Libertarians Are The True Political Moderates
- Thread starter kaz
- Start date
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 308,482
- 263,733
- 3,615
Start with an Article and section....then admit that you lied
Dad2three
Gold Member
LOL.
There is NO such thing as effective Gov, never has been.
But because of racism, god gays and guns they got you voting with them and against yourself. Schmuck.
Too funny
I am married to a black woman, my sister is married to her partner, I practice no religion, and I can knock a Rooster out of the air at 50-60 yards.....
You?
You are nothing more than a cliche spouting lemming who depends on the Gov for his/her every need.
Now....you go ahead and vote for Hillary.
Yea and Mr. Sterling of the Clippers likes black chicks too.
And hey, I know gays who can't wait for the GOP to open up their tent and let them in. White rich men aren't the only ones who get to be assholes or fools. Look at you.
I see the value in MY government. I don't want it to go away because government is the referee. If you don't think class warfare exists and the rich are winning, wake up white boy.
You remind me of Billy Bob Thorton in that movie where he was ******* Holly Berry. Make her feel good!!!
NOW I get it....you jus anotha Nigga with a hard on for ******
Go get your food stamps and just thank me boy.
Among the 254 counties where food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011, Republican Mitt Romney won 213 of them in last years presidential election, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data compiled by Bloomberg. Kentuckys Owsley County, which backed Romney with 81 percent of its vote, has the largest proportion of food stamp recipients among those that he carried.
Food Stamp Cut Backed by Republicans With Voters on Rolls - Bloomberg
LOL
TakeAStepBack
Gold Member
- Mar 29, 2011
- 13,935
- 1,742
- 245
Clearly, there are those who still do not know what libertarianism means. They just throw any ol' horse shit at the wall and hope something sticks.
- Thread starter
- #625
Your Marxist rhetoric is just crap, it doesn't work that way except in Karl and your minds. Free markets are better for every one except leaches who don't want to work.
And again, you're a liar. If you believed government is controlled by the rich, the last think you would want is MORE government. It's just your empty rhetoric.
- Thread starter
- #626
No, I mean indoctrinating them in socialism and worship of government, which our schools clearly and consistently do.
Swish. OK, think about it. I'm talking about how government indoctrinates the children in government. That I have another option completely misses the point. Liberal teachers are indoctrinating our children that liberalism is good, anything else is bad. I went to the public schools for 10 out of the 13 years from K-12, and obviously the indoctrination didn't hold. Sadly, like the monotonous liberal tone of the liberal media, it does overwhelmingly work. Like you, the majority of kids come out of school believing that lawyers know all and knowing zero about economics.
*** Note: Skipped a bunch of Marxist rhetoric, you do love that.
- Thread starter
- #627
Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. Fascism is one step removed from socialism where industry is technically in private hands, but planning is done by the central government. Which is why Hitler lead the ... Socialist ... party in Germany ...
LOL, you are using fascism completely wrong and say we don't know what you are saying. Racism isn't right or left, either can be or neither can be, that's your bigtry. Fascism is unambiguously left. Nationalism isn't right or left. Liberals like saying that, but Stalin was as nationalist as anyone. With Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, nationalism has been a far greater issue on the left, at least in terms of the number of people you kill.
- Thread starter
- #628
LOL, once again misinterpreting a Jefferson quote to make him sound like what you are and he isn't, Marxist.
- Thread starter
- #629
And yet, you want to make government more powerful. You're a liar, you don't believe what you said. Oddly the one thing you say that is actually correct turns out to be a lie...
- Thread starter
- #630
Baseless talking point
- Thread starter
- #631
What field of economics agrees with you libertard nuts?
No one likes Libertarians nor do we want them running this country.
Let me ask you, how come the tea baggers are able to get elected all across the country but all you guys have is a cult lunatic following that gets Ron Paul less than 1% of the vote?
If you guys are right, start running for local and state government then for national government and start winning over hearts and minds.
Let me tell you something. Thom Hartmann has Libertarians on a lot and they discuss what they agree on and what they disagree on. You guys can call us socialists all you want. No one likes your political philosophy. At least not enough to win you any elections. So go **** yourselves.
PLUS 10...
Um...hey guys...get a room. I don't condemn your orientation, but I don't want to watch it...
