Libertarian movement (2 Viewers)

[dieburndie]

And there we have it ladies and gentlemen, the hallmark of a functionally illiterate 4th generation farm-hand;

i.e. Using the term 'Keynesian' as an adjective for all models who conclusions conflict with the redneck consensus

Yes, I am functionally illiterate. Bravo.

Really cuts deep down, coming from the guy still confusing your/you're.

 

[volition]

By definition he's only receiving the service if he's paid for it. Never speak again. F**ktard.

Ok, to make the example work better, I will automatically deduct $1000 from his account. Whether he chooses it or not. Happy now?

 

[badquinton304]

oh man, is this your first time arguing with libertarians? The Answer according to Libertarian code is Private Security firms which are then bound by contracts and contract/tort law. The courts themselves are private and hire private firms to subpoena their prospective "clients". (Though how bankruptcy would work in libertariantopia still baffles me. Slavery is probably their solution o.o) The security firms themselves are controlled by market forces (the better they stick to the rules, the more customers they get etc.)

This did not play out too well on MGS4 lol.
But so long as the contractor and the client gets what they want, then I don't really see where playing by the rules will come in. In reality if some bastard wants to defend and in turn get the revenge they want then the contractor gets paid and another angry man hires them. I'm not saying that this shit doesnt happen with state military forces but I seriously doubt that its going to be any better with contractors.

I know he got banned?

FIXED
Nice try.

 

[vikraman]

This did not play out too well on MGS4 lol.
But so long as the contractor and the client gets what they want, then I don't really see where playing by the rules will come in. In reality if some bastard wants to defend and in turn get the revenge they want then the contractor gets paid and another angry man hires them. I'm not saying that this shit doesnt happen with state military forces but I seriously doubt that its going to be any better with contractors.



FIXED
Nice try.

Libertarian argument will ensue hereweith. Well I would imagine the terms of the contract between the client and the security firm would dictate the lines that cannot be crossed e.g torture etc.

My Argument is this: Agreed. Private security firms will probably commit more violence since they are only answerable to ONE client. If it's a particularly violent client then well too bad for his victim! The coppers however are answerable to the whole lot of us. They do something we don't like, they get sacked and jailed from time to time.

 

[SylviaB]

ITT: people who know nothing about Anarcho-capitalism

 

[moll.]

Because the police in a democratic system have always been uncorrupt and entirely accountable for their actions. Governments have never given police direct powers to interfere with democracy and protest, and even to directly commit overt violence against the people they are supposed to represent.

It is a bit frightening what direct, public control of the police force could mean. But probably less frightening than concentrating that power in a smaller group of elected individuals.

It's only frightening if that small group of elected representatives has no accountability to the general public. True, the police force has been known in the past for it's corruption and has often actively worked against democracy. But you can hardly say that that's the case these days. Greater access and power from the media has led to greater disclosure, more accountability of our elected representatives and hence a strengthening of democracy. You can hardly say that the police are still the fearsome hand of authority that they once were, and that they remain in many other nations.
Sure, there's still a long way to go, but it's been all uphill since here, so I fail to see why it won't remain so.

 

[moll.]

oh man, is this your first time arguing with libertarians? The Answer according to Libertarian code is Private Security firms which are then bound by contracts and contract/tort law. The courts themselves are private and hire private firms to subpoena their prospective "clients". (Though how bankruptcy would work in libertariantopia still baffles me. Slavery is probably their solution o.o) The security firms themselves are controlled by market forces (the better they stick to the rules, the more customers they get etc.)

Next.

(None of this means I am Libertarian though, I've just argued against 12312414981239812 of them hence predicting their future answers. I believe in a benign dictatorship, with me being the dictator of course.)

Two problems with this line of thought:
1) As Dragon mentioned, the private security firm and the private courts will only be faithful to the party which pays them, or pays them most. The opposing side can just go suck it, cos they're poor, right?
2) Related to the above, is that market forces would not result in the more honest or moral of the companies getting the new contracts, it would simply be the ones who best do the job to the clients satisfaction. The role of the credit-rating agencies in the GFC, in that they rated everything - including the unstable sub-prime packages - with an AAA credit rating if the selling firm offered them enough, is a case in point.

