Debate Now Is Libertarianism UnAmerican?

[Derideo_Te]

The Libertarian party platform states that they want to deregulate and trash all forms of social welfare.

So is the Libertarian Party "factually wrong" about what they are posting as their stated platform?

No. YOU are wrong in stating that "without those regulations that Libertarians want to trash we would have anarchy."

So what is your Libertarian alternative that doesn't constitute anarchy?

Removing the regulations libertarians want to trash wouldn't constitute anarchy. So I'm not sure what you're fishing for.

Explain exactly how your deregulated Libertarian Utopia will work in reality.

I don't know exactly how it would work. But unless the government collapses, it wouldn't be anarchy. Your claim was ridiculous hyperbole.

In other words you support something that you are completely ignorant as to how it would actually harm you if it became a reality?

Let's take an example and let's see if it is "ridiculour hyperbole", m'kay?

Libertarians want to deregulate all social welfare programs, right?

How many people currently receive SS benefits? Just a shade under 65 million or about 20% of the population. In 2000 at least 50% of those people depended entirely on SS and 25% depended upon SS for 90% of their income. 18% depended 100% on SS for all of their income. Those figures haven't improved since then.

Estimates of Unreported Asset Income in the Survey of Consumer Finances and the Relative Importance of Social Security Benefits to the Elderly

Now take away their SS, SSI, Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

What is going to happen when 20% of the population can't pay their bills?

Who is going to feed them, house them, care for their medical needs, pay their utility bills?

Since you have deregulated everything utilities will cut off their water and electricity. Landlords will evict them and banks will foreclose on them. Hospitals and doctors will refuse them care.

65 million people is a lot of people who are going to be unhappy and many of them are going to have relatives who are just as unhappy to see their loved ones deprived of their SS benefits. So it could easily be 2 or 3 times that number.

At least half the people will have a sound reason to overthrow your Libertarian Utopia. Explain how you are going to stop that happening?

What measures are you going to take to stop them marching on your Libertarian leaders?

How are you going to protect your leaders and your Libertarian Utopia?

Either you explain exactly how your Libertarian leaders are going to deal with this massive crisis in your Utopia or you are tacitly admitting you have anarchy on your hands caused by Libertarian deregulation of social programs.

 

[dblack]

In other words you support something that you are completely ignorant as to how it would actually harm you if it became a reality?

Is that any way to respond when you're caught red-handed? The gracious thing would be to acknowledge it and move on. How about "OK, I was exaggerating, but ...", and try to frame a more honest argument.
Maybe then could we can have an intelligent discussion. If such a thing interests you.

 

[Derideo_Te]

In other words you support something that you are completely ignorant as to how it would actually harm you if it became a reality?

Is that any way to respond when you're caught red-handed? The gracious thing would be to acknowledge it and move on. How about "OK, I was exaggerating, but ...", and try to frame a more honest argument.
Maybe then could we can have an intelligent discussion. If such a thing interests you.

In other words you can't answer a single one of the questions posed in that response so you are resorting to ad homs instead.

Why am I not surprised that this happens every single time a Libertarian is exposed as having no substance to support their failure of a political dogma?

The quoted figures were from credible sources and the scenario was in full accordance with the stated platform of the Libertarian Party.

But the predictable failure to answer the difficult questions is inevitable because Libertarianism is so extreme that it collapses into anarchy as soon as it is implemented.

Thank you for once again tacitly acknowledging that Libertarianism is un-american.

 

[dblack]

In other words you support something that you are completely ignorant as to how it would actually harm you if it became a reality?

"In other words" I'm not going to play your stupid game. I'm under no "onus" to defend your moronic strawmen. If you can't make an honest argument, I'm not going to bother creating a detailed response. I'm just going to point out how you're full of shit.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today

Onus is on you to provide credible substantiation for your claim.

Onus is on you to provide an objective definition of "un-American." Something you've failed to do for 30+ pages. This belongs in the Rubber Room, not a structured debate forum.

 

[dblack]

So much onus, so little time.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today

Onus is on you to provide credible substantiation for your claim.

Onus is on you to provide an objective definition of "un-American." Something you've failed to do for 30+ pages. This belongs in the Rubber Room, not a structured debate forum.

Post # 300 does provide definitions of the term un-American from two objective and unbiased sources.

Debate Now - Is Libertarianism UnAmerican Page 10 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The OP clearly stipulated that the dictionary definitions prevail throughout this thread but spoonfeeding is obviously necessary when dealing with Libertarians.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So much onus, so little time.

