The Big Flaw in Libertarianism

[M14 Shooter]

True!
Then we can be just like India!
Where the average wage is $2 a day!

India is a socialist country.
Conditions are improving as they adopt more market oriented policies.
Are you sure you thought your example through?

Free market at work!
Not what I want for my country though.

What made you think India had a free market?

Never mind that as those policies take hold, the labor market will force wages up.
In China, too.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The big flaw in libertarianism - they complain about "both parties" being the problem, but dutifully pullt the lever for the Republican Party almost every time.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The big flaw in libertarianism - they complain about "both parties" being the problem, but dutifully pullt the lever for the Republican Party almost every time.

Link?

(and just because someone calls himself a libertarian doesn't mean he is one, same with people who call themselves liberal/conservative/progressive/etc)

 

[dblack]

The big flaw in libertarianism - they complain about "both parties" being the problem, but dutifully pullt the lever for the Republican Party almost every time.

Link?

(and just because someone calls himself a libertarian doesn't mean he is one, same with people who call themselves liberal/conservative/progressive/etc)

It would be interesting to see stats on that sort of thing. None of the libertarians I know consider themselves "Republicans", though obviously many Repubs want to claim libertarian values.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The big flaw in libertarianism - they complain about "both parties" being the problem, but dutifully pullt the lever for the Republican Party almost every time.

An unprovable assertion.

 

[Dr.Drock]

The big flaw in libertarianism - they complain about "both parties" being the problem, but dutifully pullt the lever for the Republican Party almost every time.

Link?

(and just because someone calls himself a libertarian doesn't mean he is one, same with people who call themselves liberal/conservative/progressive/etc)

It would be interesting to see stats on that sort of thing. None of the libertarians I know consider themselves "Republicans", though obviously many Repubs want to claim libertarian values.

I'm a libertarian, I'm as likely to vote Obama as I am Romney (that likelihood being zero).

But on the other side it's a hijacked term like all politicial terms, even John McCain sometimes calls himself libertarian, which is obviously a lie and joke.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It would be interesting to see stats on that sort of thing. None of the libertarians I know consider themselves "Republicans", though obviously many Repubs want to claim libertarian values.

Republicans are a lot closer to Libertarian values. Republicans often talk a very good line, problem is that the rarely act on the talk.

 

[IndependntLogic]

True!
Then we can be just like India!
Where the average wage is $2 a day!

India is a socialist country.

Um yeah okay. Here let's educate you:
India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice where it says "most populous democracy"? Yeah that.
Wait. lemme guess. There ARE no non-socialist countries anywhere in the world, right?

Conditions are improving as they adopt more market oriented policies.

Um for whom? Corporations? Sure. The average person? $2 bucks a day. Those are "improving conditions" I would prefer not to have for America tyvm.

Are you sure you thought your example through?

Free market at work!
Not what I want for my country though.

What made you think India had a free market?

I get it. So then if India doesn't have a free market - and I'm sure you claim America doesn't, then who does?
If no one does, what makes you think anyone ever will?

 

[IndependntLogic]

Link?

(and just because someone calls himself a libertarian doesn't mean he is one, same with people who call themselves liberal/conservative/progressive/etc)

It would be interesting to see stats on that sort of thing. None of the libertarians I know consider themselves "Republicans", though obviously many Repubs want to claim libertarian values.

I'm a libertarian, I'm as likely to vote Obama as I am Romney (that likelihood being zero).

But on the other side it's a hijacked term like all politicial terms, even John McCain sometimes calls himself libertarian, which is obviously a lie and joke.

Here is a difference between me and 99% of the posters here.
I can respect that you're not going to vote the same way I am.
It's hard to find people like that here.
If you feel Gary Anderson, Ron Paul or even Ru Paul is the best choice, good for you. I would bet you can even tell me why you make your choice and back it up with reasoning.
I may disagree with you but (gasp!) that's okay.
I find that a far sight better than those who vote a certain direction because their parents did or because they've always been a member of a certain party.
My first four presidential votes were Republican. Now you couldn't get me near what that party has become.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Um yeah okay. Here let's educate you:
India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice where it says "most populous democracy"? Yeah that.
Wait. lemme guess. There ARE no non-socialist countries anywhere in the world, right?

So you lack the eduction to know the difference between economic and political systems?

It would no doubt surprise you that Lenin's Soviet Union was arguably the most democratic nation in history.

