What is a small government libertarian?

[Dad2three]

No I'm not because you are a one sided troll. That's you mugging the receiver with your anti business and tax the hell out of anything that moves mentality. Your mugging the receiver who in this case is a business. The Gov'ts job is to watch the game and throw flags when people do illegal shit.

Today. The Gov't is grabbing the football and running up the field with it.

LOWEST effective tax burden on Corps in 40+ years, ALL TIME record Corp profits, lowest share of labor costs EVER, and Corps are being mugged?

PLEASE

Those record profits and revenues did something in 2008 also..........Didn't they...........

Amazing what you can do with 4.5 Trillion from the Fed into the markets, while taking .25% loans from the Reserve to play on Wall Street. It's a Fiat machine, with minimal real Recovery.

I could post the labor participation rate, but you'd just ignore it.

You mean up to and including 2008 to present US Corps made record profits? Yes

Yes, to bad the UNDER REGULATED 'free markets' bought into a WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE by the Banksters, one cheer lead by Dubya in the US

 

[Dad2three]

Dad2three makes the very common moonbat mistake of assuming that Libertarianism is Anarchy.

Nope, pointing out OVER AND OVER, libertarianism NEVER works. You can't point to ONE state or nation to EVER use it successfully. Weird? lol

Well, it's ridiculously unfair to expect people to to point to something that never existed in real life, outside of say, Somalia.

Somebody brought up something about 'Fair Tax' bills? I've read at least 11 of them, and there is nothing 'fair' about them. I guess I just shouldn't read them all the way through, so I could pretend to be for 'fair taxes n stuff', too. It's a lot easier to be for 'fair taxes' if you don't actually read the bills proposed.

Well I love it when they TRY to point to Hong Kong,
40% subsidized housing, abject poverty, but they have a few VERY big 'job creators' paying some very LOW wages AND low taxes LOL

 

[Dad2three]

Can anyone identify the small government utopia we should base ourselves on?

The Constitution. Remember that thing?

Hello..................

Oh you mean the STRONG FEDERAL GOV'T THING?

 

[Picaro]

LOWEST effective tax burden on Corps in 40+ years, ALL TIME record Corp profits, lowest share of labor costs EVER, and Corps are being mugged?

PLEASE

Whenever I read this stuff about 'high taxes' and how our poor corporations are being treated unfairly, I know I'm reading a post by somebody who doesn't fill out their own tax returns, has no idea what taxes were in the past, or is just repeating junk propaganda they read somewhere, like from Free Republic or Town Hall.

My fave is the meme about the '90% tax rate' of the 1950's and early 1960's, as if that were really what was being paid. In fact, that was the top rate on capital gains, and only on 50% of capital gains, and of course an amazing array of deductions on even that taxable 50%, i.e. if you had $100 in gains you were taxed at 90% on $50 max, and only if you had absolutely no deductions of any kind, which never happened in an era when if you wanted to install solid gold faucets in the CEO's private bathroom, or just have the company buy his house for him, it was 100% deductible, for example, but it makes for great nonsense propaganda to scare the clueless with.

 

[Picaro]

Nope, pointing out OVER AND OVER, libertarianism NEVER works. You can't point to ONE state or nation to EVER use it successfully. Weird? lol

Well, it's ridiculously unfair to expect people to to point to something that never existed in real life, outside of say, Somalia.

Somebody brought up something about 'Fair Tax' bills? I've read at least 11 of them, and there is nothing 'fair' about them. I guess I just shouldn't read them all the way through, so I could pretend to be for 'fair taxes n stuff', too. It's a lot easier to be for 'fair taxes' if you don't actually read the bills proposed.

Well I love it when they TRY to point to Hong Kong,
40% subsidized housing, abject poverty, but they have a few VERY big 'job creators' paying some very LOW wages AND low taxes LOL

Contrast Hong Kong with Singapore. I know which place I'd rather live, and nobody is predicting Singapore's imminent collapse.

 

[Agit8r]

Cut 50 checks for each state based on population and let the Governors and state legislators decide how to spend it.

Redistribution from the wealthy (ie Blue) states to the less wealthy (ie Red) states? There's the old conservatism I know. Why not have your cake AND eat it too, right?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The Government's only role in the economy should be enforcing contracts that were voluntarily agreed upon by all parties. Voluntary contracts are the force of the Free Market, and Government needs to be the force behind that contract, otherwise everything falls to pieces, as their is no confidence in the market.

 

[eagle1462010]

Can anyone identify the small government utopia we should base ourselves on?

The Constitution. Remember that thing?

Hello..................

Oh you mean the STRONG FEDERAL GOV'T THING?

Changing history again Dad................The Federalist papers say differently. All warning us about YOU frankly Dad.

 

[norwegen]

You would think that the first principle of libertarianism would be unequivocal respect for the will of the People.

Nope. there's nothing intrinsically moral or just about majority rule. A lynch mob is majority rule in action.

Ironically though, most People don't want the rest of the Libertarian agenda.

