Libertarianism is DANGEROUS

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Billy000, Nov 18, 2011.

  1. Billy000
    Online

    Billy000 Democratic Socialist

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,133
    Thanks Received:
    1,240
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +4,265
    It is my sincerest belief that while personal freedom and a free market are important American ideals, they needs limitations. Libertarianism is one of those ideologies that sounds good on paper, but its actual application as a national system would be crazy.

    I'll be the first to admit that the government doesn't always get it right. However, in the interest of public well-being, sometimes even economic growth does need to be limited by government regulation.

    GOVERNMENT REGULATION

    Can you imagine the implications if we did not have government agencies, like the FDA or FAA? The pharmaceutical industry, for instance, would become dangerous. If drug companies were under no authoritative review, what is to stop them from releasing potentially harmful products? Without the FDA, there would be no legal mandate for these food and drug companies to test the safety and effectiveness of their products.
    Self-regulation is a slow process and only works to an extent. There are plenty of things that would slip through the cracks that consumers would not know about. Take the tobacco companies, for instance. There are already additives in cigarettes that make them more addicting. Is it really worth it to have these industries left unchecked? Take a minute and imagine what they could get away with. Imagine what they could do to their products for the sake of more profit.... it's a scary thought.

    TAXATION

    It has been an issue since the 1970's that productivity in the lower and middle class jobs have risen, but wages have remained flat. In other words, the "rich" are not earning all of the money that they make.
    If those at the top of the income distribution receive far more than the value of what they create, and those at lower income levels receive less, then one way to correct this is to increase taxes at the upper end of the income distribution and use the proceeds to protect important social programs that benefit working-class households, programs that are currently threatened by budget deficits.
    This would help to rectify the maldistribution of income that is preventing workers from realizing their share of the gains from economic growth. And don't get it twisted -I have nothing against the wealthy. I think these hard-working individuals deserve to be well paid for what they do, but not nearly to this extent.
    It isn't just the rich that need to pay taxes, of course. EVERYONE needs to put in their fair share for the sake of the greater good. I have no problem with paying higher taxes, so long as I know that the revenue is intended to make this country better (it doesn't always, I know).

    WELFARE/UNEMPLOYMENT/FOOD STAMPS

    I do understand that there are a lot of government moochers in this country, but that doesn't mean that these programs are unnecesssary and ineffective. Some people do need help when they are unable to stand on their own two feet. Also, it's not like it's easy to get into these programs. Have you ever seen the applications? They are huge, and leave little room for falsification.
    Hell, I support the Republican proposal that people entering these programs should be drug-tested first. I think that it is a great compromise, and more of this government funding will ultimately go to the right people.


    Like I said, the government isn't perfect; it certainly does over-reach from time to time. However, I think people have become so black-and-white when it comes to personal freedom. The idea has become over-romanticized in today's politics. The truth of the matter is that it is human nature for people to be selfish. People cannot handle TOTAL personal freedom. They just can't. For the sake of the greater good, people need limitations.

    Please, please, please don't accuse me of being a freedom-hating socialist. That is not the case.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  2. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    If gubmint didn't do it, nobody would! :rolleyes:
     
  3. Avorysuds
    Offline

    Avorysuds Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    13,834
    Thanks Received:
    1,655
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Eugene Oregon
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    YES!!! Libertarianism means NO GOVERNMENT!!!!!!
     
  4. Avorysuds
    Offline

    Avorysuds Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    13,834
    Thanks Received:
    1,655
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Eugene Oregon
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    You know, the other thing that gets me is the OP assumes that if the nation moves in the direction of Libertarianism that we instantly become 100% Libertarian. As if when a conservative President or a Liberal President win over the Presidency that the entire or whole country becomes that ideology... as if the tax code, foreign policy, all social policy and everything else all of a sudden, over night just switches over to represent that ideology in the purest form.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2011
  5. dblack
    Offline

    dblack Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2011
    Messages:
    20,119
    Thanks Received:
    2,006
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,766
    I guess some people actually see it that way. But Libertarianism isn't anarchy. It's actually based on the notion that we need government to protect our freedom. What it rejects is the idea of government as caretaker and master.
     
  6. Mr Liberty
    Offline

    Mr Liberty Hater of Socialism

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Messages:
    391
    Thanks Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    In a great country that has lost it's way
    Ratings:
    +62
    That is not a true statement. We just believe that government should first and foremost protect individual liberty.
     
  7. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194
    There's a difference between less regulations no regulations. IMHO, most libertarians don't mind paying more taxes if their money is only used for functions that only gov't can provide and is efficiently, effectively, and honestly spent. None of that is remotely true these days.

    As for welfare, certainly those among that cannot provide for themselves should be helped, but not those who could but won't. And whatever we do provide must be paid for without creating debt that our children and grandchildren will have to pay for. It is not gov'ts responsibility to take care of it's citizens, it is their responsibility to take care of themselves if they can.
     
  8. Avorysuds
    Offline

    Avorysuds Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    13,834
    Thanks Received:
    1,655
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Eugene Oregon
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    I know, I was giving the OP a hard time. I'm mostly Libertarian myself.
     
  9. occupied
    Offline

    occupied Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    16,396
    Thanks Received:
    2,244
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,719
    The uninformed libertarianism of some teabaggers is nothing but a way to bitch about everything, support nothing, never having to defend any policy, and vote 1000% republican anyway. A cowardly cop-out.
     
  10. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,759
    Thanks Received:
    4,331
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,705
    Why is it that the left gets freaked out about liberty but they aren't concerned about registered socialists serving in congress?
     

Share This Page