Libertarian policies

[Masterhawk]

Which libertarian policies do you hold? If there's one you don't hold, please comment below as to why.

1. deregulation means removing any government regulations

2. reducing government spending means cutting spending in social programs, subsidies, and in military to reduce taxes

3. social freedom means that you believe that the government should stay out of people's lives. In other words, government intervention in recreational drug use, gambling, and people's sex lives is minimal if at all present.

4. open borders

5. right to privacy not only means that the authorities should not search property without probable cause but also that surveillance should be restricted

 

[Dittohead not!]

Which libertarian policies do you hold? If there's one you don't hold, please comment below as to why.

1. deregulation means removing any government regulations

2. reducing government spending means cutting spending in social programs, subsidies, and in military to reduce taxes

3. social freedom means that you believe that the government should stay out of people's lives. In other words, government intervention in recreational drug use, gambling, and people's sex lives is minimal if at all present.

4. open borders

5. right to privacy not only means that the authorities should not search property without probable cause but also that surveillance should be restricted

1 Of course not all government regulations, just the ones that only serve special interestss
2. All government programs need to be subject to reductions, not just the ones one party or the other disagrees with. The deficit is out of control, and spending has to be reduced.
3. Agreed. The purpose of government is to protect liberty, not to protect us from ourselves.
4. No, open borders would mean the end of sovereignty.
5. Of course. The Fourth Amendment is more important today than ever. We need to bring the fifth one back from the brink of disaster as well, but that's another issue.

 

[cuban smokes]

freedom from Democrats & Republicans ............

 

[KevinKohler]

Actually, all of those, in moderation.

 

[Kreton]

Which libertarian policies do you hold? If there's one you don't hold, please comment below as to why.

1. deregulation means removing any government regulations

2. reducing government spending means cutting spending in social programs, subsidies, and in military to reduce taxes

3. social freedom means that you believe that the government should stay out of people's lives. In other words, government intervention in recreational drug use, gambling, and people's sex lives is minimal if at all present.

4. open borders

5. right to privacy not only means that the authorities should not search property without probable cause but also that surveillance should be restricted

1. No. Some regulations are good and needed.
2. Yes, but beginning with waste. Our government wastes ridiculous amounts of money.
3. For the most part yes, but again, some are good.
4. No.
5. Yes.

 

[MTAtech]

If one believes that doctors should be licensed; buildings should meet fire codes; banks insured by the FDIC shouldn't make risky investments; and commercial aircraft should have mechanical parts replaced on a schedule, you believe in government regulations.

I haven't seen any real evidence that government wastes any more money than large private businesses.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

All but deregulation.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I am for all of that with a couple caveats.

I am for minimal regulation of small businesses but large corporations have to have their power and influence kept in check just as much as the government does.

I am for open borders in principle but recognize it is impractical to do so unless most countries have open borders as well.

 

[Waddy]

I would be for open borders with countries that have a similar standard of living as we do. But letting millions of under educated impoverished unskilled laborers in displaces native born workers and suppresses wages.

 

[celticwar17]

I am for everything accept open borders.

If we did not live in a wellfare state, or a government where there is a lot of social programs .... then I'd be for open borders.... but we are not close to that whatsoever

 

[RAMOSS]

I am for all of that with a couple caveats.

I am for minimal regulation of small businesses but large corporations have to have their power and influence kept in check just as much as the government does.

I am for open borders in principle but recognize it is impractical to do so unless most countries have open borders as well.

It depends on the regulation. regulations that deal with health and safety are needed, even for the small businesses.

 

[Goshin]

Low taxes, social freedom, right to privacy... within reason. Nothing is absolute.

Deregulation... almost clicked that one. I believe regulations should be kept to what is really necessary, such as not letting factories dump toxins in the river or belch unrestrained pollution. But only the truly necessary.


My biggest point of contention with libertarianism is the open borders idea... you can't really have that and still have a sovereign nation. It's an invitation to be legally invaded.

 

[Aristaeus]

I am for everything accept open borders.