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,496
- 245
Marxists and Marketists...cut from the same cloth
The closest twin we have in America today to the communists and Marxists in Russia are the 'Marketists'; conservatives, libertarians and 'free marketeers' who have turned government nonintervention and 'laissez faire' into a religion. It has created 'malaise faire'
If libertarians are correct in claiming that they understand how best to organize a modern society, how is it that not a single country in the world in the early twenty-first century is organized along libertarian lines?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Myths-Free-Market-Kenneth-Friedman/dp/0875862233"]MYTHS OF THE FREE MARKET[/ame] - Blind Faith
The gap between rich and poor is now the widest in US history. This is disturbing, for if history is any guide we have unwittingly placed ourselves in grave danger.
Over the last millennium Europe has witnessed long cycles of widening and narrowing economic disparity. In each cycle, once the gap between the rich and the rest widened beyond a certain point, it presaged decline and disaster for all of society, the rich as well as the poor. Could we be seeing the first tremors of a new cycle, the outliers of the next menacing storm? In recent decades, many US citizens have come under increasing financial pressure. Since the 1970s, our number of working poor has increased sharply. Nearly all of our much-vaunted newly-created wealth has gone to the richest.
For a country that has prided itself on its resourcefulness, the inability to address such problems suggests something deeper at work. There is something, powerful but insidious, that blinds us to the causes of these problems and undermines our ability to respond. That something is a set of beliefs, comparable to religious beliefs in earlier ages, about the nature of economies and societies. These beliefs imply the impropriety of government intervention either in social contexts (libertarianism) or in economic affairs (laissez faire).
The faithful unquestioningly embrace the credo that the doctrine of nonintervention has generated our most venerated institutions: our democracy, the best possible political system; and our free market economy, the best possible economic system. But despite our devotion to the dogmas that libertarianism and free market economics are the foundation of all that we cherish most deeply, they have failed us and are responsible for our present malaise.
The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).
The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809).
The closest twin we have in America today to the communists and Marxists in Russia are the 'Marketists'; conservatives, libertarians and 'free marketeers' who have turned government nonintervention and 'laissez faire' into a religion. It has created 'malaise faire'
If libertarians are correct in claiming that they understand how best to organize a modern society, how is it that not a single country in the world in the early twenty-first century is organized along libertarian lines?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Myths-Free-Market-Kenneth-Friedman/dp/0875862233"]MYTHS OF THE FREE MARKET[/ame] - Blind Faith
The gap between rich and poor is now the widest in US history. This is disturbing, for if history is any guide we have unwittingly placed ourselves in grave danger.
Over the last millennium Europe has witnessed long cycles of widening and narrowing economic disparity. In each cycle, once the gap between the rich and the rest widened beyond a certain point, it presaged decline and disaster for all of society, the rich as well as the poor. Could we be seeing the first tremors of a new cycle, the outliers of the next menacing storm? In recent decades, many US citizens have come under increasing financial pressure. Since the 1970s, our number of working poor has increased sharply. Nearly all of our much-vaunted newly-created wealth has gone to the richest.
For a country that has prided itself on its resourcefulness, the inability to address such problems suggests something deeper at work. There is something, powerful but insidious, that blinds us to the causes of these problems and undermines our ability to respond. That something is a set of beliefs, comparable to religious beliefs in earlier ages, about the nature of economies and societies. These beliefs imply the impropriety of government intervention either in social contexts (libertarianism) or in economic affairs (laissez faire).
The faithful unquestioningly embrace the credo that the doctrine of nonintervention has generated our most venerated institutions: our democracy, the best possible political system; and our free market economy, the best possible economic system. But despite our devotion to the dogmas that libertarianism and free market economics are the foundation of all that we cherish most deeply, they have failed us and are responsible for our present malaise.
The pieties of libertarianism and free markets sound pretty, but they cannot withstand even a cursory inspection. Libertarianism does not support democracy; taken to an extreme, it entails the law of the jungle. If government never interferes, we could all get away with murder. Alternatively, if the libertarian position is not to be taken to an extreme, where should it stop? What is the difference between no government and minimal government? Attempts to justify libertarianism, even a less than extreme position, have failed. Laissez faire, or free market economics, characterized by minimal or no government intervention, has a history that is long but undistinguished. Just as the negative effects of a high fever do not certify the health benefits of the opposite extreme, hypothermia, the dismal failure of communism, seeking complete government control of the economy, does not certify the economic benefits of the opposite extreme, total economic non-intervention.
