I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Extreme Humor

Oddee

Gorilla Mask

Funny Stuff

Funny Games

FreeGame Heaven

123 Games

Angelsfire.nl

Crazy Games

Crazy News

Fresh Pics

Friday Fun

DailyFreeGames

Pugorama

eBaum Nation

Free Samples

Funny stuff

Funny Videos

I hate retail



Back to Listing

Libertarianism: New Idea Whose Time Has Come?[Pic+

Hits: 4244 | Rating: (2.0) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: 5Cats
Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 26596 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 2:23:07 PM
@lauriloo: California, New York (both State and City) and other "liberal" states are... BROKE! The poo is going to hit the fan, hard. All those years of "freeloading" will break them: culturally, economically, physically... (Cali will split in two...)

It's a lot easier to remove a crappy State level politician than a "Czar" unilaterally appointed by a President. Doesn't matter which President, but again Obama is the worst case example...

@patchy: Life was GREAT under Mao! The people were SO HAPPY! They had to or they'd be F*CKING SHOT!
China's economy ONLY turned around when capitalist programs were introduced... and a few other reforms...

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5745 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 12:00:34 PM
No country has developed under a Socialist economy. Just remember that.

China did. Perhaps it wasn't *pure* socialist, but then there aren't many *pure* examples of any type of economy. China has heavy state control and state-owned businesses run the majority of the key economic departments. Banks are also regulated by the government; if they tell the banks to lend more, they do. In the US with the housing bubble and whatnot, the government told the banks to loan more and they were extremely reluctant. So I'd say China has a semi-privatized economy that is dominated by government control. So it's kind of a planned economy, but for all intents and purposes it is mostly socialist.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 10:35:07 AM
@lauriloo

few corrupt state politicians

There are in the federal government already! Seriously, let's say the EPA goes crazy (they already did btw), who can stop them? Nobody. Let's say Georgia's EPA goes crazy. People will start leaving Georgia. The damage is mitigated by the population.

mostly run by Republicans

Couldn't help yourself, could you? See California and New York (and Ohio, and Michigan, and...).

We are the UNITED states of America, not fifty states who happen to hang together.

You were so close. We are the UNITED STATES of America; as in, we are a bunch of sovereign, independent states (like European countries) grouped together for the common good (like the EU).

Seriously, you need to read into political history.


HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 10:29:45 AM
@lauriloo

The reason the southern states aren't more of a poohole

It's actually culture that's at fault. California and New York are "pooholes" too; I'm originally from New York.

would be basically uninhabitable

A bit dramatic, even for you. Yes, some states would make bad decisions. Some would make great decisions. Over time, the states that made bad decisions would try to emulate those that made good ones.

Let's say Wyoming comes up with this amazing law that saves them 50% on healthcare. Obviously we should make it a federal law because it is better than anything we have now, right? No! If we do that, we get stuck there for a very long time; new ideas - potentially even better ones - won't be able to be tried. Besides, all the other states have a HUGE incentive to mimic Wyoming anyways.

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 10:11:51 AM
The reason the southern states aren't more of a poohole than they currently are is because of the support they get from the gov and being basically forced to be better. If every state were left to their own devices, many large portions of the US would be basically uninhabitable and the good states would become overcrowded. If states regulated their own pollution, food safety, education quality, there would be more than a few corrupt state politicians who would gladly put their citizens at risk to encourage corrupt companies to come into their state and spend their money. States have plenty of things they control on their own and we can already see that many local governments (mostly run by Republicans) can't handle the responsibility without some kind of anti-women, anti-minority, anti-poor agenda. You want to expand THAT. no thanks. We are the UNITED states of America, not fifty states who happen to hang together.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 9:51:24 AM
@Kain

I guess my point is this: over the last 100 years, we've gone further towards a strong central government AND we've fallen significantly. Now, there are all new concerns about spying by the federal government.

Is it merely a coincidence that the stronger the federal government gets, the more abuses against citizens occur? I don't think so.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 9:48:17 AM
@Kain

The only thing libertarianism will do is turn money directly into power

How so? You've only given a statement without any supporting logic. The only thing currently crushing Americans is THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Why continue to give them all of the power when we could be equally efficient when transferring it to the states?

I don't see the point of conglomerating power. I tend to believe that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Kain1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 1463 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 8:39:08 AM
@Humanaction:

The only thing libertarianism will do is turn money directly into power. I know I know, "money is already power". Yes, but the only thing holding that power from crushing the lower and middle class is the federal government.

Kain1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 1463 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 8:15:26 AM
Give it a try if you must, but don't say you weren't warned..

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 4:59:42 AM
@Gerry

As for the safety measures, again, it has nothing to do with wanting a society that is unregulated. Rather, it's about being unregulated AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

You should be aware that libertarians advocate small government, and any necessary regulations occurring as the lowest possible level of government. Most libertarians I know want those responsibilities moved to the state level.

There are very good reasons, such as greater representation, to transfer government programs to the state.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Friday, June 21, 2013 4:56:42 AM
@lauriloo

Please don't go on another charity fantasy. If people were that charitable, charities wouldn't have to constantly beg for money.