If we did not live in a wellfare state, or a government where there is a lot of social programs .... then I'd be for open borders.... but we are not close to that whatsoever

Lol. America is probably the least welfare state industrialised nation in the world with the possible exception of Singapore.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Which libertarian policies do you hold? If there's one you don't hold, please comment below as to why.

1. deregulation means removing any government regulations

2. reducing government spending means cutting spending in social programs, subsidies, and in military to reduce taxes

3. social freedom means that you believe that the government should stay out of people's lives. In other words, government intervention in recreational drug use, gambling, and people's sex lives is minimal if at all present.

4. open borders

5. right to privacy not only means that the authorities should not search property without probable cause but also that surveillance should be restricted

As a libertarian (little "L") I support only necessary regulation, and that should be signed off on by my elected representatives in Congress and not imposed as law by faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats or the courts.

I support federal spending as is necessary in order for the government to carry out its responsibilities assigned to it in the Constitution and that's it.

The federal government is given no Constitutional authority in any social issues.

I do not support open borders. Borders, language, and culture is what makes a country a country.

There is no constitutional or unalienable right to privacy in the public sector. Invasion of privacy in the private sector should be lawful, necessary, and rare.

 

[celticwar17]

Lol. America is probably the least welfare state industrialised nation in the world with the possible exception of Singapore.

But, it still is... regardless. If we give individual citizens free stuff... no open borders.

 

[holbritter]

If one believes that doctors should be licensed; buildings should meet fire codes; banks insured by the FDIC shouldn't make risky investments; and commercial aircraft should have mechanical parts replaced on a schedule, you believe in government regulations.

I haven't seen any real evidence that government wastes any more money than large private businesses.

:shock:

There is plenty of evidence out there. A large private business would NEVER waste the amount of money the government does. I've worked in govt. and private business and they are day and night when it comes to 'waste'.

 

[MTAtech]

:shock:

There is plenty of evidence out there. A large private business would NEVER waste the amount of money the government does. I've worked in govt. and private business and they are day and night when it comes to 'waste'.

Show your evidence then.

Large corporations pay their top executives hundreds of millions of dollars, lacking evidence that those individuals did anything special to deserve empirion compensation. Heads of government agencies never receive salaries even close.

Private corporations also lavish perks.

former General Electric CEO Jack Welch’s divorce case, including information that the company granted him such post-retirement perks as an $80,000-per-month Manhattan apartment and court-side seats to New York Knicks games. Tyco’s former CEO Dennis Kozlowski received a $2.5 million apartment in New York’s Trump Tower and a $15,000 dog-shaped umbrella stand, among many other perks.
source

Anyone who has worked in a large corporation, such as GE, IBM, etc., can outline wasteful practices that don't get reported the way government waste does.

But your solution is to throw the baby out with the bath water. 'Oh, there is waste is Medicare. Let's get rid of Medicare.'

 

[Dittohead not!]

Here's a good test to see if a given law, regulation, policy, or whatever is a good one or not: The Declaration of Independence says that the purpose of government is to protect our rights.

Therefore, any law, regulation, policy, that protects rights is a good one. One that limits rights is not.


Do we have a right to drink clean water? Then a regulation requiring water testing and purification is a good regulation.

Simply apply the test: Does it enhance or does it curtail liberty?

 

[holbritter]

Show your evidence then.

Large corporations pay their top executives hundreds of millions of dollars, lacking evidence that those individuals did anything special to deserve empirion compensation. Heads of government agencies never receive salaries even close.

Private corporations also lavish perks.
Anyone who has worked in a large corporation, such as GE, IBM, etc., can outline wasteful practices that don't get reported the way government waste does.

But your solution is to throw the baby out with the bath water. 'Oh, there is waste is Medicare. Let's get rid of Medicare.'

No, where did I have a solution? If you're talking about my other post, I was being sarcastic and it wasn't even directed at you.

Now, as for the 'waste'. I'm not talking about wages or 'perks'. Private business can do whatever they want with their money......It's not coming out of my pocket, unlike government spending. When you are spending the tax payers money you should be more fiscally responsible than paying $600 for a freaking toilet seat, for instance. Fraud is a big problem in some of these programs, yet very little is done about it. That is waste. I've read audit reports on some of these programs in NY. The amount of waste is amazingly mind boggling. From ineffective procedures that are never addressed to the outright fraud enabling processes that are not addressed.

