Libertarians Are The True Political Moderates

[KNB]

So what would Libertologists do about 9/11?

 

[Bfgrn]

Libertarians want government limited to those functions which only government can do. Most of us would generally agree with police, military, civil and criminal courts, roads, management of limited resources and recognition of property rights. I am not referring to anarchists who want no government here who like calling themselves libertarians, I am referring to the masses of us who want government limited, not eliminated.

Fiscal polices. We want taxes, but we want them low, flat and for the good of the people as a whole and not used for income redistribution. The left are the extremists here not only punishing success and harming employers, but even using tax COLLECTION as a welfare program with refundable tax credits. We are moderates, taxes should be reasonable and to fund the government, not implement social policy. And spending should be within our means.

Social policies. Socons go to church (or other religious institutions) then go to government to implement morality by force. Clearly they are the extremists. Libertarians believe they should have the right to persuade people to live moral lives, they should not have the right to force their morality on them. We are, the moderates.

NeoCons. We want the military used for the defense of the United States. We don't want to be policeman to the world like the right, we also don't blame our troops for the failures of our politicians like the left. And we don't want them in everyone's back yard, like both sides do. We are moderates, protect and defend, don't use force to make other's decisions just like we don't want government making our decisions here.

Republicans and Democrats are just so deep into the question of what government can do to impose their social and fiscal wills on us, they have stopped even asking the question, should government even do that? Do we have the right to make that choice for everyone and use force to impose it on all our citizens? Libertarians are the moderates, that is the first question we ask, that is the right question to answer before proceeding any further.

Who would have thought Vladimir Putin's Russia was 'libertarian'...

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesn’t sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you don’t know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

However, these government policies are generally matched by the views of Ivan Six-Pack. We had been led to believe by pinko sociology teachers in college that communism taught progressive views on gender, race, immigration and class, so it therefore came as a shock to find when I moved here that after 80 years of Marxist indoctrination, young ladies in Russia often reject feminism, men ooze with unrepentant machismo, and the population appears to generally support a penal code that could have been based on Dostoyevsky’s work.

 

[dblack]

So what would Libertologists do about 9/11?

It would have never happened if libertarians were in charge.

 

[kaz]

We the People are a collective,we elect people among us or appoint those among us with leadership qualities to lead us. So we the people are the government. I agree with libertarians on some stuff,gun laws,most drug laws,staying out of other countries business etc. Just don't agree on just doing what each individual wants and that's it. I think everyone has a responsibility and a want to help each other out. I don't think because someone is poorer or not as well off or not as politically connected they should be left out to die. I don't think deregulation is good for people at all! Its great for corporations but horrible for the people I think free trade destroys our economy and puts people out of jobs so corporations can ship their companies overseas so they can pay less wages and have less safety regulations than they do here.

So, you believe in things that aren't true, and you call me crazy because I point out the facts that contradict your belief system.

DAVIES AND MCCARL: How big business benefits from regulation - Washington Times

Did you think all that money in politics was there just because large corporations were just such nice guys? Regulation can keep competition out of business...

LOL, so you believe that businesses control government to thwart competition, and you want more government. Liar, you don't believe that. If you did, you would be a ... wait for it ... libertarian ...

Keeping government small so there is less government to peddle influence is a key libertarian concept. Anyone who says they think government is controlled by corporations and therefore they want more government because they hate corporations is just a liar. You want the handouts. It's about the $$$. Which is why you call a libertarian a right winger when the only thing we agree about is $$$. That's the only issue that matters to you. The rest are just excuses.

 

[NYcarbineer]

OK, what's the moderate position on gun rights, compared to the libertarian position?

Are they essentially the same?

 

[Kosh]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3hY1eagq88]Reagan Warned Us About Obama - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PaintMyHouse]

So, you believe in things that aren't true, and you call me crazy because I point out the facts that contradict your belief system.

DAVIES AND MCCARL: How big business benefits from regulation - Washington Times

Did you think all that money in politics was there just because large corporations were just such nice guys? Regulation can keep competition out of business...

LOL, so you believe that businesses control government to thwart competition, and you want more government. Liar, you don't believe that. If you did, you would be a ... wait for it ... libertarian ...

Keeping government small so there is less government to peddle influence is a key libertarian concept. Anyone who says they think government is controlled by corporations and therefore they want more government because they hate corporations is just a liar. You want the handouts. It's about the $$$. Which is why you call a libertarian a right winger when the only thing we agree about is $$$. That's the only issue that matters to you. The rest are just excuses.

You should try not telling me what I think, you never get it right.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, you believe in things that aren't true, and you call me crazy because I point out the facts that contradict your belief system.

DAVIES AND MCCARL: How big business benefits from regulation - Washington Times

Did you think all that money in politics was there just because large corporations were just such nice guys? Regulation can keep competition out of business...

