The Big Flaw in Libertarianism

[Quantum Windbag]

"The Market Will Correct Itself". They claim if a company is not nice, people won't buy its' products and services, they won't work there and The Magical Market will make the bad ol' company go away! Wrong. It doesn't ...[because]... The Market does little to correct anything a company does, once it gets big enough. That's just plain fact.

Prove it. Be sure to use current examples.

Be happy to.
BP
Pacific Gas & Electric
Skadden Arps
General Electric
Exxon
Ford
GM
Chrysler
Pfizer
Eli Lilly
Kaiser
Blue Cross
Most of the Fortune 100
Which of those countries has been found guilty in a court of law, for harming or killing people.
Multiple times.
All of them.
Which did the Magial Market make disappear?
None of them.

I look forward to your fact-filled and civil response.

Thank you for your service, btw.

Which of those companies are supported by the government?

How does pointing to the fact that we do not have a free market prove a free market won't work?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"The Market Will Correct Itself". They claim if a company is not nice, people won't buy its' products and services, they won't work there and The Magical Market will make the bad ol' company go away! Wrong. It doesn't ...[because]... The Market does little to correct anything a company does, once it gets big enough. That's just plain fact.

Prove it. Be sure to use current examples.

How could he use current examples when the market is heavily regulated now? One can point to a need for some Government involvement even currently. Housing crash comes to mind as well as banks almost folding.

But the biggest evidence of a need for some Government regulation is going to be BEFORE the Government got involved.

The argument no longer is that the Government should not be involved, but rather to what extent.

As I get the jest of this he takes exception to the clam by Libertarians NO Government involvement is needed and is asking for a debate on that claim.

My personal opinion is it is a waste of time debating with Libertarians because they are fools on the issue.

No sane person can actually argue that no Government involvement is needed in the business world. All one need do is go back in history to when that was true for absolute evidence of a need for some regulation.

As to the specific claim that in all cases the market will correct itself, that does not apply to all the things that business does nor apply to the need for some regulation by the Government.

My problem with the specific poster in this case is that he appears to believe that ONLY the Government can save us from the evil Business people. SO basically one extreme of the issue is asking to debate the other extreme. And we all know how that will turn out.

which libertarians are calling for no government involvement?

 

[Oddball]

Knew you'd cower from that one!

Take a guess how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards for clinical trials and reporting? .

Tell us, how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards? One thing we do know is that thalidomide was approved by the FDA. We also know that thousands of people die waiting for the FDA to approve life-saving drugs. So, every life lost due to lack of regulation you have to offset with the lives lost because of regulation.

Hell, thousands of people were killed because the FDA prohibited the printing of indications for use of aspirin, in case of possible heart attack....Used to be that EMS personnel could only administer aspirin to AMI patients through the order of an ER doc, per FDA regulation.

Then we can move on to so-called "orphan drugs" that languish in pharm company attics, because the maladies they treat are suffered by so few people that they could never recoup the costs of approval.

But the FDA is absolutely indispensable, dammit!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Bank customers have been quite successful recently with getting fees eliminated before government could even begin to act. This shows that massive, quick reactions by customers do have a big impact.

Don't confuse the issue with facts, it makes IndependntLogic's brain hurt.

 

[Liberty]

QW got it... the million dollar question for morons like IL IS........

How does pointing to the fact that we do not have a free market prove a free market won't work?

 

[Oddball]

Looks like the only "Big Flaw" we've uncovered here is that of the alleged logic of the OP.

 

[The T]

Looks like the only "Big Flaw" we've uncovered here is that of the alleged logic of the OP.

What logic?

 

[Ariux]

Decent people should understand that when liberals (aka shitheads) say that freedom doesn't work, it's only because their idea of working is for everyone to do as the liberals want.

For example, a liberal isn't interested in a business hiring the best qualified people. They're interested in a business hiring women and minorities, over qualifications.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Libertarianism (L) is the modern Marxism without the good stuff and I guess some of the bad stuff. What I find particularly interesting and hopeless about L is it has reduced many youthful people to worshippers of markets and money and things, that while necessary, hardly count as positive or moral values. But I've written and posted lots on L and a few links are below.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/189696-libertarian-flame.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/50564-libertarianism-in-a-nutshell-ii.html
Why is libertarianism wrong?


