What are libertarians?

[DrDoomNGloom]

It doesn't have to benefit you as a person. It has to benefit society as a whole

Having a healthy population benefits society

Once again I ask, How shall this healthy population repay society??

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

We have one biased opinion on the meaning of general Welfare by bripat, a known callous conservative. His biases and hate expressed clearly here ("Paying some irresponsible slut to have promiscuous sex without using birth control positively harms society. Their spawn grow up only to prey on their fellow citizens and populate the state prisons. Instead of paying them money, their children should be taken away from them and put up for adoption. That would genuinely benefit society") are well known and cloud any judgment he makes.

Would you please provide a link in which he(bripat) states those things??
Sounds more like talking points you are putting in his mouth ...................
Driving this conversation in a particular direction you say ..................

 

[rightwinger]

It doesn't have to benefit you as a person. It has to benefit society as a whole

Having a healthy population benefits society

LOL, which is why they wrote a Constitution to limit federal power, and in the Constitution gave it the power to do anything...

They give Congress the task to provide for the General Welfare

The powers enumerated in the Constitution define the general welfare.

Congress will determine the General Welfare

If you think they have overstepped their bounds, you are free to take them to court. Many have and some have won

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

Libertarian Purity Test
by Bryan Caplan

​

This is the Libertarian Purity Test, which is intended to measure how libertarian you are. It isn't intended to be any sort of McCarthyite purging device -- just a form of entertainment, hopefully thought-provoking. I like it a lot better than the more famous "World's Shortest Political Quiz" because I haven't stated the questions with any intent to give an upward bias to a test-taker's score, and because it gives a clearer breakdown between hard and soft-core libertarians. Enjoy, suggest your friends try it out, and see how you compare to other test-takers...
A note on meaning: The word privatized as used throughout the survey means that a given government service is henceforth supplied by the free market and paid for by consumers. It is distinguished from sub-contracting in which the government uses tax money to hire a private firm to provide a government service.



Part I (1 point each)

1. Are taxes too high?
   Yes
   No
2. Is government spending too high?
   Yes
   No
3. Are we over-regulated?
   Yes
   No
4. Are you for free trade?
   Yes
   No
5. Should the minimum wage be abolished?
   Yes
   No
6. Should rent control be abolished?
   Yes
   No
7. Are zoning laws too strict?
   Yes
   No
8. Do we spend too much on Medicare?
   Yes
   No
9. Do we spend too much on Social Security?
   Yes
   No
10. Should we privatize the Post Office?
    Yes
    No
11. Would school vouchers be an improvement over government schools?
    Yes
    No
12. Should we relax immigration laws?
    Yes
    No
13. Would housing vouchers be an improvement over government housing?
    Yes
    No
14. Should the government sell off more of the public lands?
    Yes
    No
15. Are worker safety regulations too strict?
    Yes
    No
16. Does drug-approval take too long?
    Yes
    No
17. Do you think we spend too much on anti-poverty programs?
    Yes
    No
18. Is occupational licensing (for doctors, plumbers, and other professions) too strict?
    Yes
    No
19. Does the government spend too much on higher education?
    Yes
    No
20. Does the Federal Reserve have too much discretionary power?
    Yes
    No
21. Should marijuana be legalized?
    Yes
    No
22. Should all sex between consenting adults be legal -- even for money?
    Yes
    No
23. Do you believe in freedom of expression for books, newspapers, radio, television, the Internet, and so on, even for offensive and unpopular views and subject matters?
    Yes
    No
24. Should private clubs have sole authority to select their own members, even if they are discriminatory?
    Yes
    No
25. Are you against national service?
    Yes
    No
26. Are you against the draft?
    Yes
    No
27. Does the U.S. intervene too much in other countries?
    Yes
    No
28. Should the military budget be cut?
    Yes
    No
29. Should the U.S. refuse to pay for the defense of allies that are rich enough to defend themselves?
    Yes
    No
30. If it has to fight a war, should the U.S. try harder to avoid civilian targets?
    Yes
    No
    
    
    
    
    
    Part II (3 points each)
31. Should taxes be cut by 50% or more?
    Yes
    No
32. Should spending be cut by 50% or more?
    Yes
    No
33. Would you abolish at least half of existing federal regulatory agencies?
    Yes
    No
34. Should we abolish anti-trust laws?
    Yes
    No
35. Should we abolish public schools and universities?
    Yes
    No
36. Should we abolish welfare?
    Yes
    No
37. Should we abolish Social Security?
    Yes
    No
38. Should we abolish Medicare?
    Yes
    No
39. Should all of the public lands be privatized?
    Yes
    No
40. Should we privatize sanitation, fire, and other local services?
    Yes
    No
41. Should immigration laws be abolished?
    Yes
    No
42. Should the FDA and medical licensing be abolished?
    Yes
    No
43. Should all of the Federal Reserve's discretionary powers be eliminated and the monetary base frozen?
    Yes
    No
44. Should we abolish worker safety regulation?
    Yes
    No
45. Should the Supreme Court strike down economic regulation as unconstitutional?
    Yes
    No
46. Should all drugs be legalized for adults?
    Yes
    No
47. Should anti-discrimination laws be abolished?
    Yes
    No
48. Should the military budget be cut by at least 75%?
    Yes
    No
49. Should the U.S. withdraw completely from Europe, Asia, and other foreign bases?
    Yes
    No
50. Is bombing civilians in an enemy country morally equivalent to murder?
    Yes
    No
    