Socialism in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Um for whom? Corporations? Sure. The average person? $2 bucks a day. Those are "improving conditions" I would prefer not to have for America tyvm.

Are you an idiot? Conditions in India have vastly improved for the average person since 1960 - night and day.

I get it. So then if India doesn't have a free market - and I'm sure you claim America doesn't, then who does?

America has a nominally market driven economy. India has a centrally planned and managed economy that is moving toward a market economy.

If no one does, what makes you think anyone ever will?

Legitimate question, have you ever had a class in economics?

 

[IndependntLogic]

Um yeah okay. Here let's educate you:
India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice where it says "most populous democracy"? Yeah that.
Wait. lemme guess. There ARE no non-socialist countries anywhere in the world, right?

So you lack the eduction to know the difference between economic and political systems?

It would no doubt surprise you that Lenin's Soviet Union was arguably the most democratic nation in history.

Nah. You're completely full of crap on that one.
Socialism in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well oooh. Impressive. And the countries that DON'T have any social programs are? Oh. You got nothing? Yeah we knew that.

Um for whom? Corporations? Sure. The average person? $2 bucks a day. Those are "improving conditions" I would prefer not to have for America tyvm.

Are you an idiot?
Are you an asshole?
Conditions in India have vastly improved for the average person since 1960 - night and day.
Improved all the way to $2 a day! You'll pardon me if I'm not impressed.

I get it. So then if India doesn't have a free market - and I'm sure you claim America doesn't, then who does?

America has a nominally market driven economy. India has a centrally planned and managed economy that is moving toward a market economy.

If no one does, what makes you think anyone ever will?

Legitimate question, have you ever had a class in economics?

Have you ever directly answered a question? You would make a fine politician. Lots of bs. No straight answers.

The topic is simple: While we are definitely over-regulated, the extreme concept that there is no need of ANY regulation because The Magical Market Fairies will take care of everything is just plain bull shit.
There is need of SOME regulation. Not to the extent we have now but certainly not zero.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Have you ever directly answered a question? You would make a fine politician. Lots of bs. No straight answers.

The topic is simple: While we are definitely over-regulated, the extreme concept that there is no need of ANY regulation because The Magical Market Fairies will take care of everything is just plain bull shit.
There is need of SOME regulation. Not to the extent we have now but certainly not zero.

You started a thread to slander Libertarians, you got your ass handed to you. You persisted by making spurious and false claims whilst demonstrating abject ignorance.

Lenin's USSR was indeed the most pure democracy in history. Do you even grasp what a "soviet" is? It's a congress or committee. The problem is that you lack a fundamental grasp of what a democracy is. Your neighbors voting on whether you should get dinner tonight might not be the great thing you imagine. You no doubt believe the USA is a democracy and have no grasp of what a constitutional republic is.

You demonstrate no understanding at all of economic systems, thinking that "democracy" and "socialism" are mutually exclusive.

As for regulation, Have you ever heard of Underwriter's Laboratory? This is the U/L that you find on electrical and electronic equipment. Would you be surprised to learn that U/L is NOT a government body? In fact, it is purely voluntary - still you will find absolutely no products without U/L certification. Now you worship government as the highest manifestation of the human condition, so would you care to examine the effectiveness of U/L versus the FDA? Say appliance fires compared to Salmonella outbreaks?

In fact, the record of private certification agencies, ISO, IEEE, GAAP, etc. so vastly outperforms government regulators that there it is an absurdity.

But you don't grasp this.

 

[LibertyForAll]

This thread was based on the false premise that libertarians can be painted with a broad brush. There are different philosophies some more extreme than others. I rarely see libertarians calling for complete deregulation. I think Kevin is the only one in this thread that has called for that.

 

[bayoubill]

There is a theory that seems almost holy to Libertarians and which many posters dodge like hell. So if there are any Libertarians who would like to take a crack at responding directly to a point, I'd like to hear their views. Of course, if they all use the same dodges and analogies I got from another Libertarian, then quit asking why no one takes you guys seriously.
Here it the central economic theory I've heard from Libertarians and why I dispute it:

"The Market Will Correct Itself". They claim if a company is not nice, people won't buy its' products and services, they won't work there and The Magical Market will make the bad ol' company go away! Wrong. It doesn't.
Without government regulation, companies hurt people (e.g. unsafe working conditions, denial of health benefits, toxic dumping, unsafe oil rigs etc...).
They make harmful products (e.g. dangrous drugs, cars that blow up etc...).
They treat employees horribly (e.g. discrimination, wrongful term, etc...).
And no - those companies don't disappear if they are bad because "the Magical Market Corrects All".
The Market does little to correct anything a company does, once it gets big enough. That's just plain fact.
So the biggest flaw I find in Libertarianism is the belief that companies will regulate themselves, if simply left alone. History proves this is not the case.

