Always appreciate your thoughts g, whether we agree or not. Since I call myself a libertarian/classical liberal, allow me to respond with equal specificity...and let's see where the chips fall.
Let's get specific.
A Libertarian would legalize all drugs that are currently illegal. Crack, heroine, meth, pot. I would not. I would legalize pot, and that's about it.
Not exactly. A libertarian would not "legalize" drugs anymore than we would "legalize" rosemary or oregano. What we would do is suggest that any consensual activity between adults should not be subject to criminal prosecution. Stated differently, if you don't infringe on the rights of another, it shouldn't be anyone else's business.
Would this mean drugs are legalized? If we're talking about adults that haven't taken from another nor harm anyone else, a libertarian doesn't really care if they are or are not under the influence.
Now, because we know that getting pissed drunk or stoned out of your mind
can lead to foolish decisions, I would be open to the possibility of increased sentencing for those that do harm others while under the influence. Otherwise, it's your body, ingest what you like.
A Libertarian would disband the FDA,
Correct. States are free to regulate, categorize or ban foods and drugs, but I find no provision within the enumerated powers of the Constitution to allow such meddling from the Federal government. Besides, I believe consumers and free market organizations rating the quality and effectiveness of such products would be far more efficient and helpful than bureaucrats with no threat of competition. Were states allowed to experiment with different approaches, we could see...and more importantly, choose...the best approach.
Of course, if someone is harmed with their food or drug, well, there's already plenty of laws against that.
Correct. Again, states are free to regulation/oversee civilian air transportation. Personally, I think it should be the problem of private airport owners to regulate their own traffic.
and the Federal Reserve. I would not. I would certainly support regular audits of the Federal Reserve, and I would cease and desist on the continuing ZIRP, QEs, etc immediately. The Fed is way off the reservation right now. But the perfect is the enemy of the good. I trust the Fed's hands on our monetary machine way, way, way, way more than I would trust Nancy Pelosi's or John Boehner's hands on it.
Due respect, I think that's a false comparison. It is not Pelosi who should centrally control the price of money, it's the FREE MARKET that should do so.
This libertarian stands against all forms of central price controls, be they for the price of money, the price of labor, or the price of raisins.
A Libertarian would decrease our military down to the size of a cub scout troop. I would not. I would decrease Defense spending back to Cold War levels,
I disagree with that assertion. I won't speak for all libertarians, but I think we should have the biggest, baddest, most technologically advanced military in the history of the world. I don't want to "decrease" the military as much as I want to involve ourselves far less often in overseas conflicts. Stated differently, less intervention.
Does that require less spending? Probably, but more importantly, I want our military protecting our borders and keeping international waters free from piracy and open to trade. Certainly NOT a cub scout troop!
perhaps more if we would stop subsidizing the defense of our wealthiest allies and make them pay their own way. Let's see them pay for their socialized medicine and their own defense at the same time.
100% agree.
Interesting exchange, thanks.