 

[OlNate]

Which libertarian policies do you hold? If there's one you don't hold, please comment below as to why.

1. deregulation means removing any government regulations

2. reducing government spending means cutting spending in social programs, subsidies, and in military to reduce taxes

3. social freedom means that you believe that the government should stay out of people's lives. In other words, government intervention in recreational drug use, gambling, and people's sex lives is minimal if at all present.

4. open borders

5. right to privacy not only means that the authorities should not search property without probable cause but also that surveillance should be restricted

Said yes to 3 and 4.

Said no to 1, because corporations cannot be trusted to regulate themselves to put the well being of citizens ahead of profits.
Said no to 2, because social programs are important to ensuring that a civilized society leaves no one behind. Also, because I'm not selfish, and care about others.
Said no to 5, because there are dangers in the world, and without making major overall changes to how we treat people, at home and abroad, there will always be someone pissed off enough to do something heinous to get theirs.

To me libertarianism is the epitome of an immature political ideology. They want all the perks, but none of the responsibility, and they're the first to change their tune when something impacts them personally. Doing what you want and not paying taxes does not make for a great system to run a country as powerful or as important as America.

Not that it gets it all wrong, and not that it is ill intentioned...it's just a little silly in some of the fundamental ways it misunderstands what it takes to run a country.

 

[soylentgreen]

I would be for open borders with countries that have a similar standard of living as we do. But letting millions of under educated impoverished unskilled laborers in displaces native born workers and suppresses wages.

So, have i got this right? America has millions of native under educated, impoverished and unskilled laborers who will loose their jobs to immigrants? Or is it that there are educated, well off natives who are being employed in unskilled labour?

 

[Nickyjo]

Here's a good test to see if a given law, regulation, policy, or whatever is a good one or not: The Declaration of Independence says that the purpose of government is to protect our rights.

Therefore, any law, regulation, policy, that protects rights is a good one. One that limits rights is not.


Do we have a right to drink clean water? Then a regulation requiring water testing and purification is a good regulation.

Simply apply the test: Does it enhance or does it curtail liberty?

We may be getting into semantics here, but any regulation necessarily curtails liberty. And there is no named right to, say, clean water. It’s just that we have collectively through our representatives decided that society should make certain actions under law and regulation for the presumed common good. The debate revolves around what the common good is and whether actions taken are constitutional. Arguments and decisions over the ACA are a good example of this struggle.

 

[Waddy]

So, have i got this right? America has millions of native under educated, impoverished and unskilled laborers who will loose their jobs to immigrants? Or is it that there are educated, well off natives who are being employed in unskilled labour?

We grow plenty of native born unskilled, under-educated workers of our own. They just won't work for starvation wages. Better off on government assistance. And that's what a surplus of imported unskilled laborers does; hold down wages. So let's get our unskilled workers employed at somewhat higher wages before we import more of the same. And, we have a surplus of engineers. More new grads than can be absorbed in the market; except for software engineers. That field has a huge shortage, so letting in immigrants with software engineering skills makes sense.

 

[Dittohead not!]

We may be getting into semantics here, but any regulation necessarily curtails liberty. And there is no named right to, say, clean water. It’s just that we have collectively through our representatives decided that society should make certain actions under law and regulation for the presumed common good. The debate revolves around what the common good is and whether actions taken are constitutional. Arguments and decisions over the ACA are a good example of this struggle.

Sometimes, it's necessary to curtail one person's liberty to preserve that of another. I don't have a right to dump my sewage into the municipal water supply, for example, or have a toxic waste dump in my back yard. It's a matter of one person's liberty infringing that of another.

And rights don't have to be enumerated. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are simply examples, not a definitive list.

 

[MrPeanut]

Social freedoms and right to privacy are the two I most identify with. Aren't Libertarians generally anti-war as well? I'd check that box too.