Libertarianism: a case study in consequences

[Hatuey]

I'm not a Libertarian and I doubt many people here would think of me as a Libertarian supporter but I think this is an issue of who your employers are and not a Libertarian system at work. If anything these people got exactly what they deserved. If you want the government to come to your aide when your house is burning down, be prepared to pay your taxes.

 

[Ikari]

Incorrect. It certainly stands up to scrutiny. Libertarians are just all nutjobs and don't see the problem with their faith. They approve of Guy Montags watching your house burn down, killing people innocently, and risking everyone through allowing fires to spread. I don't expect you, a Libertarian, to see anything wrong with your sociopathic religion.

"blah blah blah blah I hate libertarians"

Yes, we get it. Do you have something other than insult, hyperbole, and zealous ranting?

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I'm not a Libertarian and I doubt many people here would think of me as a Libertarian supporter but I think this is an issue of who your employers are and not a Libertarian system at work. If anything these people got exactly what they deserved. If you want the government to come to your aide when your house is burning down, be prepared to pay your taxes.

Exactly. :yes:

 

[Technocratic]

Volunteer fire department = socialism.
Oppose at all costs.

Actually, some Libertarians do call that "creeping collectivism," but volunteer firefighters are inefficient anyway. It's a worse system to rely on people volunteering.

 

[Gabriel]

According to ikari, not approving of firemen watching a house burn down, literally, is socialism. And advocating people get billed for services rendered is also socialism, now.

Libertarians have gone completely off the deep end. Everything is "socialislm"

You need to take your Adamn Smith pills. You're not very rational, are you?

Yeah making libertarianism the order of the day is a really messy business but not only that they exaggerate the value of turning a democratically elected body into a powerless yes man for corporations. They can't see the forest for all the trees. Everything takes a back seat to individual profit motives. In the end they will only just hand over the rest of the peoples power to the most wealthy.

Truly the Tea Party/GOP/Republican alliance is the most terrible and embarrassing thing that has happened in US politics. The right has been turned into a three ring circus with corporations playing the ring leader. Libertarians are all over the place and many of their representatives are demonstrating the wacky nature of that group .. every time they open their mouths.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Actually, some Libertarians do call that "creeping collectivism," but volunteer firefighters are inefficient anyway. It's a worse system to rely on people volunteering.

There hasn't been much of a problem with that around here.
We're in a rural area and they do the job well enough.

 

[Technocratic]

"blah blah blah blah I hate libertarians"

Yes, we get it. Do you have something other than insult, hyperbole, and zealous ranting?

Yes. Learn from the mistakes of your radical relatives: the Communists. You have more in common with them than you think. One advocates a silly collectivist utopia where we all hold hands and sing together, and you advocate a cutthroat system of massive privatization anarchy that cannot work. They could not work without incredibly suffering, even in much milder applications, which is why Libertarian thought was abandoned. No one want wants to live in the wild, wild west.

You find nothing wrong wth people dying through negligence, such as homes burnng down because firemen sit back and watch, etc. That's ethically bankrupt.

 

[Ikari]

According to ikari, not approving of firemen watching a house burn down, literally, is socialism. And advocating people get billed for services rendered is also socialism, now.

Libertarians have gone completely off the deep end. Everything is "socialislm"

You need to take your Adamn Smith pills. You're not very rational, are you?

I'm a scientist, I'm as rational as they come. I was just giving you a taste of your own medicine...seems you're too caught up in your ideological rant to have noticed.

 

[Technocratic]

I'm a scientis

Unlikely. Then again, there are nuttyCreationists who are somehow real biologists, too, so even if you were, it clearly doesn't mean anything. Being a scentist desn't make you any more immune to Libertarian dogma.

If you were acting rationally, you wouldn't be a Libertarian. It's got nothing to do with reason. Libertarianism is rightwing Communism. Complete with its saints, dogmas, infallible mechanisms, etc. Fringe ideology, because no one wants to live in the market utopia.

Most Libertarians really do think everything is socialism if it's left of Ayn Rand. You weren't joking. It was a Freudian slip.

 

[Ikari]

Yes. Learn from the mistakes of your radical relatives: the Communists. You have more in common with them than you think. Your system if massive privatization and market anarchy cannot work. They could not work without incredibly suffering, even in much milder applications, which is why Libertarian thought was abandoned. No one want wants to live in the wild, wild west.