This is why a strong centralized government and reasonable level of regulation is necessary to the well-being of citizenry.

I would welcome any commentary from Libertarians on this and will not stoop to the petty insults, labeling etc... that the weak use as their only means of debate. However, I will challenge you if your reasoning is flawed! Cheers, FS

okay... I'll give it a shot...

in a truly unfettered marketplace, where competition is allowed to flourish, the market would tend to correct itself, and little if any government regulation would be needed...

problems arise when government gives special consideration to a select few large companies, via legislative action that stifles competition... which ultimately creates virtual monopolies in certain sectors of the economy... not to mention creating companies that are "too big to fail"...

if you look at the record, you would find that the companies that are most needing "regulation" are the very same companies that became artificially huge due to favorable government actions on their behalf...


regarding concerns about unsafe working conditions, toxic dumping, harmful products, etc., these would rightly be addressed by property-rights and liability laws, which do not constitute regulation, as such, but come under the judicial protections afforded us by a properly-functioning government...

Hmm. A reasoned, intelligent and civil reply. So please understand that challenging or disagreeing with a view by no means, is intended as disrepect for the person with that view.
The challenge with the concept you have been kind enough to expound on, is that it has never proven accurate in practice. I am reminded of Communism. In theory it sounds wonderful! In practice, it never turns out that way.
For example, America prior to the 20th century. Slavery. When there wasn't slavery, there was horrible discrimination. There were sweatshops where women and children work all hours for poverty wages - and even then, they were often screwed out of those wages and fired if they refused the sexual advances of managers etc... There was no defense and certainly no retribution. Did those shops just correct themselves? Nope. Nor did they suffer a loss of sales. Nothing.
The coal mining industry? Did the owners just decide to make working conditions safer? No.

The point being, America was not the Libertarian Utopia some of your compatriots claim it was, prior to the 20th century. Well maybe it was for rich, white land owners. The closest things I've seen to Libertarian economies / governments, have been Hong Kong and The Ukraine. To some degree, India. Even Mexico might apply. Very little government interference with business. Almost no regulation or enforcement of environmental issues, wage & hour, discrimination laws, no such thing as an equivalent of OSHA and so on. Guess what happens when companies realize the government isn't going to help anyone they screw? Guess how much power the citizen has against say PEMEX in a country where the market is left to correct itself? Or what they odds that they would be stupid enough to even file a lawsuit?

I mean, I get the part about companies will lose revenues if they don't provide a good service, product etc... but seriously, does anyone think less people are shopping at Wal-Mart just because it has been shown to systematically disriminate against women on a widespread basis?
Nope.
Has Wal-Mart disappeared?
They're more profitable than ever.

Of course, this is far from an unfettered marketplace but I can't think of a time or place this one particular aspect of Libertarianism proved accurate.

My apologies for not getting back to the discussion sooner...

and I'm afraid I'm going to have to take a rain check on continuing the discussion...

there is much here to address... and little time to do it...

hopefully I'll be back in here tomorrow to pick up where I left off...

 

[IndependntLogic]

Have you ever directly answered a question? You would make a fine politician. Lots of bs. No straight answers.

The topic is simple: While we are definitely over-regulated, the extreme concept that there is no need of ANY regulation because The Magical Market Fairies will take care of everything is just plain bull shit.
There is need of SOME regulation. Not to the extent we have now but certainly not zero.

You started a thread to slander Libertarians, you got your ass handed to you.
Nah. You think so but really, no one has made a case that is convincing to anyone but the members of your club.
So while you seem a tady hysterical and over-sensitive about me simply challenging a theory I'd heard from a Libertarian (on this board and in other places) there is no "slander" involved. Ya know, if you guys didn't go into hysterics every time someone disagreed with you, you might be taken seriously by more than 0.5% of the population.
You persisted by making spurious and false claims whilst demonstrating abject ignorance.
OMG I was spurious! Was I Spast & Spurious? Seriously dude, settle down. Have a nice cup of tea or something.

