What's not to love about libertarians?

[Quantum Windbag]

That industry and people are smart enough to properly regulate themselves to both their country's and their betterment.

So, industry and people are not smart enough to do this themselves, they need a different industry (government) full of people to regulate them. If the people that are doing it are not smart enough, why are the people not doing it smart enough? Do you think all the smart people stay out of industry?

 

[Charles_Main]

For those who think libertarians are goofy or dumb, what specific issues do you disagree with libertarians on?

I actual agree with many of their basic Ideas. It is just that they take limited Government and Personal Freedom to the Extreme and often irrational. Bordering on Anarchist. Some of them at least.

I am a conservative, but I recognize the need for Government in some areas, and for a social safety net. It just seems to me many Libertarians want so small of a government, to the point that we would basically have none. No social safety Net, No FBI, no regulations, a near powerless fed. I have talked to Libertarians who advocate going back to something like the Articles of Confederation we had before the Constitution. Which was a loose collection of Nation states, Not the strong United nation we have today. Basically much like the EU. I think some of their more Radical Ideas would inevitably lead to a dissolution of our unions, and 50 Separate not unified Nation states squabbling with each other, and much more weaker in the world because of it. Both from a National Defense perspective and Economic one.

 

[Liberty]

Why would you need to oppose others morality?

that morality is only a problem if it becomes law.
and if libertarians ran things....

...the rule of law would be based first and for most on protecting the individual human rights of everyone. What are you implying?

And these individual human rights are?

What you are talking about is impossible to work out, even among libertarians.
some believe that the govt should not fund police.

local/state governments should fund local/state services through local/state taxes. no libertarian would disagree with that. our beef is with the federal government.

Also, read some philosophy to answer your first questions. Hobbes, Locke, Cicero, are great places to start.

 

[Liberty]

For those who think libertarians are goofy or dumb, what specific issues do you disagree with libertarians on?

I actual agree with many of their basic Ideas. It is just that they take limited Government and Personal Freedom to the Extreme and often irrational. Bordering on Anarchist. Some of them at least.

I am a conservative, but I recognize the need for Government in some areas, and for a social safety net. It just seems to me many Libertarians want so small of a government, to the point that we would basically have none. No social safety Net, No FBI, no regulations, a near powerless fed.

You are right to an extent. (I think) We would prefer the constitution be taken literally and of course, the 10th amendment as well UNLESS there was a legitimate constitutional amendment to circumvent the 10th, which is perfectly legitimate if the amendment process is followed.

I believe all of your concerns would be fine with us if it was kept to a state/local level is what I am saying.

 

[uscitizen]

That industry and people are smart enough to properly regulate themselves to both their country's and their betterment.

So, industry and people are not smart enough to do this themselves, they need a different industry (government) full of people to regulate them. If the people that are doing it are not smart enough, why are the people not doing it smart enough? Do you think all the smart people stay out of industry?

Naah obviously the smart people stay out of government.

Unfettered capitalism will always keep striving to maximize their profits at the expense of the workers and environment.

 

[eagleseven]

Why would you need to oppose others morality?

Because a single leader who rejects libertarian morality can readily convert the nation into a police-state, or a theocracy, depending upon the dominant morality.

If 95% of the population believes the Church must rule, then the Church will rule, regardless of what the other 5% think about it.

 

[uscitizen]

Why would you need to oppose others morality?

Because a single leader who rejects libertarian morality can readily convert the nation into a police-state, or a theocracy, depending upon the dominant morality.

If 95% of the population believes the Church must rule, then the Church will rule, regardless of what the other 5% think about it.

Kinda sounds like democracy you are describing there.

 

[Charles_Main]

For those who think libertarians are goofy or dumb, what specific issues do you disagree with libertarians on?

I actual agree with many of their basic Ideas. It is just that they take limited Government and Personal Freedom to the Extreme and often irrational. Bordering on Anarchist. Some of them at least.

I am a conservative, but I recognize the need for Government in some areas, and for a social safety net. It just seems to me many Libertarians want so small of a government, to the point that we would basically have none. No social safety Net, No FBI, no regulations, a near powerless fed.

You are right to an extent. (I think) We would prefer the constitution be taken literally and of course, the 10th amendment as well UNLESS there was a legitimate constitutional amendment to circumvent the 10th, which is perfectly legitimate if the amendment process is followed.

I believe all of your concerns would be fine with us if it was kept to a state/local level is what I am saying.

You responded before I could edit in something I wanted to say.

This

I have talked to Libertarians who advocate going back to something like the Articles of Confederation we had before the Constitution. Which was a loose collection of Nation states, Not the strong United nation we have today. Basically much like the EU. I think some of their more Radical Ideas would inevitably lead to a dissolution of our union, and 50 Separate not unified Nation states squabbling with each other, and much more weaker in the world because of it. Both from a National Defense perspective and Economic one.

 

[Liberty]

Why would you need to oppose others morality?

that morality is only a problem if it becomes law.
and if libertarians ran things....

...the rule of law would be based first and for most on protecting the individual human rights of everyone. What are you implying?

And these individual human rights are?
Where does ones right cross over to impact another?

