides, not too many managers unions out there, you know? But yeah, too many problems to list here, it needs it's own thread, and has many besides.

The problem with trying to get another job is that there is a wall. You got tons of 20-30K a year jobs...they are everywhere. Got quite a few 30-40K jobs, too. Even a slew of 40-50K jobs. But past 50K a year, you gotta be a specialist of some sort. 50K-100K requires skill sets and exp that are highly specialized...in other words, if those jobs are not specifically what you went to college for, you gotta go back to college to get one. Which, of course, means spending a minimum of 20K, but more realistically, 50K. Not an option for a lot of people. And then, the 100K and up jobs...all requires extensive exp, which is code for...you gotta know somebody. There is a major barrier between "normal" jobs, and the elite. Enough so that they even now have their own job search engine. Like such a thing is even needed.

Anyway, my point is, the jobs that a lot of, or even most americans, are qualified for, are all part of the same corporations, all have the same beurocracies, in many cases, sharing at some point many of the same heads. We're all subsidiaries of someone larger, and those larger companies all copy each other in SOP. Which is to say, meet the new boss, same as the old boss, and meet the new job, same as the old job. The grass is not greener somewhere else.

So, as I am working longer hours without significantly more pay to produce things of significantly increasing price, what do YOU, the consumer, get out of it?
 
If you didn't drink poisoned water how can justify the argument your rights were violated? It would seem to me that the water is undrinkable, but until you actually drink it there isn't much to say about your rights being violated because of you right not to be poisoned.

Wow..
 
No one cares how FDR put it. His statement is contradiction anyway. You can't call for coercion and freedom at the same time.

Yes you can. Society refers to it as compromise. Freedom, complete freedom, is not conducive to society, so compromise is made. I lose my freedom to punch you in the face, and the same to you, so that we enjoy the freedom of not getting punched in the face all the time. It's the simplest concept in the world.

Except that they lower wages and raise prices, yeah, lets go with that nonsense he said there. Oh wait, we still have to face the fact that gifts don't motivate people. Crap.
What DOES motivate people?
 
Construction... well we have lots of that but it has mostly been taken over by illegals working for peanuts, a concrete mason that made $20 an hour in the 80s is lucky if he can find a job literally for anything more than minimum wage today. Again, I'm talking about people I know personally.

I've seen so many businesses close their doors and NOT reopen at all, not even under another owner, in the past decade... it worries me.

You and I have had this discussion before, and you and I both realize that the only thing which will remedy this is Americans putting their money where their mouths are. If I had a choice not to buy Chinese crap, I'd absolutely not do it. I would willingly pay more for Americans to have jobs making widgets. The problem is that there are not enough Americans willing to do this, and until there are, our lower working class will continue to suffer from lack of jobs with livable wages, as we get more entrenched in the global economy.
I wish there were a workable solution, but I just don't see one, without alot of us getting on board.
 
Yes you can. Society refers to it as compromise. Freedom, complete freedom, is not conducive to society, so compromise is made. I lose my freedom to punch you in the face, and the same to you, so that we enjoy the freedom of not getting punched in the face all the time. It's the simplest concept in the world.

Except that isn't calling for freedom, is it? No, it holding that rights are violated by those actions and restricting freedom in the process because of it. Lets not humor the idea you can do both at the same time.

What DOES motivate people?

It depends on the person in question. There are however general rules and usually speaking gifts do not motivate people.
 
Am I wrong? You are standing there unharmed next to a water hole that is poisoned. Your rights were violated how?

Is there a sign by the well denoting it as poisoned? No, not until a couple of people get poisoned by it. Do you presume to say that a company, or even individuals, would, knowingly or even unknowingly, poison the potable water supply, and admit to it?

Say they do, lol. What happens when folks are thirsty?
 
If you don't exert power over your employees, you're not a business owner. What else would you call the power to hire, fire or tell your employees what to do?
 