Lenin's USSR was indeed the most pure democracy in history. Do you even grasp what a "soviet" is? It's a congress or committee. The problem is that you lack a fundamental grasp of what a democracy is. Your neighbors voting on whether you should get dinner tonight might not be the great thing you imagine. You no doubt believe the USA is a democracy and have no grasp of what a constitutional republic is.

This is a challenge you are always going to have, if you want anyone to ever look at Libertarianism seriously. You guys all talk as if theory is or was reality. In THEORY, the Soviet Union would have had the greatest distribution of power but in REALITY, that was nowhere near the case. It is a perfect example of the flaw I spoke of. In theory companies would never intentionally decide NOT to recall a harmful product because it was dangerous - or even to allow it to go out in the first place. In reality, the examples of enitre industries harming consumers, endangering the lives of their workers etc... are too numerous to name.

You demonstrate no understanding at all of economic systems, thinking that "democracy" and "socialism" are mutually exclusive.

As for regulation, Have you ever heard of Underwriter's Laboratory? This is the U/L that you find on electrical and electronic equipment. Would you be surprised to learn that U/L is NOT a government body? In fact, it is purely voluntary - still you will find absolutely no products without U/L certification. Now you worship government as the highest manifestation of the human condition, so would you care to examine the effectiveness of U/L versus the FDA? Say appliance fires compared to Salmonella outbreaks?

Have you ever heard of Moody's? The fine folks who tolld us that CMBS' were worthy of a A+ rating. Funny, they're still around, aren't they.
You're logic is beyond flawed:
If there is one example of a company doing the right thing, this proves all companies will always do the right thing. Lovely theory.

In fact, the record of private certification agencies, ISO, IEEE, GAAP, etc. so vastly outperforms government regulators that there it is an absurdity.
But you don't grasp this.

Not true. But wait, let use the exact Libertarian logic when pointing the FDA missed a bad drug.
There are bad engineers who should not have been certified. OMG The IEEE is completely worthless and should be destroyed and replaced with a government agency! Obviously I'm not stupid enough to believe that. Nor am I so blinded by ideology that I would believe that because it conforms the what I read in a pamphlet on Independentism.

This thread was based on the false premise that libertarians can be painted with a broad brush. There are different philosophies some more extreme than others. I rarely see libertarians calling for complete deregulation. I think Kevin is the only one in this thread that has called for that.

You are among the most reasonable and objective Libertarians I've encountered. So okay. I hereby officially retract that ALL libertarians would argue in favor of such a foolish belief. Thus far, you are the only one in this thread who has said otherwise though.
Just look at the example from Uncensored directly above you for proof. Or virtually every other Libertarian poster in this thread.
All argue that complete deregulation would not have seriously damaging consequences because "The Market" (I feel like the word God could be put in there with some of these zealots) will take care of everything and all of us. Cum By Ya baby.
So fine. There are Libertarians who realie the theory I describe isn't actually going to be the solution to all things. Some regulation is required.
My apologies for painting all Libertarians with the same brush.

 

[bayoubill]

Have you ever directly answered a question? You would make a fine politician. Lots of bs. No straight answers.

The topic is simple: While we are definitely over-regulated, the extreme concept that there is no need of ANY regulation because The Magical Market Fairies will take care of everything is just plain bull shit.
There is need of SOME regulation. Not to the extent we have now but certainly not zero.

You started a thread to slander Libertarians, you got your ass handed to you.
Nah. You think so but really, no one has made a case that is convincing to anyone but the members of your club.
So while you seem a tady hysterical and over-sensitive about me simply challenging a theory I'd heard from a Libertarian (on this board and in other places) there is no "slander" involved. Ya know, if you guys didn't go into hysterics every time someone disagreed with you, you might be taken seriously by more than 0.5% of the population.
You persisted by making spurious and false claims whilst demonstrating abject ignorance.
OMG I was spurious! Was I Spast & Spurious? Seriously dude, settle down. Have a nice cup of tea or something.

Lenin's USSR was indeed the most pure democracy in history. Do you even grasp what a "soviet" is? It's a congress or committee. The problem is that you lack a fundamental grasp of what a democracy is. Your neighbors voting on whether you should get dinner tonight might not be the great thing you imagine. You no doubt believe the USA is a democracy and have no grasp of what a constitutional republic is.