I don't support market anarchy. I'm libertarian, not an anarchist. The big failing with communism is that they didn't consider that once people were in power; they'd be very reluctant to give that power back up. It's an idealization of what can be and certain political philosophies are built off of that, noting the real world limitations to the system. Anarchy too is not achievable. On any reasonable scale, it will never hold up. It is an idealization of what can be and certain political philosophies are built off that, noting the real world limitations to the system. In libertarianism; the main focus is on the rights and liberties of the individual. But it's not an anarchist political ideology. There are necessities and one necessity is government. Thus you have to work with it; but you also must balance and control it. Too much government is just as bad as no government. So we continually struggle to see where that balance lies and in the process libertarians focus on the rights and liberties of the individual.

 

[Ikari]

Unlikely. Then again, there are nuttyCreationists who are somehow real biologists, too, so even if you were, it clearly doesn't mean anything. Being a scentist desn't make you any more immune to Libertarian dogma.
If you were acting rationally, you wouldn't be a Libertarian. It's got nothing to do with reason.

Meh. Your disapproval does not take the PhD in physics off my wall. Not really concerned. It's just funny how you want to make libertarians look like these theological nutjobs. But the only one looking like that in this thread is you.

 

[Gabriel]

I'm a scientist, I'm as rational as they come. I was just giving you a taste of your own medicine...seems you're too caught up in your ideological rant to have noticed.

What is ideological? Rationalising someone watching their house burn down because of ideological profit motives .. or just helping them out because maybe someday that would be your house? Truly libertarians are making arguments for an anarchy variety of social morality.

Your making ideological arguments to defend the public services being denied.

 

[Hatuey]

Yes. Learn from the mistakes of your radical relatives: the Communists. You have more in common with them than you think. Your system if massive privatization and market anarchy cannot work. They could not work without incredibly suffering, even in much milder applications, which is why Libertarian thought was abandoned. No one want wants to live in the wild, wild west.

I don't think you should focus on massive privatization and market anarchy as most Libertarians don't really espouse those view in America. I think just dealing with 'mainstream' Libertarian views regarding our foreign policy and social programs is more than enough to make a case for why we should never have a Libertarian government. I think that strategy would serve you better than overreaching to things like the fire department.

I doubt there are many Libertarians on this forum who would support making the police department or fire departments truly private as this would create more problems than simply having them be run by the government. As it is hundreds of private companies employ racist policies and discrimination towards the poor. In this case the local government did something I actually approve of. It made taxation optional and then had its case for why people shouldn't fear taxation supported by the consequences of not paying your taxes.

This is a case which supports a "Libertarian" inspired view of taxation and at the same time shows why it's not a good idea to refuse paying into with the collectivist programs Libertarians love to harp on.

 

[Technocratic]

What is ideological? Rationalising someone watching their house burn down because of ideological profit motives .. or just helping them out because maybe someday that would be your house? Truly libertarians are making arguments for an anarchy variety of social morality.

Your making ideological arguments to defend the public services being denied.

The problem is, Libertarians like him don't think like normal people who have empathy and a sense of social duty. They think, literally, like egoistic sociopaths. They all fancy themselves Randian Superman like Howard Roark and John Galt.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

What is ideological? Rationalising someone watching their house burn down because of ideological profit motives .. or just helping them out because maybe someday that would be your house? Truly libertarians are making arguments for an anarchy variety of social morality.

Your making ideological arguments to defend the public services being denied.

Understand the context of the story.

A city fire department offered to put out fires for county residents, for a fee.
The city does not have the power to tax county residents, they can only offer an optional fee for service.

The man did not pay the fee, he does not get his fire put out.
If they wanted a fire department, they can pay taxes and have one built.
Something that the vast majority of the States do.

 

[Ikari]

What is ideological? Rationalising someone watching their house burn down because of ideological profit motives .. or just helping them out because maybe someday that would be your house? Truly libertarians are making arguments for an anarchy variety of social morality.

Your making ideological arguments to defend the public services being denied.

I never made those arguments. But thanks for jumping to conclusion. I said that the the rural areas are outside the boundary of city tax in that area. The city does not have the power to tax them. The only thing they can do is to charge a fee. Also, sending a bill after the fact for the city is a losing situation as they will not make that money back on the whole. The only reasonable thing they can do given their restrictions is to charge a fee and if people pay the fee; they can have the service. All are able to join it, it's not like it was being withheld. But the real solution, as stated before (thanks for paying attention) is for the people of the area to extend taxation power to the city for emergency services to the rural area.

 

[Technocratic]

I don't think you should focus on massive privatization and market anarchy as most Libertarians don't really espouse those view in America. I think just dealing with 'mainstream' Libertarian views regarding our foreign policy and social programs is more than enough to make a case for why we should never have a Libertarian government. I think that strategy would serve you better than overreaching to things like the fire department.