Henrin;1061377101]Except that isn't calling for freedom, is it? No, it holding that rights are violated by those actions and restricting freedom in the process because of it. Lets not humor the idea you can do both at the same time.
How much freedom do you have if you are constantly on your porch, guarding it against would be aggressors? How much freedom do you have if the only thing upholding so called law is YOU? Do you truly believe that, deep down inside, people are good natured and respectful? People are animals, and society is only ever 5 to 6 meals away from survival of the fittest, in the most literal sense. A man who needs something, needs it to live, does not care for whatever rules you would impose on him, beyond the forced used to impose it. Are you really desiring a society in which the everyday gamble is, you wield more force than the needy man? Your "natural" rights are all illusions, granted you by the very machine you hate. The very machine that makes large groups of people possible. Authoritarianism.



It depends on the person in question. There are however general rules and usually speaking gifts do not motivate people.
Tips motivate most of the strippers who have ever given ME a lap dance, and strictly speaking, those are gifts.

What motivates people, is the availability to acquire what they WANT, whatever that thing might be. And the best way for MOST of us to get what we WANT, is through the smoothness of life offered us by civilization. Hard to hang onto my corvette without authoritarian cops on every corner, making sure that what's mine stays mine, and I gladly pay for it, and I gladly give the go ahead for my hired thugs (government) to take from who they need to keep that ball rolling. Because, it provides the greatest level of liberty for us all, not just for a few.
 
How much freedom do you have if you are constantly on your porch, guarding it against would be aggressors? How much freedom do you have if the only thing upholding so called law is YOU? Do you truly believe that, deep down inside, people are good natured and respectful? People are animals, and society is only ever 5 to 6 meals away from survival of the fittest, in the most literal sense. A man who needs something, needs it to live, does not care for whatever rules you would impose on him, beyond the forced used to impose it. Are you really desiring a society in which the everyday gamble is, you wield more force than the needy man? Your "natural" rights are all illusions, granted you by the very machine you hate. The very machine that makes large groups of people possible. Authoritarianism.

You sure do enjoy talking of things I never mentioned. Did you not have enough material or was there perhaps no holes in my logic? You can say rights come where ever you please, it matters not to me, but I owe nothing to this so called needy man.

Tips motivate most of the strippers who have ever given ME a lap dance, and strictly speaking, those are gifts.

Idiotic. Tips are not gifts, but income earned from services rendered. If you don't agree I question your presence in this thread.
 
Last edited:
Is there a sign by the well denoting it as poisoned? No, not until a couple of people get poisoned by it. Do you presume to say that a company, or even individuals, would, knowingly or even unknowingly, poison the potable water supply, and admit to it?

Say they do, lol. What happens when folks are thirsty?

They get poisoned. Shocking?
 
Henrin;1061377357]You sure do enjoy talking of things I never mentioned. Did you not have enough material or was there perhaps no holes in my logic?
I suppose I'll have to break this down for you. But just this once, cuz I gots to get to bed soon. This is what you said...

"Except that isn't calling for freedom, is it? No, it holding that rights are violated by those actions and restricting freedom in the process because of it. Lets not humor the idea you can do both at the same time. "

I made one word bold, because it's dead wrong. By giving up a certain level of liberty, we grant ourselves as a WHOLE, a greater level of liberty. You see, to me, guarding myself and my stuff all the time is NOT freedom. It sounds like a crappy life, constantly being on guard, on edge, etc. Having police frees me up from a LOT of that. Your counter is likely that we should self police. Well, we already do. Last time I looked, cops are US citizens. That we pay them from a collective fund only serves my second point...the greatest level of liberty for the whole, and not just for some. So, yes, you CAN do both at the same time. And once again...that's called compromise. We trade a little, to get a lot. You can quote Franklin all day long, but you'd be wasting your time.
Idiotic. Tips are not gifts, but income earned from services rendered. If you don't agree I question your presence in this thread.
If it's income earned, why is it optional for me to offer it?

Duly noted that you did not address the last portion of my post.
 
They get poisoned. Shocking?

Correct. And as I said before, I have a right to not get poisoned from drinking out of the watering hole, more so than a company has a right to dump poison into it. Your fellow libertarian arguing the point did not seem to agree. Maybe you two should hook up, and discuss this.
 
Back
Top Bottom