This is a challenge you are always going to have, if you want anyone to ever look at Libertarianism seriously. You guys all talk as if theory is or was reality. In THEORY, the Soviet Union would have had the greatest distribution of power but in REALITY, that was nowhere near the case. It is a perfect example of the flaw I spoke of. In theory companies would never intentionally decide NOT to recall a harmful product because it was dangerous - or even to allow it to go out in the first place. In reality, the examples of enitre industries harming consumers, endangering the lives of their workers etc... are too numerous to name.

You demonstrate no understanding at all of economic systems, thinking that "democracy" and "socialism" are mutually exclusive.

As for regulation, Have you ever heard of Underwriter's Laboratory? This is the U/L that you find on electrical and electronic equipment. Would you be surprised to learn that U/L is NOT a government body? In fact, it is purely voluntary - still you will find absolutely no products without U/L certification. Now you worship government as the highest manifestation of the human condition, so would you care to examine the effectiveness of U/L versus the FDA? Say appliance fires compared to Salmonella outbreaks?

Have you ever heard of Moody's? The fine folks who tolld us that CMBS' were worthy of a A+ rating. Funny, they're still around, aren't they.
You're logic is beyond flawed:
If there is one example of a company doing the right thing, this proves all companies will always do the right thing. Lovely theory.

In fact, the record of private certification agencies, ISO, IEEE, GAAP, etc. so vastly outperforms government regulators that there it is an absurdity.
But you don't grasp this.

Not true. But wait, let use the exact Libertarian logic when pointing the FDA missed a bad drug.
There are bad engineers who should not have been certified. OMG The IEEE is completely worthless and should be destroyed and replaced with a government agency! Obviously I'm not stupid enough to believe that. Nor am I so blinded by ideology that I would believe that because it conforms the what I read in a pamphlet on Independentism.

This thread was based on the false premise that libertarians can be painted with a broad brush. There are different philosophies some more extreme than others. I rarely see libertarians calling for complete deregulation. I think Kevin is the only one in this thread that has called for that.

You are among the most reasonable and objective Libertarians I've encountered. So okay. I hereby officially retract that ALL libertarians would argue in favor of such a foolish belief. Thus far, you are the only one in this thread who has said otherwise though.
Just look at the example from Uncensored directly above you for proof. Or virtually every other Libertarian poster in this thread.
All argue that complete deregulation would not have seriously damaging consequences because "The Market" (I feel like the word God could be put in there with some of these zealots) will take care of everything and all of us. Cum By Ya baby.
So fine. There are Libertarians who realie the theory I describe isn't actually going to be the solution to all things. Some regulation is required.
My apologies for painting all Libertarians with the same brush.

An observation: I've been hangin' out with libertarians for more'n 30 years...

and, almost without exception, they all are truly fine people...

but I gotta say, many of 'em do tend to get kinda prickly whenever somebody questions libertarian ideals...

 

[saveliberty]

Your butt hurt is noted IL.

 

[IndependntLogic]

You started a thread to slander Libertarians, you got your ass handed to you.
Nah. You think so but really, no one has made a case that is convincing to anyone but the members of your club.
So while you seem a tady hysterical and over-sensitive about me simply challenging a theory I'd heard from a Libertarian (on this board and in other places) there is no "slander" involved. Ya know, if you guys didn't go into hysterics every time someone disagreed with you, you might be taken seriously by more than 0.5% of the population.
You persisted by making spurious and false claims whilst demonstrating abject ignorance.
OMG I was spurious! Was I Spast & Spurious? Seriously dude, settle down. Have a nice cup of tea or something.

Lenin's USSR was indeed the most pure democracy in history. Do you even grasp what a "soviet" is? It's a congress or committee. The problem is that you lack a fundamental grasp of what a democracy is. Your neighbors voting on whether you should get dinner tonight might not be the great thing you imagine. You no doubt believe the USA is a democracy and have no grasp of what a constitutional republic is.

This is a challenge you are always going to have, if you want anyone to ever look at Libertarianism seriously. You guys all talk as if theory is or was reality. In THEORY, the Soviet Union would have had the greatest distribution of power but in REALITY, that was nowhere near the case. It is a perfect example of the flaw I spoke of. In theory companies would never intentionally decide NOT to recall a harmful product because it was dangerous - or even to allow it to go out in the first place. In reality, the examples of enitre industries harming consumers, endangering the lives of their workers etc... are too numerous to name.