 

[Graney]

True, the police force has been known in the past for it's corruption and has often actively worked against democracy. But you can hardly say that that's the case these days. Greater access and power from the media has led to greater disclosure, more accountability of our elected representatives and hence a strengthening of democracy. You can hardly say that the police are still the fearsome hand of authority that they once were, and that they remain in many other nations.
Sure, there's still a long way to go, but it's been all uphill since here, so I fail to see why it won't remain so.

I think it comes in cycles, and there's no real protection against it happening again. Political, financial, social instability can change *everything*.

You're assuming the public and the media would never again get behind the abuse of power.

I don't know what your opinion on drug use and individual rights is, but from my paradigm, the war on drugs is a huge abuse of government power enforced by the police, that is occurring today and has the full backing of the public and media. Millions of people are casualties of this horror. The current state of policing is as a big a nightmare as ever. They're doing terrible things every day, and no one is there to hold them accountable.

 

[vikraman]

Is it just me or has every libertarian argument been drugs, drugs and OMG LOOK DRUGS

What if we go portugal's way (yes read about it.) and legalise ownership and use of most drugs? Go Singapore's way on economic issues. Hey suddenly having a state doesn't feel that bad anymore...

 

[SylviaB]

Is it just me or has every libertarian argument been drugs, drugs and OMG LOOK DRUGS

yes it's just you you daft cunt

What if we go portugal's way (yes read about it.) and legalise ownership and use of most drugs? Go Singapore's way on economic issues. Hey suddenly having a state doesn't feel that bad anymore...

please elaborate

 

[Graney]

Nothing is legalized in portugal guy, it's just decriminalized, which is still total crap.

 

[vikraman]

yes it's just you you daft cunt






please elaborate

low, low taxes. still progressive though (though we can change it to a flat tax.) 15% being the top bracket. 6% being the lowest (and there are exemptions too, so the effective tax is lower.)

co-payment for healthcare (it's a fairly complex system but hardly budget busting like medicare etc.) Healthcare in Singapore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia has rough descriptions of it but the facts speak pretty loudly only 3% of gdp goes to healthcare.

very open economy (no.1 in world economic freedom ranking) immigration is controlled but effectively anyone who can get a job is granted permanent residency. no minimum wage keeps costs down in various industries, costs of living are pretty low as a result.

singapore has very good public education (TIMSS rankings put them right at the top every year)

most importantly, NO MIDDLE CLASS WELFARE. like seriously, not a cent.

now if only they would legalise drugs, (they currently hang you.. immediately.. even if you're only carrying enough to get high once. hence the low prison population lol)

 

[SylviaB]

yeah so what does this have to do with government being good?

 

[FabricLive]

Sweet I can live in 15% slavery!

 

[FabricLive]

Economic calculation problem which you can only solve with super complex AI's w/ perfect information

EDIT: Migrate to a post-scarcity economy okay

 

[loquasagacious]

See I'm still not sure where I stand on the libertarianism spectrum to be honest. I disagree with middle-class welfare (just tax us less fuuuuuu) and "concessions" that allow for tax avoidance by those who can afford the best accountants, and believe much of this could be avoided by simplification of the system. On the otherhand I am a great fan of public schooling, but not how it is achieved here. I would much rather a voucher system which would allow more diversity of schooling from both the public and private sectors. Similarly I would like to see our health system set up more like that of singapore.

I'm in a similar position tbh.

I think the state should be much much smaller - but that there is still a place for the state providing law and order, defence, protecting the rights of minors/minorities, providing a minimum curriculum, providing some welfare and with some involvement in healthcare.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

I'm in a similar position tbh.

I think the state should be much much smaller - but that there is still a place for the state providing law and order, defence, protecting the rights of minors/minorities, providing a minimum curriculum, providing some welfare and with some involvement in healthcare.

Yeah we've tried minarchism; ever heard of the United States of America? It's now the ultimate big government quite literally imprisoning and murdering millions.