"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke The American Conservative -- Marxism of the Right


"Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them." Tony Judt 'Ill Fares the Land'

"Libertarian solutions favored by the political right have contributed even more directly to the erosion of social responsibilities and valued forms of communal life, particularly in the UK and the US. Far from producing beneficial communal consequences, the invisible hand of unregulated free-market capitalism undermines the family (e.g., few corporations provide enough leave to parents of newborn children), disrupts local communities (e.g., following plant closings or the shifting of corporate headquarters), and corrupts the political process (e.g., US politicians are often dependent on economic interest groups for their political survival, with the consequence that they no longer represent the community at large). Moreover, the valorization of greed in the Thatcher/Reagan era justified the extension of instrumental considerations governing relationships in the marketplace into spheres previously informed by a sense of uncalculated reciprocity and civil obligation. This trend has been reinforced by increasing globalization, which pressures states into conforming to the dictates of the international marketplace." Daniel Bell in Communitarianism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

You don't know much about political philosophy, do you?

 

[saveliberty]

Don't throw underhand at a major league baseball game IL.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Um hmmm. Well you're a uh, angry little fellow, aren't you? Not sure how to simplify this enough and doubt it would do any good.
So let's see. The government has killed lots of people! That has nothing to do with the topic.
I am a capitalist. I own a business and employ people. Nothing was discussed about capitalism. There is a difference between Capitalism and Libertarianism. Perhaps you could find a Liberal Elitist to explain it to you. In the meantime, no. I believe that if regulation can prevent thousands of deaths each year, then that is a good thing.
Where did I claim capitalism is a failure? Oh i didn't? Yeah that.
Now. When you hae come out of your hysterics and settled down a bit, perhaps you'd like to discuss whether a reasonable level of regulation is good for the citzenry.

That's a lot of sound and fury that signifies absololutely nothing. You didn't answer a single question I asked. Who are these "thousands of people" you refer to? You reeled off a list of companies you dislike, but you didn't manage to name a single person they supposedly killed.

There is no "reasonable" level of regulation. It's all bad for the citizenry. The tort system is the only thing required to keep corporations in line.

Yes. There is a reasonable level of regulation. You exemply why no one takes Libertarians seriously. That's just foolish.
as far as people being killed by companies, well let me think for 1/4 of a second. Oh yeah.
Take a guess how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards for clinical trials and reporting? That would be millions. Guess how many suffered permanent side-effects before they were required on the labels? Millions.

So I get it. Libertarians don't care if regulation will save the life of your daughter before she dies. All you care about is being able to sue afterward.
Wait. How do you feel about tort reform?
it's going to be hilarious if you claim you're for it!

Regulations don't save lives, and the lack of regulation doesn't kill people. It it worked that way laws against murder would end murder. You need to come from a reasonable and rational position before people can treat you as either reasonable or rational.

My guess is you will use this thread as an excuse to hide from more people that can point out just how ridiculous your positions are.

 

[saveliberty]

So IL wasn't going to use an offensive tone huh? lol

Just lump everyone together like certain liberals love to do. Make them a group and then demonize them. All because they can't honestly defend their positions.

 

[Oddball]

Libertarianism (L) is the modern Marxism without the good stuff and I guess some of the bad stuff. What I find particularly interesting and hopeless about L is it has reduced many youthful people to worshippers of markets and money and things, that while necessary, hardly count as positive or moral values. But I've written and posted lots on L and a few links are below.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/189696-libertarian-flame.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/50564-libertarianism-in-a-nutshell-ii.html
Why is libertarianism wrong?


"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke The American Conservative -- Marxism of the Right


"Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them." Tony Judt 'Ill Fares the Land'

"Libertarian solutions favored by the political right have contributed even more directly to the erosion of social responsibilities and valued forms of communal life, particularly in the UK and the US. Far from producing beneficial communal consequences, the invisible hand of unregulated free-market capitalism undermines the family (e.g., few corporations provide enough leave to parents of newborn children), disrupts local communities (e.g., following plant closings or the shifting of corporate headquarters), and corrupts the political process (e.g., US politicians are often dependent on economic interest groups for their political survival, with the consequence that they no longer represent the community at large). Moreover, the valorization of greed in the Thatcher/Reagan era justified the extension of instrumental considerations governing relationships in the marketplace into spheres previously informed by a sense of uncalculated reciprocity and civil obligation. This trend has been reinforced by increasing globalization, which pressures states into conforming to the dictates of the international marketplace." Daniel Bell in Communitarianism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

You don't know much about political philosophy, do you?