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).
The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.
Thomas Jefferson - Letter to Larkin Smith (1809).
Contumacious
Radical Freedom
Since , at least 1909, Americans have been brainwashed in government schools to accept government supremacy.
After 12 years of such mind control they will accept totalitarianism , no questions asked.
Last edited:
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,496
- 245
As we moved toward an ideology driven 'free market' ONLY belief economically, and away from a mixed economy, the results have been disastrous.
Over the past half-century we have seen lower tax rates and less government interference. We have come a long way toward free enterprise from the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since the Kennedy Administration we have reduced the marginal tax rate on our highest incomes from the 91% that remained in effect from the 1940s into the mid-1960s (and a brief peak of 94% during World War II) to 28% in the 1986 tax code. Yet our economic growth has slowed.
Decade/Average Real GNP/per Capita GNP Growth
1960-1969 4.18% 2.79%
1970-1979 3.18% 2.09%
1980-1989 2.75% 1.81%
1990-1994 1.95% 0.79%
(Maddison, Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992 p. .183, 197)
Despite our adoption of the most enlightened free market policies, our performance resembles that of a declining Great Britain in the late nineteenth century.
Free market apologists contend the closer we come to pure laissez faire, the better. But there is little evidence for even this position. The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Over the past half-century we have seen lower tax rates and less government interference. We have come a long way toward free enterprise from the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Since the Kennedy Administration we have reduced the marginal tax rate on our highest incomes from the 91% that remained in effect from the 1940s into the mid-1960s (and a brief peak of 94% during World War II) to 28% in the 1986 tax code. Yet our economic growth has slowed.
Decade/Average Real GNP/per Capita GNP Growth
1960-1969 4.18% 2.79%
1970-1979 3.18% 2.09%
1980-1989 2.75% 1.81%
1990-1994 1.95% 0.79%
(Maddison, Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992 p. .183, 197)
Despite our adoption of the most enlightened free market policies, our performance resembles that of a declining Great Britain in the late nineteenth century.
Free market apologists contend the closer we come to pure laissez faire, the better. But there is little evidence for even this position. The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
- Thread starter
- #635
People who believe in free markets are the closest we have to Marxists in America. Mkay....
Oh, those of you in the Democratic party, who advocate the planks of the communist manifesto and justify them with the rhetoric from the Communist manifesto are not...
Up is down, night is day, left is right and you're a rocket scientist!
- Thread starter
- #636
The more and more government controls our markets, the freer you think they are, and that freedom is what is causing our market problems.
Well, apparently libertarians are not the only ones supporting legalization of drugs around here...
Dad2three
Gold Member
Like all Utopian delusions, Libertarianism is a fairy tale
The greatest failure in the Libertarian, Tea Party, and Republican Party philosophy is this absurd notion that getting rid of regulations and restrictions of government on business....people, human beings, will always do the right thing. There are currently very few regulations on burning coal in China....the result is a high-level emergency and health crisis that has the Chinese government scrambling to put together legislation that can be enforced BY GOVERNMENT.
Government also exists to take care of and protect its citizens against other citizens. Purist Randian philosophy is just the Law of the Jungle in a tie and a coat.
Dad2three
Gold Member
The more and more government controls our markets, the freer you think they are, and that freedom is what is causing our market problems.
Well, apparently libertarians are not the only ones supporting legalization of drugs around here...
Conservative economic theories have never worked and never will. You can say "tax cuts create jobs" but that's just blather. Show me when it has worked and then we'll talk.
Dad2three
Gold Member
That is the problem, conservatives very seldom tell you their intentions. They talk nuances "job creation" "deficit reduction", "Austerity", They just can not say it loud and proud: I WILL GIVE YOUR GOVERNMENT TO THE RICH AND POWERFUL, (because is unfair that The Middle Class make any money at all and corporations do not get to keep all of it) SO I CAN GIVE IT TO THOSE WHO ALREADY HAVE MOST OF THE MONEY FROM BUYING CONGRESSMEN AND DEREGULATING INDUSTRY.
Dad2three
Gold Member
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Most Americans say: operation successful, 90% or MAGA supports it (on Islamic Republic)- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
putin lawmaker claims Ukraine is using “Terminator robots” in combat- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 0
-
March 15 is the international day to recognize Islamophobia- Started by TroglocratsRdumb
- Replies: 7
