If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I liked Ron more then Gary, But I like Gary more then Rand. I think Rand has too much of a tendency to get extreme.
The only thing I've always questioned about Libertarian-ism is how they expect it to work in a post WW2 world where you almost NEED all of these services and social policies for a modern civilization to work, whether you like it or not.
I guess I was thinking of the Hijacked use of Libertarian, Reading up on some of the Principles and platforms posted online I find them fairly agreeable.
The only thing I can disagree with is deregulation of trade/business.
deregulation is a double-edged sword at times. Having witnessed it first hand in Radio Broadcasting..
When they dereg'd the industry in '96, it opened the door for the media giants to take over the industry (Clear Channel, CBS..etc.) which resulted in centralization of content and the loss of regionalized programming.
20 years later, the industry is essentially dead.
But then again, maybe this is a good thing. It's become so unprofitable to own/operate a radio station with a lot of overhead, that the major conglomerates are shedding smaller market stations like bad pennies. They are being picked up and ran again by local interest. One of my former Program Directors at KUPL here in Portland actually left Dial Global and moved back to Longview and purchased several stations there. He's living out his dream in his home town.
So maybe it did work out in the end?
1991 325i MT2 Touring (JDM bro)
2016 Ford Flex
2011 Audi A3 - wife's other German car
Even deregulated businesses/industries is a decent idea in most cases. Most libertarians I know seem to always be in full support of the Free Market and deregulation. This is usually because if you believe in limited government, and limiting the governments involvement in most businesses it is supposed to create a less expensive market to get into, creating more competition and driving down costs.
The Libertarian mindset actually goes hand in hand with Free Market principles, where they both stress individual rights to do whatever you want so long as you respect others lives, liberty, and private property. Generally this means that private businesses are allowed to make all their own decisions without government intervention, if a baker wants to deny service to a homosexual couple because its against what he believes in, that is within his right. The Free Market would dictate that if people don't like this, they will not support that business and spend money elsewhere, "voting with your wallet". Businesses that choose to take stances on issues are fully expected to either suffer or gain from those decisions.
this kinda explains why Gary Johnson has slapped down so many would be laws and regulations in NM.
I will say getting into Environmental issues is tough to address with Free Market as Businesses could essentially pollute, be punished by "the market" and forced to clean up the mess, but as we've seen in Pripyt and countless other environmental disasters, once the damage is done, there is very little to remedy it. Also destroying the environment does directly affect others lives and sometimes property, hence anti libertarian.
I think entirely free markets can only exist in some markets, not all.
ISP's and other services are great examples of how Deregulation doesn't work.
I assume you're talking about maintaining a level of Net Neutrality? The Free market would say ISP are still susceptible to "voting with your wallet". I think the Free market itself is very reliant on the people being smart consumers or at least researching before they buy. If an ISP proved or attempted to restrict access to sites or information this is something that a consumer can disagree with and find another provider who will not do this.
the problem is when we have 2-3 ISP in a given area and are allowed to collude and increase prices. By deregulating you allow other firms to move in, compete, win or lose, but provide more options which makes companies offer more, or cost less to entice people to buy. if we regulate a market we make it more difficult for a firm to move in and attempt to fill a niche they see.
look at cellphone companies now, every single one of them is attempting to undercut the other, increase their own appeal etc. I went from paying $110 a month for 3GB of data and unlimited talk/text to a different company for $50 a month for unlimited data/talk/text.
Remember, we do not have a free market capitalism, we have a type of crony capitalism. companies large enough or who have the funds to lobby and have laws/regulations created that make it difficult for smaller companies to start/survive. This is a huge issue. but also to stay on topic of Gary Johnson...
Being a libertarian his ideals generally lean towards Free market, and also towards the Constitution and Amendments. The more the federal government regulates, the more it overreaches its powers given to it in the Constitution, destroys Free Market, Tramples individual rights, and tramples States rights in the 10th amendment.
Since Ron Paul isn't in the running any longer, I will definitely be supporting Gary Johnson this election. I think most people deep down are more libertarian than they realize. I have seen a few Gary Johnson campaign signs sprout up in front of some houses in my area. It'll take a few more election cycles for people to realize that Republicans and Democrats are basically just bizarro-world versions of each other.
Since Ron Paul isn't in the running any longer, I will definitely be supporting Gary Johnson this election. I think most people deep down are more libertarian than they realize. I have seen a few Gary Johnson campaign signs sprout up in front of some houses in my area. It'll take a few more election cycles for people to realize that Republicans and Democrats are basically just bizarro-world versions of each other.
its like voting if bacon or sausage is better, they are both still made from the same pig.
I like his libertarian stance on taxes. Lower corporate tax an HOPEFULLY bring more businesses back to the united states and less income/property and etc. taxes will leave us more money in the bank. It's not the role of the government to constantly take our money to feed in to well... who knows the specifics. Also, there's definitely a "porridge that's just right" scenario for regulation.
BUT you have to decrease spending to compensate, for a decrease in taxes, and military spending will have to be part of that discussion. If you guys remember, there was a British general that said if Corbyn became PM, and fulfilled his promise of lowering the role of the army, that there could be a revolt. Not saying that's 100% but I can only assume, with so much money tied up in the military industrial complex, that those same sentiments would echo over here.
So how far can libertarian ideology really be implemented before it's abused or outright ignored?
Comment