IOW, the first principle of Libertarianism should be the rejection of Libertarianism as a non-viable political philosophy in a democratic society.

I do agree it's non viable in a democratic society. You're error is in your choice of which one to dispense with, libertarianism or democracy.

There you go, a poster who not only admits that Libertarianism won't work in a democratic society,

but one who would rather have the former than the latter.

A Libertarian autocracy...

...now there's a concept.

Libertarianism doesn't work in democratic society. It does, however, work in republican society.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Government's only role in the economy should be enforcing contracts that were voluntarily agreed upon by all parties. Voluntary contracts are the force of the Free Market, and Government needs to be the force behind that contract, otherwise everything falls to pieces, as their is no confidence in the market.

Right. A referee not siding with either team. Only throwing a flag when necessary.

 

[Picaro]

Can anyone identify the small government utopia we should base ourselves on?

Apparently Red China, I guess. It's very business friendly.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Liberals like to say they don't know what a small government libertarian is. I believe it's pretty clear. No, we are not all the same, but I think when I talk to small government libertarians these are generally agreed upon. Please comment those of you who consider yourself small government libertarian on what you agree and disagree on.

Definition: Note I said "small government" libertarian. I realize many anarchists call themselves "libertarian." I'm not knocking them and of course they are free to participate, I am just not speaking about anarchy here, I am speaking about those of us who want government minimized, not eliminated.

So, here is my definition. I believe these should be the primary functions of government:

1) Military - protecting the country entire country.
2) Police - Enforcing the laws.
3) Civil courts - To resolve contractual and other disputes between citizens.
4) Criminal courts & prisons - to dispense justice for fraud and other criminal acts
5) Roads - To acquire and manage the massive land requirements to move freely about the country
6) Management of limited resources - Access to and distribution of things like water
7) Recognition of property rights - Land, possessions and so forth.

Having these expand my liberty and they only work when there is general recognition of how they are managed. For example, having to sit in a tower all day with a gun to protect my land and my family, courts ruling's not being accepted except voluntarily, people putting toll booths on roads going through their own property, people hoarding water and extorting their neighbors and an inability to sell my home because there is no generally accepted recognition of my borders would reduce and not expand my liberty.

Issues I see the most disagreement on:

1) Abortion. I am like most libertarians I know pro-choice. However, I do see a lot of libertarians who are pro-life. While I do understand their view the baby is a life, I do not understand their view government can force the mother to provide her body to it. However, I understand they do believe it's murder and therefore the job of the criminal justice system.

2) Military. Most libertarians I know think the military should be used only for defense. Almost all libertarians think we use our military far to excessively. However, I do see disagreement with how far we should go in being proactive. I personally think our proactive policies frequently cause that which they were meant to avoid, but it is an area I see disagreement.

3) Taxes. All libertarians I know think our current system is preposterous. Libertarians generally would eliminate the income tax. I support the fair tax, that is not universally accepted by libertarians, which I don't understand because it is the most logical, economically efficient tax. All taxes are taxes on the economy. Therefore, it is logical to have one flat tax on the economy rather than a myriad of indirect taxes. But for whatever reason many libertarians don't grasp that. Libertarians who do support income tax in my experience always support a flat tax.

We are not Republicans because:

1) Social - we are against government morality laws, with the exception of some pro-lifers discussed above.

2) Military - we want smaller, less used military

3) Fiscal - we are fiscal conservatives, we don't just talk about fiscal conservatism.

Liberals are authoritarian leftists, we have nothing in common with them. They believe government force is the solution to every problem.

My view. Please comment.

Libertarians are running candidates in races where they may split GOP votes, ensuring democrats get those offices.
Now, Libertarians can stick to their principles and have no connection with government( democrats in power) or they can look at the larger picture.

 

[rightwinger]

Can anyone identify the small government utopia we should base ourselves on?

The Constitution. Remember that thing?

Hello..................

We are based on the Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it mention small government?

 

[Picaro]

The Government's only role in the economy should be enforcing contracts that were voluntarily agreed upon by all parties. Voluntary contracts are the force of the Free Market, and Government needs to be the force behind that contract, otherwise everything falls to pieces, as their is no confidence in the market.

Well, it's highly doubtful people work in sweatshops or mines 'voluntarily', and certainly most businesses won't pay fair wages voluntarily, either, and in fact rely on government to shoot them down if they dare complain or strike for higher wages, which of course is what 'libertarians' mean when they say they don't want 'anarchy' and want some sort of 'police' and military' spending.

 

[eagle1462010]

Can anyone identify the small government utopia we should base ourselves on?

The Constitution. Remember that thing?

Hello..................

We are based on the Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it mention small government?

Enumerated powers it was in my first post on this thread but Obama shredded it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Liberals like to say they don't know what a small government libertarian is. I believe it's pretty clear. No, we are not all the same, but I think when I talk to small government libertarians these are generally agreed upon. Please comment those of you who consider yourself small government libertarian on what you agree and disagree on.