LOL, so you believe that businesses control government to thwart competition, and you want more government. Liar, you don't believe that. If you did, you would be a ... wait for it ... libertarian ...

.

Do you support government anti-trust intervention or not?

 

[kaz]

No, Japan attacked us, and just missed the timing on declaring war on us.

And 59 years later so did Afghanistan. You might have heard about it, it was all over the news. People generally refer to it as "9/11."

That was the work of a terrorist, not a government. That was also all over the news.

So government abetting a terrorist attack isn't an attack? How does that make sense even in your pedestrian mind?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

OK, what's the moderate position on gun rights, compared to the libertarian position?

Are they essentially the same?

One says you have the right, within reason. The other says you have the right, and what's "reason"?

 

[kaz]

So what would Libertologists do about 9/11?

As I keep saying, blast the crap out of Al Qaeda and the Taliban and make them pay many times over. We would not nation build in Afghanistan.

 

[kaz]

Libertarians want government limited to those functions which only government can do. Most of us would generally agree with police, military, civil and criminal courts, roads, management of limited resources and recognition of property rights. I am not referring to anarchists who want no government here who like calling themselves libertarians, I am referring to the masses of us who want government limited, not eliminated.

Fiscal polices. We want taxes, but we want them low, flat and for the good of the people as a whole and not used for income redistribution. The left are the extremists here not only punishing success and harming employers, but even using tax COLLECTION as a welfare program with refundable tax credits. We are moderates, taxes should be reasonable and to fund the government, not implement social policy. And spending should be within our means.

Social policies. Socons go to church (or other religious institutions) then go to government to implement morality by force. Clearly they are the extremists. Libertarians believe they should have the right to persuade people to live moral lives, they should not have the right to force their morality on them. We are, the moderates.

NeoCons. We want the military used for the defense of the United States. We don't want to be policeman to the world like the right, we also don't blame our troops for the failures of our politicians like the left. And we don't want them in everyone's back yard, like both sides do. We are moderates, protect and defend, don't use force to make other's decisions just like we don't want government making our decisions here.

Republicans and Democrats are just so deep into the question of what government can do to impose their social and fiscal wills on us, they have stopped even asking the question, should government even do that? Do we have the right to make that choice for everyone and use force to impose it on all our citizens? Libertarians are the moderates, that is the first question we ask, that is the right question to answer before proceeding any further.

Who would have thought Vladimir Putin's Russia was 'libertarian'...

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesn’t sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you don’t know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

However, these government policies are generally matched by the views of Ivan Six-Pack. We had been led to believe by pinko sociology teachers in college that communism taught progressive views on gender, race, immigration and class, so it therefore came as a shock to find when I moved here that after 80 years of Marxist indoctrination, young ladies in Russia often reject feminism, men ooze with unrepentant machismo, and the population appears to generally support a penal code that could have been based on Dostoyevsky’s work.

Putin is libertarian? Out of the mind of an idiot...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

And 59 years later so did Afghanistan. You might have heard about it, it was all over the news. People generally refer to it as "9/11."

That was the work of a terrorist, not a government. That was also all over the news.

So government abetting a terrorist attack isn't an attack? How does that make sense even in your pedestrian mind?

It makes sense if you blame the person who actually did the deed, not everyone who might have agreed with him, but didn't.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Cuntumacious.....big GOV means a big IRS in everyone's life, high taxes, large regulatory agencies messing with people/companies, large GOV departments like Education wasting people's money, etc.

One doesn't need a large GOV to maintain a strong military, asswipe. The DoD is outlined in the US Constitution, the Dept of Education, etc aren't thus should be downsized to a point where the DoD gets the majority of funding from tax revenues.

Tax revenues are what drives the GOV, asswipe. High taxes is different than high tax revenues. If I stimulate the economy with a 5% tax rate and bring in more REVENUE than a 10% tax rate, that is what conservatives like me with an Economics degree and MBA push for compared to knuckle-dragging scum like you.

You see asswipe, grow the economy and jobs with a low tax RATE and generate enough tax REVENUE to support a strong national defense while downsizing the rest of GOV in DC that is not supported in the US CONSTITUTION....ever heard of that document?

You know what's scary, dude? Everything you said here is ... libertarian ...

That is conservative doctrine, which the so-called libertarians are trying to claim as their own policy and belief.

 

[kaz]

Did you think all that money in politics was there just because large corporations were just such nice guys? Regulation can keep competition out of business...

LOL, so you believe that businesses control government to thwart competition, and you want more government. Liar, you don't believe that. If you did, you would be a ... wait for it ... libertarian ...

Keeping government small so there is less government to peddle influence is a key libertarian concept. Anyone who says they think government is controlled by corporations and therefore they want more government because they hate corporations is just a liar. You want the handouts. It's about the $$$. Which is why you call a libertarian a right winger when the only thing we agree about is $$$. That's the only issue that matters to you. The rest are just excuses.