    
    
    
    
    Part III (5 points each)
51. Should all taxes be abolished?
    Yes
    No
52. Should highways and roads be privatized?
    Yes
    No
53. Should the Fed be abolished and replaced with free banking and privately-issued money?
    Yes
    No
54. Should all legislation be replaced by judge-made law, arbitration, and other private rule-suppliers?
    Yes
    No
55. Is all government inherently evil?
    Yes
    No
56. Is government an unnecessary evil?
    Yes
    No
57. Should police be privatized?
    Yes
    No
58. Should the courts be privatized?
    Yes
    No
59. Should the law itself be privatized?
    Yes
    No
60. Should the state be disarmed and its military disbanded?
    Yes
    No
61. Is it morally permissible to exercise "vigilante justice," even against government leaders?
    Yes
    No
62. Is all government essentially exploitation of the productive members of society for the benefit of a parasitic ruling elite?
    Yes
    No
63. Should the state be abolished?
    Yes
    No
64. Would you call yourself an "anarcho-capitalist?"
    Yes
    No

Take the test, let us all know your score, I have the results as defined by??

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

What, No One wants to brag about that score??

Pretty Ugly isn't it?? Kaz where is that torch you were carrying??

Me, I failed the test, dismal score .......extremely low ...............

 

[Wry Catcher]

We have one biased opinion on the meaning of general Welfare by bripat, a known callous conservative. His biases and hate expressed clearly here ("Paying some irresponsible slut to have promiscuous sex without using birth control positively harms society. Their spawn grow up only to prey on their fellow citizens and populate the state prisons. Instead of paying them money, their children should be taken away from them and put up for adoption. That would genuinely benefit society") are well known and cloud any judgment he makes.

Would you please provide a link in which he(bripat) states those things??
Sounds more like talking points you are putting in his mouth ...................
Driving this conversation in a particular direction you say ..................

Sure, today at 6:39 AM in post #267, in full he posted this:

No, I am not. So explain how welfare benefits me? We are discussing the "general welfare," not the welfare of only deadbeats and goldbrickers.

Paying some irresponsible slut to have promiscuous sex without using birth control positively harms society. Their spawn grow up only to prey on their fellow citizens and populate the state prisons. Instead of paying them money, their children should be taken away from them and put up for adoption. That would genuinely benefit society.

 

[kaz]

It doesn't benefit me. The taxes I have to pay for it positively harm me.

Crybaby ^^^. Do you lack food, clothing or shelter? Are you unable to afford medical insurance? Are you hated for being poor, are you exploited in a minimum wage job with no way out?

Man up, and stop whining.

BTW, your opinion on the meaning of general Welfare is worth the same as most of your opinions. Nada.

Just stop whining and give me your money you greedy baby!

LOL, you're a douche

 

[kaz]

If you give individuals healthcare they cannot otherwise afford, you likely improve their health, which contributes to the general health of the nation,

and the health of the nation is a general welfare concern, an economic concern, and a national security concern.

Now if those healthy people would work and contribute to society in a productive manner then we are coming closer to an idea that could become acceptable.

Wait, you say you want to be healthy at our expense, but do not wish to become part of "us" the working class once that health is obtained, then you kind of loose that advantage you are looking for ................

I mean this look like simple negotiations to me, what is a persons health worth?? Hard work, combined with a pleasant attitude for those who enabled you and those who will be working with you ...............

Bet you DON'T respond to this ......................

You picked the wrong poster out of the quote, I didn't say that. The quote is preposterous. It's a ridiculous contortion of "logic"

 

[kaz]

If you think they have overstepped their bounds, you are free to take them to court. Many have and some have won

You may want to google what a message board is, wench. I see why you like the liberal media so much, you don't have to listen to things you don't agree with.

 

[rightwinger]

 

[kaz]

Wealth envy is an ugly thing there big guy. You had the chance to invest in your own education, work hard, and make something of yourself. The choice to not do that was yours. We don't owe you the money as if you did.

 

[rightwinger]

Wealth envy is an ugly thing there big guy. You had the chance to invest in your own education, work hard, and make something of yourself. The choice to not do that was yours. We don't owe you the money as if you did.

Which of those pets are you?

My guess is you are the cat

 

[bripat9643]

It doesn't benefit me. The taxes I have to pay for it positively harm me.

Crybaby ^^^. Do you lack food, clothing or shelter? Are you unable to afford medical insurance? Are you hated for being poor, are you exploited in a minimum wage job with no way out?

Man up, and stop whining.

BTW, your opinion on the meaning of general Welfare is worth the same as most of your opinions. Nada.