I doubt there are many Libertarians on this forum who would support making the police department or fire departments truly private as this would create more problems than simply having them be run by the government. As it is hundreds of private companies employ racist policies and discrimination towards the poor. In this case the local government did something I actually approve of. It made taxation optional and then had its case for why people shouldn't fear taxation supported by the consequences of not paying your taxes.

This is a case which supports a "Libertarian" inspired view of taxation and at the same time shows why it's not a good idea to refuse paying into with the collectivist programs Libertarians love to harp on.

I don't know. Every time a Libertarian candidate speaks, all he does his drone on and on about privatization of public services and "cutting taxes." There's no other solution ever offered. In NJ, we now got crappy private corrections facilities, where CCA makes a profit off of prisoners. That's worked out so well...oh wait, it didn't. Yet Libetarians trumpet it as a huge success. The workers are treated like crap, as are the inmates (leading to horrific conditions). The company is profitable by cutting corners, refusing to hire enough staff, etc. But it's private!!! So it gets the Libertarian seal of approval.

It's disgusting.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

This is a case which supports a "Libertarian" inspired view of taxation and at the same time shows why it's not a good idea to refuse paying into with the collectivist programs Libertarians love to harp on.

Few of us are opposed to the "collectivism" of fire departments.
They are local and serve an immediate, real need.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I don't know. Every time a Libertarian candidate speaks, all he does his drone on and on about privatization of public services and "cutting taxes." There's no other solution ever offered. In NJ, we now got crappy private corrections facilities, where CCA makes a profit off of prisoners. That's worked out so well...oh wait, it didn't. Yet Libetarians trumpet it as a huge success.

On a federal or state level, those privatization measures are entirely possible.
For a local area, fire departments funded by taxes are just fine.

Not a comparable situation.

 

[Technocratic]

On a federal or state level, those privatization measures are entirely possible.
For a local area, fire departments funded by taxes are just fine.

Not a comparable situation.

But even at the State level, it doesn't work. CCA doesn't "work." It's inferior to a real corrections service, but "cheaper."

 

[Hatuey]

Few of us are opposed to the "collectivism" of fire departments.
They are local and serve an immediate, real need.

When I say Libertarian inspired view of taxation I meant in the sense of having the choice of whether you want to be taxed for services or not. It's a bit facetious, I know but I'm not being given much to work with here. It's hard to talk **** about Libertarians when I'm being given fire departments as a jump-off point.

 

[Ikari]

Understand the context of the story.

A city fire department offered to put out fires for county residents, for a fee.
The city does not have the power to tax county residents, they can only offer an optional fee for service.

The man did not pay the fee, he does not get his fire put out.
If they wanted a fire department, they can pay taxes and have one built.
Something that the vast majority of the States do.

It's a hard concept for those with no belief in personal responsibility or action. The city cannot tax them, they don't have the power. Thus they offered the fee. To everyone. Everyone could take it, but they can't make it mandatory because they don't have that power. The dude made a choice. Yes, it would be better to extend tax power to the place. Yes, in the land of sunshine and lollipops you could charge him after the fact and he'd pay. But that's not the reality of the situation. And if the people of that rural area do not want a repeat, they have to do something. Government isn't this all omnipotent force that knows what we need when we need it. We still have to make actions and abide by the consequences of those actions. I don't see how that's a tough concept; but for some it may be out of their intellectual capacity.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

But even at the State level, it doesn't work. CCA doesn't "work." It's inferior to a real corrections service, but "cheaper."

Are you so sure state run prisons were better?
Not to say it is a preferable option but making an assumption that, "prisons are bad, therefor privately run prisons are the cause" isn't a fair analysis.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

When I say Libertarian inspired view of taxation I meant in the sense of having the choice of whether you want to be taxed for services or not. It's a bit facetious, I know but I'm not being given much to work with here. It's hard to talk **** about Libertarians when I'm being given fire departments as a jump-off point.

There are some things that voluntary taxation would be preferable, like Social Security but other things where it is totally unreasonable.

Depends on how needed the service is.

 

[Technocratic]

Are you so sure state run prisons were better?
Not to say it is a preferable option but making an assumption that, "prisons are bad, therefor privately run prisons are the cause" isn't a fair analysis.

Yes. State run prisons do it better than the junkies they got now doing it. The facilities are staffed with people underpaid, overworked, and short-handed. When the company is hired throught the lowest bidder, one expects that. Except, running a facility like it's a wal mart is no way to do the job.