You should try not telling me what I think, you never get it right.

You don't think, you post reactionary drivel which is why you constantly contradict yourself. You also can't read and process what you wrote, though in fairness you don't read and process what anyone else writes either.

You said corporations spend money to thwart competition.

That is true.

Yet you endlessly advocate endless growth in government, you're an authoritarian leftist.

Which means you are not only making it up as you go, you're a liar. No one would advocate growth in government if they believed government to be corrupt.

I do believe government is corrupt, so I want it smaller. For once, try to think about it.

 

[KNB]

So what would Libertologists do about 9/11?

As I keep saying, blast the crap out of Al Qaeda and the Taliban and make them pay many times over. We would not nation build in Afghanistan.

That's your plan? That sounds like Bush's plan minus any effort to help them after bombing the shit out of them.

Do you even know who you're at war with? "al-Qaeda and the Taliban", right? How many times in the past ten years has the US killed or captured al-Qaeda or the Taliban's number 1, number 2, or number 3, or number 4, or 5, or 6 person? Your plan involves mass killing of innocent people without any humanitarian effort in the aftermath. That's beyond sadistic. That is actually much worse than Bush's plan.

 

[Bfgrn]

And I promise to support those functions just as soon as I determine which ones the government can do best.

But we are by definition EXTREMISTS, we support FREEDOM 100% - no ifs buts or howevers. NO COMPROMISES.



Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater (R-AZ)

I did say what ones I believe those are, and in discussions with libertarians, they are pretty generally the ones that are supported by libertarians. So that would give you a place for a more specific comment. I am referring to limited government libertarians, not no government anarchists, which I did state.

Well, we have traveled so far to the left that even minarchists are considered "extremists" . How many people here support CONSTITUTIONAL TAXES? How many people here support reducing the size of government to those SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED?

Over the last 40 years we have moved to the right, not the left.

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the Republican party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."
Barry Goldwater

 

[PaintMyHouse]

LOL, so you believe that businesses control government to thwart competition, and you want more government. Liar, you don't believe that. If you did, you would be a ... wait for it ... libertarian ...

Keeping government small so there is less government to peddle influence is a key libertarian concept. Anyone who says they think government is controlled by corporations and therefore they want more government because they hate corporations is just a liar. You want the handouts. It's about the $$$. Which is why you call a libertarian a right winger when the only thing we agree about is $$$. That's the only issue that matters to you. The rest are just excuses.

You should try not telling me what I think, you never get it right.

You don't think, you post reactionary drivel which is why you constantly contradict yourself. You also can't read and process what you wrote, though in fairness you don't read and process what anyone else writes either.

You said corporations spend money to thwart competition.

That is true.

Yet you endlessly advocate endless growth in government, you're an authoritarian leftist.

Which means you are not only making it up as you go, you're a liar. No one would advocate growth in government if they believed government to be corrupt.

I do believe government is corrupt, so I want it smaller. For once, try to think about it.

Again, you should try not telling me what I think, you never get it right.

 

[Kosh]

Cuntumacious.....big GOV means a big IRS in everyone's life, high taxes, large regulatory agencies messing with people/companies, large GOV departments like Education wasting people's money, etc.

One doesn't need a large GOV to maintain a strong military, asswipe. The DoD is outlined in the US Constitution, the Dept of Education, etc aren't thus should be downsized to a point where the DoD gets the majority of funding from tax revenues.

Tax revenues are what drives the GOV, asswipe. High taxes is different than high tax revenues. If I stimulate the economy with a 5% tax rate and bring in more REVENUE than a 10% tax rate, that is what conservatives like me with an Economics degree and MBA push for compared to knuckle-dragging scum like you.

You see asswipe, grow the economy and jobs with a low tax RATE and generate enough tax REVENUE to support a strong national defense while downsizing the rest of GOV in DC that is not supported in the US CONSTITUTION....ever heard of that document?

You know what's scary, dude? Everything you said here is ... libertarian ...

That is conservative doctrine, which the so-called libertarians are trying to claim as their own policy and belief.

Says the far left Obama drone..

Stop following your far left masters and become a true independent.

Break the chains of political slavery to the far left.

 

[kaz]

That was the work of a terrorist, not a government. That was also all over the news.

So government abetting a terrorist attack isn't an attack? How does that make sense even in your pedestrian mind?

It makes sense if you blame the person who actually did the deed, not everyone who might have agreed with him, but didn't.

So that's what you call Al Qaeda being based in and supported by the Taliban, they "agreed" with them?

So the guy who drives a getaway car just "agreed" with the bank robber, they didn't commit a crime?

LOL, I love to keep you talking. Mommas, don't let your babies grow up to be Liberals...