Just stop whining and give me your money you greedy baby!

LOL, you're a douche

Liberals are nothing but a bunch of two-bit thugs.

 

[bripat9643]

Wealth envy is an ugly thing there big guy. You had the chance to invest in your own education, work hard, and make something of yourself. The choice to not do that was yours. We don't owe you the money as if you did.

Apparently Deanie thinks we're all pets and the federal government is our owner.

 

[bripat9643]

It doesn't have to benefit you as a person. It has to benefit society as a whole

Having a healthy population benefits society

LOL, which is why they wrote a Constitution to limit federal power, and in the Constitution gave it the power to do anything...

They give Congress the task to provide for the General Welfare

The powers enumerated in the Constitution define the general welfare.

Congress will determine the General Welfare

That is how things work now, but that is not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. The powers enumerated in the Constitution are what they meant by "the general welfare."

If you think they have overstepped their bounds, you are free to take them to court. Many have and some have won

I'm free to pursue an utterly pointless and grossly expensive lawsuit that will be decided by a bunch of political hacks with a vested interest in the status quo?

Why didn't you just tell me to go pound sand?

 

[bripat9643]

We have one biased opinion on the meaning of general Welfare by bripat, a known callous conservative. His biases and hate expressed clearly here ("Paying some irresponsible slut to have promiscuous sex without using birth control positively harms society. Their spawn grow up only to prey on their fellow citizens and populate the state prisons. Instead of paying them money, their children should be taken away from them and put up for adoption. That would genuinely benefit society") are well known and cloud any judgment he makes.

That's "hate?" Apparently you hate the taxpayers because you always want to stick them with the bill and increase their taxes.

My "bias" is against disastrous government programs like welfare. Apparently your bias is to increase the financial burden on taxpayers as quickly as possible and to destroy society with illegitimacy and criminality.

 

[rightwinger]

It doesn't have to benefit you as a person. It has to benefit society as a whole

Having a healthy population benefits society

LOL, which is why they wrote a Constitution to limit federal power, and in the Constitution gave it the power to do anything...

They give Congress the task to provide for the General Welfare

The powers enumerated in the Constitution define the general welfare.

Congress will determine the General Welfare

That is how things work now, but that is not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. The powers enumerated in the Constitution are what they meant by "the general welfare."

If you think they have overstepped their bounds, you are free to take them to court. Many have and some have won

I'm free to pursue an utterly pointless and grossly expensive lawsuit that will be decided by a bunch of political hacks with a vested interest in the status quo?

Why didn't you just tell me to go pound sand?

Sucks being you Fingerboy

 

[rightwinger]

 

[bripat9643]

Can anyone (it seems Kaz has cut and run) define the phrase "general Welfare" as used in clause 1 of the 8th Sec. In Article I and to what it references.

If it does not refer to the citizens, to what does the phrase refer?

Um...cut and run? I've been going through the 34 replies I got overnight in order. They are all over the place.

And I've told you what general welfare is repeatedly. It is general welfare. General means everyone, welfare means benefit. Welfare is not referring to your government check.

So general welfare means, everyone benefits. Everyone benefits from having military, police, roads. When government takes money from one person and gives it to another, that is specific welfare, it only benefits the person receiving the check, it harms the person the money was taken from. The Federal government is authorized to only benefit everyone, not to benefit some at the expense of others.

If you give individuals healthcare they cannot otherwise afford, you likely improve their health, which contributes to the general health of the nation,

and the health of the nation is a general welfare concern, an economic concern, and a national security concern.

You could use the same logic to give everyone a car or a house. That isn't "the general welfare." That's the welfare of particular people. How does the fact that you are healthier benefit me?

It doesn't have to benefit you as a person. It has to benefit society as a whole

Having a healthy population benefits society

If it doesn't benefit me, then how does it benefit "society as a whole?" Doesn't that mean every member of society should benefit?

I could claim that giving the family down the street a plasma TV would benefit the general welfare because then perhaps their kids would be happier and wouldn't beat up other kids in school. Your logic would justify almost anything. It would be used to rationalize giving Bill Gates a billion dollars. It would be used to justify putting all Democrats in concentration camps.

Furthermore, you logic ignores the negative side of the equation. It ignores all the harm done to taxpayers by taking more of their income so deadbeats and goldbrickers can while away their time without working.

No, it doesn't mean that every member of society should benefit

How can any law benefit each citizen equally?

Does a major highway or dam being built in California benefit me in NJ? No, it does not. But it benefits our society as a whole

Laws against murder and robbery benefit everyone. The national defense benefits everyone. Welfare harms most of society and only benefits a few goldbrickers and deadbeats.

You're right about the highway and the damn, they don't benefit everyone, which is why government shouldn't be doing that.

 

[kaz]

Wealth envy is an ugly thing there big guy. You had the chance to invest in your own education, work hard, and make something of yourself. The choice to not do that was yours. We don't owe you the money as if you did.

Which of those pets are you?

My guess is you are the cat

We know you're the dog...