The Big Flaw in Libertarianism

[dblack]

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...

Likewise, pretty much since high school.

My preference for libertarian politics is pretty simple. I almost always find myself in the minority. So the prospect of majority-rule, when it isn't truly necessary, is somewhat less than appealing.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If my family was about to be put on the street I would take a job making less money in order to pay the bills. I might be lower paid than everyone else but I would gladly do it just to get money coming in. I can always look for better jobs later once my family's needs are met. Isn't this logical? This is the free market as it applies to the commodity of labor. They pay me what I am willing to accept. When the government steps in and decides they aren't paying me enough and demand that they increase my pay the company is faced with two choices, either pay me more or let me go. Many times they will pick the latter choice and now I am left without a means to care for my family because of government intervention. Who are you to decide how much people should work for? Who are you to force my family onto the streets in order to enforce your idea of equality?
If conditions are so bad at walmart the employees can get jobs elsewhere, it's not like it's a niche industry with a high degree of specialization. When walmart realizes they have a high turnover and it costs them more money to train people constantly vs paying higher salaries then they will change their business model of they will fail as a business.

So basically you're saying that a company that screws employees based on gender WON'T correct itself and the market WON'T correct it either but Fcuk me because I think that's unfair (which it is).
Yeah. I've lived in countries exactly like that. I'd prefer my favorite one (USA) not be one of them.

That's not what I got out of LFA's post. The point is: a self-regulating market does respond to the priorities and values of the people involved, it's just that those priorities and values aren't always what you think they should be. Further, those values aren't always the same as what people say when they think someone else is footing the bill.

That is exactly why people don't like the free market, it doesn't do what they want.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Read the last sentence in my post again. The company will correct itself when the costs of the failed business model demand it or they will fail as a business. Ether way the problem is solved.

Um yeah. Lovely theory. Have you noticed that none of those things have happened? The company hasn't corrected itself. It won't. The economy is tough and they will just continue screwing people. Also, it also has not failed. It is as profitiable as ever. Customers aren't going away because of the way Wal-Mart treats employees. Neither is there a shortage of people desperate enough to work there.
That is not theory.
That is the difference between your theory and what happens in real life.
That is reality.
The examples of this are too numerous to ever count.
If you have ever lived in a country with little or no regulation in this regard, you will find out this is reality everywhere there is no such regulation.
Name a country with no environmental regulation or enforcement.
I'll show you a country where the envirnment is destroyed.
Name a country with no labor regulation or efnorcement.
I'll show you a country with horrible labor conditions and wages.
Reality.

You missed my point. The reason that walmart hasn't corrected itself is because they are offering a wage that people are willing to accept. The people have their reasons for taking it and it should be up to them. No one is forcing anyone to work at Walmart. Is it better to employ a 100 people at 4 dollars an hour or 50 people at 8 dollars an hour? If I was homeless I would take anything to try to work my way out of the situation but since companies only have so much to spend on labor they can only hire so many people at a time.

I'm not talking about not having any regulations at all. There is a middle ground and you are trying to paint everything as black and white.

You overlooked another possible explanation, WalMart is not correcting itself because they aren't actually discriminating against women.

 

[dblack]

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.

That illustrates how dysfunctional the two-dimensional political axis, and the two party system, really are. Freedom isn't "farther to the right", and the establishment powers in both major parties are equal in their net opposition to real liberty.

 

[saveliberty]

Walmart has never operated in an unregulated US economy. IL's example is once again wrong.

 

[freedombecki]

If my family was about to be put on the street I would take a job making less money in order to pay the bills. I might be lower paid than everyone else but I would gladly do it just to get money coming in. I can always look for better jobs later once my family's needs are met. Isn't this logical? This is the free market as it applies to the commodity of labor. They pay me what I am willing to accept. When the government steps in and decides they aren't paying me enough and demand that they increase my pay the company is faced with two choices, either pay me more or let me go. Many times they will pick the latter choice and now I am left without a means to care for my family because of government intervention. Who are you to decide how much people should work for? Who are you to force my family onto the streets in order to enforce your idea of equality?
If conditions are so bad at walmart the employees can get jobs elsewhere, it's not like it's a niche industry with a high degree of specialization. When walmart realizes they have a high turnover and it costs them more money to train people constantly vs paying higher salaries then they will change their business model of they will fail as a business.

So basically you're saying that a company that screws employees based on gender WON'T correct itself and the market WON'T correct it either but Fcuk me because I think that's unfair (which it is).
Yeah. I've lived in countries exactly like that. I'd prefer my favorite one (USA) not be one of them.

