Libertarians are lazy - Page 2

Scrum · 07-28-2006, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by bheld

Do you post anything that isn't some stupid unrelated quip?

Wait, let me guess your next post.

He has a point from where he sees things. Just because we don't happen to agree with it......

thewise1 · 07-28-2006, 12:21 AM

The way I see it, put into crude words, is that each system has many benefits and many drawbacks. Right now I feel we're too far toward socialism in some ways, too far toward fasicm in others, and not enough libertarianism in the mix at the moment, so for now I push a mostly libertarian point of view, because from my point of view we could use more from where we are now.

That's not to say I want a world with nothing but libertarianism. I don't think that would be a very great place, possibly even in its utopian form. I REALLY don't like the idea of an all socialist world either, and obviously not an all fascist world. But a balance between them all (and others) makes the world a halfway decent place to live IMO. It's not necessarily right in the center of the extremes that's perfect, but it'd be pretty close.

So please keep that in mind, I think most of us probably feel this way to some degree, and remember that right now the world lacks people pushing the libertarian way - and even if nothing but libertarians got elected for the next 10 years, they could only effect so much change - much of it desperately needed in my opinion.

But all of you should remember, it's important not to become a pawn of your belief system and remember why you believe it - this goes for libertarians and everyone else.

lew · 07-28-2006, 12:21 AM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You are reaching though.

I thought you didn't like slippery slopes?

I don't see how that's reaching at all.

I work on a military base. In the compound where I work at, no cameras are allowed. No phones are allowed. (because of cameras) It's a serious issue.

bheld · 07-28-2006, 12:21 AM

The point is that free markets will work when the lag isn't an issue. For things like education, you can't afford to wait for the market to react when a crap product gets put out because you're ruining lives in the meantime.

lew · 07-28-2006, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by bheld

Do you post anything that isn't some stupid unrelated quip?

Wait, let me guess your next post.

Way to address my point. Go you.

thewise1 · 07-28-2006, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by bheld

The point is that free markets will work when the lag isn't an issue. For things like education, you can't afford to wait for the market to react when a crap product gets put out because you're ruining lives in the meantime.

There has to be a way to transition from one to the other, though... I dunno

I'm not sure that the idea of free market schools for everyone is awesome, I wouldn't want my kids educated by walmart

Scrum · 07-28-2006, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by thewise1

The way I see it, put into crude words, is that each system has many benefits and many drawbacks. Right now I feel we're too far toward socialism in some ways, too far toward fasicm in others, and not enough libertarianism in the mix at the moment, so for now I push a mostly libertarian point of view, because from my point of view we could use more from where we are now.

That's not to say I want a world with nothing but libertarianism. I don't think that would be a very great place, possibly even in its utopian form. I REALLY don't like the idea of an all socialist world either, and obviously not an all fascist world. But a balance between them all (and others) makes the world a halfway decent place to live IMO. It's not necessarily right in the center of the extremes that's perfect, but it'd be pretty close.

So please keep that in mind, I think most of us probably feel this way to some degree, and remember that right now the world lacks people pushing the libertarian way - and even if nothing but libertarians got elected for the next 10 years, they could only effect so much change - much of it desperately needed in my opinion.

But all of you should remember, it's important not to become a pawn of your belief system and remember why you believe it - this goes for libertarians and everyone else.

I love libertarians.

They are easy to understand and everything comes back to one thing:
People care about money more than anything.

bheld · 07-28-2006, 12:25 AM

Originally Posted by thewise1

The way I see it, put into crude words, is that each system has many benefits and many drawbacks. Right now I feel we're too far toward socialism in some ways, too far toward fasicm in others, and not enough libertarianism in the mix at the moment, so for now I push a mostly libertarian point of view, because from my point of view we could use more from where we are now.

That's not to say I want a world with nothing but libertarianism. I don't think that would be a very great place, possibly even in its utopian form. I REALLY don't like the idea of an all socialist world either, and obviously not an all fascist world. But a balance between them all (and others) makes the world a halfway decent place to live IMO. It's not necessarily right in the center of the extremes that's perfect, but it'd be pretty close.