The law of expanding state power seems to hold just about everywhere. Sometimes there are victories in terms of civil liberties, but government spending as a percentage of GDP almost always increases steadily in the long run. In most developed countries government spending a % of GDP has increase from around 5% at the turn of the century to between 40 and 60%.

If you want to live in a minarchist society, fine. I'm not saying governments can't exist, I'm saying people should have a realistic, viable opportunity to opt out of them. But governments will never allow this to happen, because even under minarchism, if productive people have a choice between 15% tax and 0%, its obvious what most will choose. However, some very small governments or government like institutions could probably work well (charging perhaps around 5% tax, or fees per person rather than a % of income) if there was competition from other organisations and a right to succession to keep them in check.

 

[badquinton304]

low, low taxes. still progressive though (though we can change it to a flat tax.) 15% being the top bracket. 6% being the lowest (and there are exemptions too, so the effective tax is lower.)

co-payment for healthcare (it's a fairly complex system but hardly budget busting like medicare etc.) Healthcare in Singapore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia has rough descriptions of it but the facts speak pretty loudly only 3% of gdp goes to healthcare.

very open economy (no.1 in world economic freedom ranking) immigration is controlled but effectively anyone who can get a job is granted permanent residency. no minimum wage keeps costs down in various industries, costs of living are pretty low as a result.

singapore has very good public education (TIMSS rankings put them right at the top every year)

most importantly, NO MIDDLE CLASS WELFARE. like seriously, not a cent.

now if only they would legalise drugs, (they currently hang you.. immediately.. even if you're only carrying enough to get high once. hence the low prison population lol)

Not bad, not bad at all, but I don't think it will all be quite that simple. You see a number of observations I had when I went singapore got me thinking.
There are far less obese and overweight people in the country (in fact I didn't anyone except for a couple australian tourists who could classify as obese). Its hot all year around as they are on the equator o you really cant afford to be fat, you will fry.
Smoking in singapore is restricted. Taxis, hotels, bars, bustops are all places where you are not allowed to smoke and smoking in public areas where it is reasonably crowded is frowned upon. Not to mention strict fines and community service is enforced upon those who choose to throw the ciggarrette on the floor or for any other act of littering. So its not really suprising that smoking is not too popular in singapore.
Alcohol in singapore is taxed heavily and is very expensive, so I don't think many people there drink. It is mainly just tourists visiting cocktail bars.
Also the average temperature is almost always in the high 20's all year round so you are really not going to catch a cold.
The only real problem would be tropical disease but the place is kept so clean and tidy, so risk is minimised significantly.
Also unlike australia providing medical care to really small rural populations is not an issue because the population of singapore is concentrated.
So all in all at least half of the reasons one might visit a doctor here are not really an issue in singapore. Hence health spending will be really low as there is not really much to spend on. I'm not saying its a bad system I think it is a good sysstem but implementing it in Australia in such a way that would be cost effective and beneficial may prove difficult.

I also think part of the problem is australian society, in singapore attitudes toward education, health savings, public transport and everything else in between seem to be far more responsible. People are generally more concerned about thier own future whereas many australian tend to live "in the moment".
Again they have good systems but implementing them in australia will not be so clear cut, I think we first have to take care of some issues with society as well as realising the extent of our problems and then implement a system which can bear our load.
Still the singapore system is what we should ideally (yet cautiously) be working toward.

 

[TJefferson]

I wish to inform the following interested individuals that this debate will now proceed to facebook:

Group Name:

Libertarians Vs. Statists Category:Common Interest - Politics

SylvesterBr

Riet

badquinton304

Slidey

volition

jennyfromdabloc

Anonymous-

cp3

Absolutezero

chelsea girl

dieburndie

FabricLive

violentdelights

BlackDragon

Omar-Comin

Graney

loquasagacious

 

[badquinton304]

I wish to inform the following interested individuals that this debate will now proceed to facebook:

Group Name:

Libertarians Vs. Statists Category:Common Interest - Politics

SylvesterBr

Riet

badquinton304

Slidey

volition

jennyfromdabloc

Anonymous-

cp3

Absolutezero

chelsea girl

dieburndie

FabricLive

violentdelights

BlackDragon

Omar-Comin

Graney

loquasagacious

Why?