Definition: Note I said "small government" libertarian. I realize many anarchists call themselves "libertarian." I'm not knocking them and of course they are free to participate, I am just not speaking about anarchy here, I am speaking about those of us who want government minimized, not eliminated.

So, here is my definition. I believe these should be the primary functions of government:

1) Military - protecting the country entire country.
2) Police - Enforcing the laws.
3) Civil courts - To resolve contractual and other disputes between citizens.
4) Criminal courts & prisons - to dispense justice for fraud and other criminal acts
5) Roads - To acquire and manage the massive land requirements to move freely about the country
6) Management of limited resources - Access to and distribution of things like water
7) Recognition of property rights - Land, possessions and so forth.

Having these expand my liberty and they only work when there is general recognition of how they are managed. For example, having to sit in a tower all day with a gun to protect my land and my family, courts ruling's not being accepted except voluntarily, people putting toll booths on roads going through their own property, people hoarding water and extorting their neighbors and an inability to sell my home because there is no generally accepted recognition of my borders would reduce and not expand my liberty.

Issues I see the most disagreement on:

1) Abortion. I am like most libertarians I know pro-choice. However, I do see a lot of libertarians who are pro-life. While I do understand their view the baby is a life, I do not understand their view government can force the mother to provide her body to it. However, I understand they do believe it's murder and therefore the job of the criminal justice system.

2) Military. Most libertarians I know think the military should be used only for defense. Almost all libertarians think we use our military far to excessively. However, I do see disagreement with how far we should go in being proactive. I personally think our proactive policies frequently cause that which they were meant to avoid, but it is an area I see disagreement.

3) Taxes. All libertarians I know think our current system is preposterous. Libertarians generally would eliminate the income tax. I support the fair tax, that is not universally accepted by libertarians, which I don't understand because it is the most logical, economically efficient tax. All taxes are taxes on the economy. Therefore, it is logical to have one flat tax on the economy rather than a myriad of indirect taxes. But for whatever reason many libertarians don't grasp that. Libertarians who do support income tax in my experience always support a flat tax.

We are not Republicans because:

1) Social - we are against government morality laws, with the exception of some pro-lifers discussed above.

2) Military - we want smaller, less used military

3) Fiscal - we are fiscal conservatives, we don't just talk about fiscal conservatism.

Liberals are authoritarian leftists, we have nothing in common with them. They believe government force is the solution to every problem.

My view. Please comment.

I probably stand with libertarians on many of those platforms. However, I am realistic in that unless there is a way to convince voters that a movement to a third party will gain net results, there is no way to convince them that voting for a 3rd party does not translate to "wasting my vote"..
One of the main reasons we have insidious incumbency is that the average voter is uninformed to the point where they believe voting is a matter of "picking the winner"...
I actually heard this from a woman in a grocery store talking to another woman: "well I voted for the winner"...
I wanted to dump her groceries on the floor and kick her so hard she's end up in the next county....

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Can anyone identify the small government utopia we should base ourselves on?

Apparently Red China, I guess. It's very business friendly.

Are you seriously bringing up China as a small government example?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Libertarians have valid platforms.

then they lose a screw or two and all is lost.

IMO

Any chance you could be more specific?

birthers ... 911 conspiracy hounds etc etc

Those are NOT political policy platforms. Those are ten second soundbites uttered by fools.
Yours is a perfect example of the existence of the uninformed voter.

 

[Contumacious]

You see dad. This is how people like you treat businesses. You mug them before the ball is even near the receiver. In a Libertarian world that is still a penalty. In a liberal one, it's fair to mug the receiver before he the ball gets there. It's called open markets with limited intrusion. Yet you still get no flag or penalty if you play by the rules.

Got it, you'll stick to myths and fairy tales


The Founders believed in carefully delineated federal powers either broad (Hamilton) or limited (Jefferson, sometimes) but all believed in a more powerful state than libertarians purport to believe in. If ever there was a libertarian document it was the Articles of Confederation. There was no national power. The federal government could not tax. Its laws were not supreme over state laws. It was in fact, the hot mess that critics of libertarians believe their dream state would be… and it was recognized as such by the majority of the country and was why the Constitution was ratified. The Articles of Confederation is the true libertarian founding document and this explains the failure of libertarianism.


The Founders Were No Libertarians

Mr Dingle Berry, sir


What difference does it make to individuals that the federal government be precluded from tyrannizing but any of the states could?!?!?!?!?!!?

Specifically, what difference does it make , for instance, that the federal government can not censor speech but any of the states can censor?

.

 

[Rikurzhen]

You would think that the first principle of libertarianism would be unequivocal respect for the will of the People.

What happens if more men vote than women and what men want is for them to have the right to have sex with any woman of their choosing? Must women comply?

Your majority-mob framework runs into problems.

What you're advocating is a variation on what I highlighted above - instead of compulsory sex you're advocating compulsory slavery.

People like getting free stuff paid for by other people and they use their vote to force others to hand over their income.

Didn't we fight a civil war to end slavery?