What you are talking about is impossible to work out, even among libertarians.
some believe that the govt should not fund police.

lol man im not gonna educate you. I am not that nice. Educate yourself. It is not impossible, I will give you a few basic ones.

Free Speech
Free Religion
Free Market
Free Press
Self Defense
and the rule of law to punish those who would violate these rights of others.
Come on, now...go to a library.

 

[eagleseven]

Because a single leader who rejects libertarian morality can readily convert the nation into a police-state, or a theocracy, depending upon the dominant morality.

If 95% of the population believes the Church must rule, then the Church will rule, regardless of what the other 5% think about it.

Kinda sounds like democracy you are describing there.

Indeed.

Tocqueville warned us to avoid the Tyranny of the Majority, which is why the founding fathers established a Republic with limited suffrage, as opposed to a direct Democracy.

 

[Liberty]

I actual agree with many of their basic Ideas. It is just that they take limited Government and Personal Freedom to the Extreme and often irrational. Bordering on Anarchist. Some of them at least.

I am a conservative, but I recognize the need for Government in some areas, and for a social safety net. It just seems to me many Libertarians want so small of a government, to the point that we would basically have none. No social safety Net, No FBI, no regulations, a near powerless fed.

You are right to an extent. (I think) We would prefer the constitution be taken literally and of course, the 10th amendment as well UNLESS there was a legitimate constitutional amendment to circumvent the 10th, which is perfectly legitimate if the amendment process is followed.

I believe all of your concerns would be fine with us if it was kept to a state/local level is what I am saying.

You responded before I could edit in something I wanted to say.

This

I have talked to Libertarians who advocate going back to something like the Articles of Confederation we had before the Constitution. Which was a loose collection of Nation states, Not the strong United nation we have today. Basically much like the EU. I think some of their more Radical Ideas would inevitably lead to a dissolution of our union, and 50 Separate not unified Nation states squabbling with each other, and much more weaker in the world because of it. Both from a National Defense perspective and Economic one.

Sorry for my quick response. haha.

Anyway I just want to say in my studies I have found that there were many delegates to the constitutional convention that would NOT have signed unless their state's rights were protected. Not only this, they were guaranteed that the federal government shall not overreach its authority if it is not int he enumerated powers.

With that said, the difference between the articles and the constitution is really only a couple things. 1. national currency 2. national military 3. foreign affairs

The rest was promised to the states by the 10th amendment (unless there was a calling for a constitutional amendment, of course)

 

[uscitizen]

Dream all you want guys , but believe me you will not live to see a libertarian government running the USA. Neither will your children live long enough to see it.

Enjoy your dreams though.

 

[eagleseven]

And these individual human rights are?
Where does ones right cross over to impact another?

What you are talking about is impossible to work out, even among libertarians.
some believe that the govt should not fund police.

This was worked out a long time ago, with a simple line:

Your personal rights end where others' rights begin. In other words, you may do whatever you wish, so long as it does not harm or restrict the rights of others.

Do not confuse libertarians for anarchists.

 

[Liberty]

Because a single leader who rejects libertarian morality can readily convert the nation into a police-state, or a theocracy, depending upon the dominant morality.

If 95% of the population believes the Church must rule, then the Church will rule, regardless of what the other 5% think about it.

Kinda sounds like democracy you are describing there.

Indeed.

Tocqueville warned us to avoid the Tyranny of the Majority, which is why the founding fathers established a Republic with limited suffrage, as opposed to a direct Democracy.

BINGO

 

[eagleseven]

Dream all you want guys , but believe me you will not live to see a libertarian government running the USA. Neither will your children live long enough to see it.

Enjoy your dreams though.

Enjoy your Big Brother.

 

[Liberty]

Dream all you want guys , but believe me you will not live to see a libertarian government running the USA. Neither will your children live long enough to see it.

Enjoy your dreams though.

have you read any political philosophy writings, may i ask?

 

[uscitizen]

And these individual human rights are?
Where does ones right cross over to impact another?

What you are talking about is impossible to work out, even among libertarians.
some believe that the govt should not fund police.

This was worked out a long time ago, with a simple line:

Your personal rights end where others' rights begin. In other words, you may do whatever you wish, so long as it does not harm or restrict the rights of others.

Do not confuse libertarians for anarchists.

So I should not buy something that is made by mistreated laborers?
By buying the product I would be supporting the ones doing the mistreating?

 

[eagleseven]

Ironic that the hippies of the 1960s have more in common with modern libertarians, than they do with the modern left?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oU7M4OeSRM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oU7M4OeSRM[/ame]

 

[eagleseven]

So I should not buy something that is made by mistreated laborers? By buying the product I would be supporting the ones doing the mistreating?

Are the laborers slaves? Or are they free to quit?

In libertarian society, there is only voluntary employment. Volunteers cannot be abused, by definition.

 

[loosecannon]

For those who think libertarians are goofy or dumb, what specific issues do you disagree with libertarians on?

their excessive pot smoking. I mean anybody can take an occasional bong hit at parties, but DAMNED! Do Libertarians ever get a chance to breath clean air?

Libertarian: definition: Republicans who smoke pot!