Gender? The DNC pays all its female employees less than its male employees. In some cases, $21,000 less than male employees.

Obama pays females 18% less than male staffers.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

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.

That illustrates how dysfunctional the two-dimensional political axis, and the two party system, really are. Freedom isn't "farther to the right", and the establishment powers in both major parties are equal in their net opposition to real liberty.

wrong wrong wrong Republicans have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's. Newt got 32 states to sign his! Republicans are about to stop the health care mandate while libertarians impotently look on.

Republicans are as libertarian as Ron Paul the second Ron Paul is elected. In the mean time they reflect the right libertarian side of the spectrum awaiting their orders from the people.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You overlooked another possible explanation, WalMart is not correcting itself because they aren't actually discriminating against women.

capitalism makes discrimination very hard of course. If women get paid less the company makes more profit and beats the competition who then must hire women to stay competitive thus bidding up their wages to parity.

That one will be way way over a liberal's head

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

That is exactly why people don't like the free market, it doesn't do what they want.

it makes producers compete over price and quality to survive.
its makes consumers shop very carefully with their own more for price and quality to survive.

Thus it causes the highest standard of living in human history. This is exactly and perfectly what they want. In fact it started 200 years ago on a large scale and instantly reversed the previous 5 million years of human history.

China just adopted it from American Republicans and got 60 million people very rich who would have very slowly starved to death under liberal communism.

Only a child or a liberal can't understand this.

 

[dblack]

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.

That illustrates how dysfunctional the two-dimensional political axis, and the two party system, really are. Freedom isn't "farther to the right", and the establishment powers in both major parties are equal in their net opposition to real liberty.

wrong wrong wrong Republicans have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's. Newt got 32 states to sign his! Republicans are about to stop the health care mandate while libertarians impotently look on.

Republicans are as libertarian as Ron Paul the second Ron Paul is elected. In the mean time they reflect the right libertarian side of the spectrum awaiting their orders from the people.

Nah ... It's not what they say or propose that matters. It's what they do when they actually have power.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

That illustrates how dysfunctional the two-dimensional political axis, and the two party system, really are. Freedom isn't "farther to the right", and the establishment powers in both major parties are equal in their net opposition to real liberty.

wrong wrong wrong Republicans have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's. Newt got 32 states to sign his! Republicans are about to stop the health care mandate while libertarians impotently look on.

Republicans are as libertarian as Ron Paul the second Ron Paul is elected. In the mean time they reflect the right libertarian side of the spectrum awaiting their orders from the people.

Nah ... It's not what they say or propose that matters. It's what they do when they actually have power.

what they do is reflect the will of the electorate to the extent needed to get reelected and then propose Balanced Budget Amendments, stop the mandate, and sign Grover's pledge to never raise taxes.

Libertarians are true to principle so don't get to do anything but sit impotently on the sidelines.

 

[Paulie]

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.

That illustrates how dysfunctional the two-dimensional political axis, and the two party system, really are. Freedom isn't "farther to the right", and the establishment powers in both major parties are equal in their net opposition to real liberty.

wrong wrong wrong Republicans have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's. Newt got 32 states to sign his! Republicans are about to stop the health care mandate while libertarians impotently look on.

Republicans are as libertarian as Ron Paul the second Ron Paul is elected. In the mean time they reflect the right libertarian side of the spectrum awaiting their orders from the people.

What happens in a balanced budget amendment situation when raised taxes are the implementation for balance rather than spending cuts?

Either could get to the balance, so what stops the politicians from just raising taxes because it's much easier to pull off?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I'll show you a country with horrible labor conditions and wages.

capitalism is too complex for liberals to understand. It's competitive!!

A company must have the best price and quality to survive against world wide competition. This means they must have the best jobs at the best pay or workers will go elsewhere just as customers will.

jobs pay enough now to make most people rich by historical standards because of capitalist competition, not because companies are nice now or because government forces them to be nice now.

Does an idiot liberal really think the greatest liberal laws in the world would make great jobs and wages possible in a very very poor country???

 

[dblack]

wrong wrong wrong Republicans have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's. Newt got 32 states to sign his! Republicans are about to stop the health care mandate while libertarians impotently look on.

Republicans are as libertarian as Ron Paul the second Ron Paul is elected. In the mean time they reflect the right libertarian side of the spectrum awaiting their orders from the people.

Nah ... It's not what they say or propose that matters. It's what they do when they actually have power.

what they do is reflect the will of the electorate to the extent needed to get reelected and then propose Balanced Budget Amendments, stop the mandate, and sign Grover's pledge to never raise taxes.