What a ridiculous thing to say. I've found and provided tons of research to support my stance and you'd rather ignore it than offer a counter argument? That's the fantasy.

I could easily say: please don't go on another wealth redistribution fantasy; if government was that charitable, we wouldn't even need charities.

@Gerry

I think you misunderstand the points made by libertarians. It's not some perverse desire to make people go without healthcare or education; rather, we simply think - as is supported by the evidence - that the government is wholly incapable of providing these services well. Anything done by the government will eventually become corrupt and bloated and will be almost impossible to undo.

Magentab0b
Female, 30-39, Western US
 1462 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 9:05:24 PM
I lean which ever way allows the least amount of corruption.

Anarchy! anarchy!

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33911 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:12:50 PM

@ 5Cats - read the Libertarian charter. Repealing child labor laws is listed as one of their main goals. Job safety as well. An employer has the right to send you into a mine with not federal safety measures in place. You have the right to decline the job and starve if it's too risky for you. THAT's libertarianism.

Like I said, read the charter.

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33911 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 6:11:16 PM

HumanAction - are we headed that way? Partly yes. But we're also moving towards health care and we still have schools for children. Both will be lost with libertarianism. It's a great sounding idea, but they take it too far. You're not free - you're bloody stranded!

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:41:39 PM
"We all want poor people to be taken care of, but the current system is not working."

I don't get the impression the current GOP would agree with this. Please don't go on another charity fantasy. If people were that charitable, charities wouldn't have to constantly beg for money.

Andrew155
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 2564 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:13:36 PM
patchgrabber, there aren't that many successful socialist countries. Sweden isn't socialist, that's a myth. Canada and Denmark are listed higher up on the Index of economic freedom, even. In fact, the US is more socialist than certain Scandinavian countries like Iceland because we have socialized the most important factor in a Capitalist economy - risk. Iceland didn't.

The Soviet Union was a fully Socialist country. Not Communist, Socialist. As for Libertarian Socialism, that is dumb. You can't enforce equality without the bureaucracy. It's a fantasy that became trendy again after the Soviet model failed.

No country has developed under a Socialist economy. Just remember that.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 1:39:08 PM
@Gerry1of1

This modern version of Libertarianism is just serfdom all over again.

Aren't we headed that way right now? Every day I see something about the disparity between the rich and the poor. I hear people complain that we are slaves of government and corporations.

At the same time, we are not even close to a libertarian society and are headed in the opposite direction. If what you say were true, things would be getting "better" yet the opposite seems to be happening.

Its achilles heel is the assumption that, left to their own devices, people would always do what's best for themselves AND each other.

Libertarianism does not assume this at all. Libertarians merely argue that government is not the most effective way to support the poor. We all want poor people to be taken care of, but the current system is not working.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5745 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 11:15:00 AM
Ugh, too partisan. Comparing communism and socialism as determiners of the other's system? A joke. In the next sentence he goes on to compare libertarianism to...itself. That's a fair comparison, nevermind that socialism is a well-functioning system in many modern countries. I think the same thing on Wednesday that I thought on Monday no matter what happens on Tuesday.

Apparently this guy hasn't heard of libertarian socialism either, which tries to blend aspects of both together, mostly in terms of the means of production.

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 26596 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 10:41:10 AM
@Gerry1: That's a VERY "all or nothing" viewpoint! Libertarianism is NOT Anarchy! There is a place for government and indeed it is REQUIRED in modern society.

Enforcing laws is one of the Government's JOBS! Remember: the USA used to have NO CLLs, and now it does.

In the USA? The Federal Gov't isn't responsible for public schools, but they spend billions anyhow! As long as people are FREE to move from State to State? As long as they're FREE to vote OUT bad politicians who'd scrap all public schools? It'd be fine.

Look how well the US public schools are run now! A model of efficiency and A+ results! (not!)

'The Rich' always get richer; there will always be poor people. No system even imagined has ever fixed that!

Buddha? Christ? Muhammad? Mao? Gandhi? MLK? JFK? No one has EVER 'fixed poverty'...

lauriloo
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 1805 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 10:39:01 AM
The only place Libertarianism would work is on Vulcan. Its achilles heel is the assumption that, left to their own devices, people would always do what's best for themselves AND each other. We all know that would never happen. Maybe after evolution has totally eliminated our baser instincts but not any time soon.

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33911 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 10:02:53 AM

The Libertarian Party sounds good on the surface "Freedom", but part of that freedom is to repeal all child labor laws. Corporations are free to exploit your children. They also would dis-ban the public school system. You have the right to as much education as your parents can afford.

This modern version of Libertarianism is just serfdom all over again. Super poor {surfs}stay super poor, a few mega-moguls {lords} run everything.

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 26596 Posts
Thursday, June 20, 2013 9:50:50 AM
Link: Libertarianism: New Idea Whose Time Has Come?[Pic+ [Rate Link] - Johan Goldberg examines politics, history and libertarianism. Freedom!


You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.