You demonstrate no understanding at all of economic systems, thinking that "democracy" and "socialism" are mutually exclusive.

As for regulation, Have you ever heard of Underwriter's Laboratory? This is the U/L that you find on electrical and electronic equipment. Would you be surprised to learn that U/L is NOT a government body? In fact, it is purely voluntary - still you will find absolutely no products without U/L certification. Now you worship government as the highest manifestation of the human condition, so would you care to examine the effectiveness of U/L versus the FDA? Say appliance fires compared to Salmonella outbreaks?

Have you ever heard of Moody's? The fine folks who tolld us that CMBS' were worthy of a A+ rating. Funny, they're still around, aren't they.
You're logic is beyond flawed:
If there is one example of a company doing the right thing, this proves all companies will always do the right thing. Lovely theory.

In fact, the record of private certification agencies, ISO, IEEE, GAAP, etc. so vastly outperforms government regulators that there it is an absurdity.
But you don't grasp this.

Not true. But wait, let use the exact Libertarian logic when pointing the FDA missed a bad drug.
There are bad engineers who should not have been certified. OMG The IEEE is completely worthless and should be destroyed and replaced with a government agency! Obviously I'm not stupid enough to believe that. Nor am I so blinded by ideology that I would believe that because it conforms the what I read in a pamphlet on Independentism.

This thread was based on the false premise that libertarians can be painted with a broad brush. There are different philosophies some more extreme than others. I rarely see libertarians calling for complete deregulation. I think Kevin is the only one in this thread that has called for that.

You are among the most reasonable and objective Libertarians I've encountered. So okay. I hereby officially retract that ALL libertarians would argue in favor of such a foolish belief. Thus far, you are the only one in this thread who has said otherwise though.
Just look at the example from Uncensored directly above you for proof. Or virtually every other Libertarian poster in this thread.
All argue that complete deregulation would not have seriously damaging consequences because "The Market" (I feel like the word God could be put in there with some of these zealots) will take care of everything and all of us. Cum By Ya baby.
So fine. There are Libertarians who realie the theory I describe isn't actually going to be the solution to all things. Some regulation is required.
My apologies for painting all Libertarians with the same brush.

An observation: I've been hangin' out with libertarians for more'n 30 years...

and, almost without exception, they all are truly fine people...

but I gotta say, many of 'em do tend to get kinda prickly whenever somebody questions libertarian ideals...

Prickly??? LOL! You sir, have the makings of a diplomat. Some of them are just plain religious about it! Only a few seem able to just rationally discuss their ideals, positions etc... The rest are well you know, emotional whackjobs who will post stuff with about as much substance as "Your butt..."

Your butt hurt is noted IL.

LOL! As I was saying....
Ah yes. How could anyone not take your little tinfoil hat seriously, eh? I am sure you are captain of the club!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It would be interesting to see stats on that sort of thing. None of the libertarians I know consider themselves "Republicans", though obviously many Repubs want to claim libertarian values.

Republicans are a lot closer to Libertarian values. Republicans often talk a very good line, problem is that the rarely act on the talk.

Thats because independents decide elections so both parties must move to the middle. But, 100% of the energy for freedom from liberal government resides in the Republican Party just waiting for the center to move farther to the right.

 

[bayoubill]

An observation: I've been hangin' out with libertarians for more'n 30 years...

and, almost without exception, they all are truly fine people...

but I gotta say, many of 'em do tend to get kinda prickly whenever somebody questions libertarian ideals...

Prickly??? LOL! You sir, have the makings of a diplomat. Some of them are just plain religious about it! Only a few seem able to just rationally discuss their ideals, positions etc... The rest are well you know, emotional whackjobs who will post stuff with about as much substance as "Your butt..."

full disclosure: I consider myself a libertarian... prolly been that way practically since I was born...

there was a time when I was a huge pain in the butt, spouting off about libertarianism... I 'spect it prolly got to the point where people hid when they saw me comin'... some few years ago a good friend remarked that it seemed like I had lost my sense of humor whenever the subject of politics came up... and dang if he wasn't right...

since then I've tried to keep everything in perspective... and never take things too seriously... otherwise I'll just end up bitter... and what's the good of that...?