Yet another post lacking any intelligent substance on the OP topic.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today

Onus is on you to provide credible substantiation for your claim.

Onus is on you to provide an objective definition of "un-American." Something you've failed to do for 30+ pages. This belongs in the Rubber Room, not a structured debate forum.

Post # 300 does provide definitions of the term un-American from two objective and unbiased sources.

Debate Now - Is Libertarianism UnAmerican Page 10 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

View attachment 45563


The OP clearly stipulated that the dictionary definitions prevail throughout this thread but spoonfeeding is obviously necessary when dealing with Libertarians.

Those "objective" definitions use very subjective terms to define the word. "Not characteristic of or proper to the United States." What's characteristic of the United States? What's proper to the United States? Social democracy is not a characteristic of the United States as far as I can tell, but plenty of people here advocate for it. Are they un-American? Is Bernie Sanders un-American because his socialist views aren't proper to the United States? The definitions you're using are nice and vague and completely subjective. That you don't understand the difference between objective and subjective makes this thread a farce. And you can stipulate whatever you want. If I make a post stipulating that all liberals are actually Martians it doesn't make it so.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So much onus, so little time.

Yet another post lacking any intelligent substance on the OP topic.

The OP topic lacks any intelligent substance.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today

Onus is on you to provide credible substantiation for your claim.

Onus is on you to provide an objective definition of "un-American." Something you've failed to do for 30+ pages. This belongs in the Rubber Room, not a structured debate forum.

Post # 300 does provide definitions of the term un-American from two objective and unbiased sources.

Debate Now - Is Libertarianism UnAmerican Page 10 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

View attachment 45563


The OP clearly stipulated that the dictionary definitions prevail throughout this thread but spoonfeeding is obviously necessary when dealing with Libertarians.

Those "objective" definitions use very subjective terms to define the word. "Not characteristic of or proper to the United States." What's characteristic of the United States? What's proper to the United States? Social democracy is not a characteristic of the United States as far as I can tell, but plenty of people here advocate for it. Are they un-American? Is Bernie Sanders un-American because his socialist views aren't proper to the United States? The definitions you're using are nice and vague and completely subjective. That you don't understand the difference between objective and subjective makes this thread a farce. And you can stipulate whatever you want. If I make a post stipulating that all liberals are actually Martians it doesn't make it so.

You are quibbling with Merriam_Webster's definitions now?

Since all you have are semantics you have conceded that the OP is correct in asserting that Libertarianism is un-American.

Feel free to whine as much as like but until you can provide something of actual substance to refute the OP you have nothing of any value to contribute.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So much onus, so little time.

Yet another post lacking any intelligent substance on the OP topic.

The OP topic lacks any intelligent substance.

Thank you for proving that I am correct when I posted that you have nothing of any value to contribute.

You cannot refute Thom Hartmann.

You cannot provide any instances of your Libertarian Utopia working in practice.

You cannot explain how your Libertarian leaders will deal with the fallout from their odious and un-American policies.

In summation you cannot defend Libertarianism because it is un-American.

On the other hand I can, and will, defend your right to believe in the delusional fantasy that is Libertarianism just as so many of those who attend Comic-Con believe in their superhero delusional fantasies.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Libertarian ideals have more in common with the fundamental founding principles than any other political party today

Onus is on you to provide credible substantiation for your claim.

Onus is on you to provide an objective definition of "un-American." Something you've failed to do for 30+ pages. This belongs in the Rubber Room, not a structured debate forum.

Post # 300 does provide definitions of the term un-American from two objective and unbiased sources.

Debate Now - Is Libertarianism UnAmerican Page 10 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

View attachment 45563


The OP clearly stipulated that the dictionary definitions prevail throughout this thread but spoonfeeding is obviously necessary when dealing with Libertarians.

Those "objective" definitions use very subjective terms to define the word. "Not characteristic of or proper to the United States." What's characteristic of the United States? What's proper to the United States? Social democracy is not a characteristic of the United States as far as I can tell, but plenty of people here advocate for it. Are they un-American? Is Bernie Sanders un-American because his socialist views aren't proper to the United States? The definitions you're using are nice and vague and completely subjective. That you don't understand the difference between objective and subjective makes this thread a farce. And you can stipulate whatever you want. If I make a post stipulating that all liberals are actually Martians it doesn't make it so.

You are quibbling with Merriam_Webster's definitions now?