Libertarians are true to principle so don't get to do anything but sit impotently on the sidelines.

Sure, pile on libertarians if that turns you on. I'm responding to the absurd notion that the Republicans stand for freedom.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Nah ... It's not what they say or propose that matters. It's what they do when they actually have power.

what they do is reflect the will of the electorate to the extent needed to get reelected and then propose Balanced Budget Amendments, stop the mandate, and sign Grover's pledge to never raise taxes.

Libertarians are true to principle so don't get to do anything but sit impotently on the sidelines.

Sure, pile on libertarians if that turns you on. I'm responding to the absurd notion that the Republicans stand for freedom.

you keep acting like they are a fixed object, They aren't!! They are what ever the people allow them to be. A Rep. makes around 200k. If people will elect a libertarian Republican a ton of people would like to make that much and so will be exaclty as far to the right as the electorate will allow. Republicans may not be for perfect freedom but they are the only vessel that could be for perfect freedom.

 

[Paulie]

what they do is reflect the will of the electorate to the extent needed to get reelected and then propose Balanced Budget Amendments, stop the mandate, and sign Grover's pledge to never raise taxes.

Libertarians are true to principle so don't get to do anything but sit impotently on the sidelines.

Sure, pile on libertarians if that turns you on. I'm responding to the absurd notion that the Republicans stand for freedom.

you keep acting like they are a fixed object, They aren't!! They are what ever the people allow them to be. A Rep. makes around 200k. If people will elect a libertarian Republican a ton of people would like to make that much and so will be exaclty as far to the right as the electorate will allow. Republicans may not be for perfect freedom but they are the only vessel that could be for perfect freedom.

I can agree somewhat with this. There's a base in the GOP that could embrace absolute freedom if they had to. That can't be said for democrats though. Not EVERYONE in the GOP would come around, but if absolute freedom was the price for keeping control rather than democrats having it, then I think a lot could accept it. Lord knows they've held their nose and voted for much worse.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What happens in a balanced budget amendment situation when raised taxes are the implementation for balance rather than spending cuts?

a BBA in effect make fiscal responsibility the law and so makes Democrats illegal. Democrats survive now buy spending far more than taxing. A BBA make that behavior illegal

Either could get to the balance, so what stops the politicians from just raising taxes because it's much easier to pull off?

obviously its not since they spend far more than they tax

 

[Paulie]

What happens in a balanced budget amendment situation when raised taxes are the implementation for balance rather than spending cuts?

a BBA in effect make fiscal responsibility the law and so makes Democrats illegal. Democrats survive now buy spending far more than taxing. A BBA make that behavior illegal

Either could get to the balance, so what stops the politicians from just raising taxes because it's much easier to pull off?

obviously its not since they spend far more than they tax

It doesn't guarantee low spending. It only guarantees no budget deficit. They could just as easily raise taxes to cover the shortfall and never even bother with the messy job of spending cuts.

It's too vague and ambiguous.

If the debt ceiling doesn't stop them from spending us into oblivion, nothing will.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Not EVERYONE in the GOP would come around,

I disagree, don't forget, to be a successful politician you have to be sincerely in the middle, you must evolve that way. But if the electorate turned libertarian they'd convert to sincere libertarians or be replaced by those who did appear sincere. The Party is not a fixed object , but the electorate appears to be for the moment anyway.

Now however at least the battle lines are drawn more clearly than ever in American History thanks to Rush Friedman Buckley etc so movement is more possible than even.

I agree that at this point liberalism is like a dead man walking. There is nothing to support except welfare entitlements that cripple our population more and more and a child-like faith in magical regulation.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What happens in a balanced budget amendment situation when raised taxes are the implementation for balance rather than spending cuts?

a BBA in effect make fiscal responsibility the law and so makes Democrats illegal. Democrats survive now buy spending far more than taxing. A BBA make that behavior illegal

Either could get to the balance, so what stops the politicians from just raising taxes because it's much easier to pull off?

obviously its not since they spend far more than they tax

It doesn't guarantee low spending. It only guarantees no budget deficit. They could just as easily raise taxes to cover the shortfall and never even bother with the messy job of spending cuts.

It's too vague and ambiguous.

If the debt ceiling doesn't stop them from spending us into oblivion, nothing will.

once the deficit is eliminated the debt will have to disappear too as it is paid off but not added to.

A debt ceiling at 17 trillion is a start but it does nothing to reduce the debt like the BBA would