Bigots know little of anything, other than their blind bigotry.

Probably why he so readily steals the words of others to try and pawn himself off as some kind of deep thinker.

 

[The T]

So IL wasn't going to use an offensive tone huh? lol

Just lump everyone together like certain liberals love to do. Make them a group and then demonize them. All because they can't honestly defend their positions.

Statists can't help but be herders.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yeah, losertarians have never pushed for legalizing drugs.

Libertarians aren't the only ones that want drugs legalized.

LEAP | Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

Losertarians want the Govt to stay out of every part of their lives, as if they will somehow be happier if they can do crack in their house with no ill effects like being robbed, ruining their own bodies which will require healthcare costs, etc.

I guess you prefer a government that gets tells you who to sleep with. Count me out.

Typically one finds a lot of these paranoid type of people living in barracaded homes believing the "Feds" are taking away their rights when in fact the Feds don't know they exist until alerted by the local Sherriff that Billy Bob threatened the local judge.

Doesn't sound like a libertarian to me. It does sound like a few hippies I know that are now in the government.

 

[saveliberty]

Manipulators are control freaks, not someone who loves his fellow man.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Libertarianism (L) is the modern Marxism without the good stuff and I guess some of the bad stuff. What I find particularly interesting and hopeless about L is it has reduced many youthful people to worshippers of markets and money and things, that while necessary, hardly count as positive or moral values. But I've written and posted lots on L and a few links are below.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/189696-libertarian-flame.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/50564-libertarianism-in-a-nutshell-ii.html
Why is libertarianism wrong?


"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke The American Conservative -- Marxism of the Right


"Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them." Tony Judt 'Ill Fares the Land'

"Libertarian solutions favored by the political right have contributed even more directly to the erosion of social responsibilities and valued forms of communal life, particularly in the UK and the US. Far from producing beneficial communal consequences, the invisible hand of unregulated free-market capitalism undermines the family (e.g., few corporations provide enough leave to parents of newborn children), disrupts local communities (e.g., following plant closings or the shifting of corporate headquarters), and corrupts the political process (e.g., US politicians are often dependent on economic interest groups for their political survival, with the consequence that they no longer represent the community at large). Moreover, the valorization of greed in the Thatcher/Reagan era justified the extension of instrumental considerations governing relationships in the marketplace into spheres previously informed by a sense of uncalculated reciprocity and civil obligation. This trend has been reinforced by increasing globalization, which pressures states into conforming to the dictates of the international marketplace." Daniel Bell in Communitarianism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

You don't know much about political philosophy, do you?

Bigots know little of anything, other than their blind bigotry.

Probably why he so readily steals the words of others to try and pawn himself off as some kind of deep thinker.

Probably.

 

[Liberty]

If anyone remotely interested in politics but didn't know a whole lot walked into this thread and read it from beginning to end, I am 100% sure libertarians would be more convincing, considering we don't use hyperbole or emotional appeals which destroy the credibility of the pro-tyranny crowd.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes. There is a reasonable level of regulation. You exemply why no one takes Libertarians seriously. That's just foolish.
as far as people being killed by companies, well let me think for 1/4 of a second. Oh yeah.
Take a guess how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards for clinical trials and reporting? That would be millions. Guess how many suffered permanent side-effects before they were required on the labels? Millions.

Really? Can you provide evidence of a single person being killed by bad drugs prior to the existence of the FDA? How many people suffer permanent side affects now even though they are listed on the label? Can you demonstrate that the creation of the FDA reduced the number of people suffering from these side effects?

So I get it. Libertarians don't care if regulation will save the life of your daughter before she dies. All you care about is being able to sue afterward.

How would regulation save the life of my daughter? Are you the kind of moron that administers medications to your children without researching their safety?

Wait. How do you feel about tort reform?
it's going to be hilarious if you claim you're for it!

That's another issue entirely.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wow. Look at this thread. People Iv'e bashed and been bashed by on other threads suddenly coming together to bash Mr So-Called Independent.
He is the Barack Obama of USMB--everyone thinks he's a loser.