Since all you have are semantics you have conceded that the OP is correct in asserting that Libertarianism is un-American.

Feel free to whine as much as like but until you can provide something of actual substance to refute the OP you have nothing of any value to contribute.

And now you're projecting your own shortcomings onto others.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So much onus, so little time.

Yet another post lacking any intelligent substance on the OP topic.

The OP topic lacks any intelligent substance.

Thank you for proving that I am correct when I posted that you have nothing of any value to contribute.

You cannot refute Thom Hartmann.

You cannot provide any instances of your Libertarian Utopia working in practice.

You cannot explain how your Libertarian leaders will deal with the fallout from their odious and un-American policies.

In summation you cannot defend Libertarianism because it is un-American.

On the other hand I can, and will, defend your right to believe in the delusional fantasy that is Libertarianism just as so many of those who attend Comic-Con believe in their superhero delusional fantasies.

I don't need to refute Thom Hartmann. All I needed to do was point out that your entire thread is meaningless and could be made literally about any subject whatsoever using the subjective nonsense you're arguing from. Rocks are un-American because they're not characteristic of the United States. Don't argue now, or would you try to argue against Merriam-Webster?

 

[dblack]

So much onus, so little time.

Yet another post lacking any intelligent substance on the OP topic.

The OP topic lacks any intelligent substance.

Thank you for proving that I am correct when I posted that you have nothing of any value to contribute.

You cannot refute Thom Hartmann.

You cannot provide any instances of your Libertarian Utopia working in practice.

You cannot explain how your Libertarian leaders will deal with the fallout from their odious and un-American policies.

In summation you cannot defend Libertarianism because it is un-American.

On the other hand I can, and will, defend your right to believe in the delusional fantasy that is Libertarianism just as so many of those who attend Comic-Con believe in their superhero delusional fantasies.

I don't need to refute Thom Hartmann. All I needed to do was point out that your entire thread is meaningless and could be made literally about any subject whatsoever using the subjective nonsense you're arguing from. Rocks are un-American because they're not characteristic of the United States. Don't argue now, or would you try to argue against Merriam-Webster?

I read that libertarians were aliens from outer-space. Onus is on you to explain why we should trust aliens from outer-space.

 

[Correll]

It seems I am not alone in my doubts about the level of sincerity in your attempt at serious, honest debate.

 

[Derideo_Te]

It seems I am not alone in my doubts about the level of sincerity in your attempt at serious, honest debate.

Haven't encountered a single Libertarian yet who can honestly explain how the stated policies of their party are going to work in practice without causing massive hardship to We the People.

Instead they just utter ad homs like yours because they cannot deal with the puerile greed and selfishness that is at the core of Libertarianism.

 

[Correll]

It seems I am not alone in my doubts about the level of sincerity in your attempt at serious, honest debate.

Haven't encountered a single Libertarian yet who can honestly explain how the stated policies of their party are going to work in practice without causing massive hardship to We the People.

Instead they just utter ad homs like yours because they cannot deal with the puerile greed and selfishness that is at the core of Libertarianism.

My point is not an ad hominem attack. I am pointing out that every post you make carries non-verbal messages of ridicule and bitter partisanship.

This is not a personal attack.

 

[Derideo_Te]

It seems I am not alone in my doubts about the level of sincerity in your attempt at serious, honest debate.

Haven't encountered a single Libertarian yet who can honestly explain how the stated policies of their party are going to work in practice without causing massive hardship to We the People.

Instead they just utter ad homs like yours because they cannot deal with the puerile greed and selfishness that is at the core of Libertarianism.

My point is not an ad hominem attack. I am pointing out that every post you make carries non-verbal messages of ridicule and bitter partisanship.

This is not a personal attack.

Your failure to substantiate your allegation as well as your consistent failure to support your Libertarianism are not my problem.

 

[Correll]

It seems I am not alone in my doubts about the level of sincerity in your attempt at serious, honest debate.

Haven't encountered a single Libertarian yet who can honestly explain how the stated policies of their party are going to work in practice without causing massive hardship to We the People.

Instead they just utter ad homs like yours because they cannot deal with the puerile greed and selfishness that is at the core of Libertarianism.

My point is not an ad hominem attack. I am pointing out that every post you make carries non-verbal messages of ridicule and bitter partisanship.

This is not a personal attack.

Your failure to substantiate your allegation as well as your consistent failure to support your Libertarianism are not my problem.

Who is that you have as an avatar?