So please keep that in mind, I think most of us probably feel this way to some degree, and remember that right now the world lacks people pushing the libertarian way - and even if nothing but libertarians got elected for the next 10 years, they could only effect so much change - much of it desperately needed in my opinion.

But all of you should remember, it's important not to become a pawn of your belief system and remember why you believe it - this goes for libertarians and everyone else.

I think there are a lot of people pushing for libertarian views, the problem is that they don't agree on what areas to do it in.

Scrum · 07-28-2006, 12:25 AM

Originally Posted by lew

I don't see how that's reaching at all.

I work on a military base. In the compound where I work at, no cameras are allowed. No phones are allowed. (because of cameras) It's a serious issue.

You are comparing the social responsiblity of buying a camera to education of children.

You are reaching.

lew · 07-28-2006, 12:25 AM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

I love libertarians.

They are easy to understand and everything comes back to one thing:
People care about money more than anything.

No, I care about freedom more than anything.

lew · 07-28-2006, 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You are comparing the social responsiblity of buying a camera to education of children.

You are reaching.

I wasn't the one that brought up that comparison.

Scrum · 07-28-2006, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by lew

No, I care about freedom more than anything.

But you want to insure your freedom on the fact that everyone values money more than anything else.

Scrum · 07-28-2006, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by lew

I wasn't the one that brought up that comparison.

You were the one that explored it.

lew · 07-28-2006, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

You are comparing the social responsiblity of buying a camera to education of children.

You are reaching.

And btw, that's why in my original post, I said cameras have a degree of social responsibility. I was in no way saying that cameras have as much "social responsibility" (which I don't even agree with in the first place; I believe in no "social responsibility" for anything) as education.

thewise1 · 07-28-2006, 12:29 AM

Originally Posted by lew

No, I care about freedom more than anything.

Personally I care more about individual freedom than corporate freedom. Corporations are owned by individuals, but take on a power greater than an individual, a power rivaling the power of many nations.

Which is why I like the idea of the deck being stacked in favor of the little guy, not the corporation. Not unfairly so, but the way things are right now stifles competition and innovation, and I believe that corporations are too powerful (not all of course).

bheld · 07-28-2006, 12:30 AM

Originally Posted by lew

And btw, that's why in my original post, I said cameras have a degree of social responsibility. I was in no way saying that cameras have as much "social responsibility" (which I don't even agree with in the first place; I believe in no "social responsibility" for anything) as education.

No, you just illustrated my point that all you do is skirt issues instead of addressing what people are actually saying.

lew · 07-28-2006, 12:31 AM

Originally Posted by bheld

No, you just illustrated my point that all you do is skirt issues instead of addressing what people are actually saying.

I directly addressed your point. You're the one skirting the issue.

Scrum · 07-28-2006, 12:32 AM

Originally Posted by lew

And btw, that's why in my original post, I said cameras have a degree of social responsibility. I was in no way saying that cameras have as much "social responsibility" (which I don't even agree with in the first place; I believe in no "social responsibility" for anything) as education.

So you believe nobody has any social responsibility to do anything?

bheld · 07-28-2006, 12:32 AM

Originally Posted by lew

I directly addressed your point. You're the one skirting the issue.

What the hell do digital cameras have to do with what I was talking about? Jesus Christ, it's like talking to a kid here.

Ardentfrost · 07-28-2006, 12:33 AM

Originally Posted by thewise1

Personally I care more about individual freedom than corporate freedom. Corporations are owned by individuals, but take on a power greater than an individual, a power rivaling the power of many nations.

Which is why I like the idea of the deck being stacked in favor of the little guy, not the corporation. Not unfairly so, but the way things are right now stifles competition and innovation, and I believe that corporations are too powerful (not all of course).

I'm starting to think that this might be close to an answer for how to keep corporations and the government from working so closely together. If we gave back all the individual freedoms to people, but kept corporations paying taxes and shit, they might be at odds more. That's what I want

That idea is the only problem I have with the founding documents: they don't do anything to prevent corporations from buying their own legislation