Thrilla
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2011
- Messages
- 20,295
- Reaction score
- 9,801
- Location
- Texas, Vegas, Colombia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
All I hear from most libertarians and conservatives is calls for less regulation and more power for business interests, not for better processes and smarter regulation.
Can you cite an example where the Declaration was successfully used to enact policy or avoid prosecution in a way that was upheld by the courts? In other words, when has the Declaration ever actually impacted the application of law?
you stated A big WRONG...after i stated it u.s.code.
its code...plain and simply
You are correct that it was incorporated into US code as "organic law." (and I have to admit I learned that just yesterday) However, it has no actual impact on the legislative process or the application and enforcement of the law.
It all depends on the mode of regulation. "More" or "less" is not the issue. Policing, safety measures - sure. Just don't forget the cost-benefits analysis. But all too often the government interferes in business, picks winners, distorts markets - and the very pernicious "corporate power" you are decrying is exercised exactly through these channels.
liberals and libertarians can see eye to eye on quite a few things, or at least reach the same value judgement.... but at the end of the day, they can't come together.
it's really a matter of left authoritarianism vs libertarianism... the 2 aren't reconcilable to any great degree..... and really, contemporary liberals aren't about to lose their authoritarian stripes anytime soon.
they learned long ago that government force is the best way to control peoples lives, and they're not about to give that up for anything.
To a large extent other countries have grown their industrial sector at our expense because of their supply of cheap labor (thanks to a lack of legal protection for workers who advocate for their interests) and lax environmental laws. The conservative/libertarian solution is for the USA to do the same. Although the lack of regulation of business combined with a lack of freedom for individuals benefits a portion of the residents of those countries, a large portion of the workers are being exploited and the environment is being destroyed. That is not a just, desirable or sustainable situation, and the people of those countries will not tolerate it indefinitely.
I have a feeling you are misrepresenting the positions... Frankly, the country is so far gone its almost irreparably damaged, and Obamacare is just another blow that will bring the country down to the level of a third world police state, especially if some of these problems don't get addressed and soon... We are talking like 2-5 years and there may not be a USA any longer, at least not in a form we would recognize...
Yes, yes, translated: libertarians want the rich and powerful to be able to exploit the poor with impunity; progressives want laws that level the playing field. Only a rightwinger would call that authoritarian. The rest of us call it democracy and self-determination.
And that because . . . We have one of the lowest tax rates on the rich in the world, the stingiest safety net, the most archaic private health care system, and the least regulation of industry?
Sounds like tea partiers and libertarians have gotten what they wanted and that's why the economy is failing. You seem to have it totally backwards
Yes, yes, translated: libertarians want the rich and powerful to be able to exploit the poor with impunity;
progressives want laws that level the playing field.
Libertarians get stuck in this world of childish dreams and circular logic where some magical free market fairy will always make things better. If the free market did it, it must be good. If it seems bad, it must be because the market wasn't free enough.
Libertarians basically read Ayn Rand and take Econ 101 and think they know enough to decide some sort of optimal economic policy.
People aren't rational, informed actors. They don't always make decisions in their best self-interest, or in the interest of anyone else.
Not every market can really be a free market. The fundamental forces required for a free market to run effectively sometimes are not present.
And that because .
. . We have one of the lowest tax rates on the rich in the world,
the stingiest safety net,
the most archaic private health care system,
and the least regulation of industry?
Sounds like tea partiers and libertarians have gotten what they wanted and that's why the economy is failing. You seem to have it totally backwards
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?