The Big Flaw in Libertarianism

[dblack]

that is what you complain about libertarians? You don't care that they believe no government above county level should have any power? That no criminal laws should exist and that local courts should hear all cases as if they were personal liability claims?

wtf??

 

[The Rabbi]

Be happy to.
BP - Gulf Oil Spill
Pacific Gas & Electric Guilty multiple counts endangering public.
Skadden Arps Guilty multiple counts discrimination
General Electric Multpile counts neglect, public endangerment because of defective products.
Exxon Valdez and so on
Ford Pinto
GM Corvair
Chrysler Ugly cars
Pfizer Thousands of deaths /perm injuries
Eli Lilly as above
Kaiser Thousands of denial of benefits resulted in death / perm injury
Blue Cross As above
Most of the Fortune 100
Which of those companies has been found guilty in a court of law, for harming or killing people.
Multiple times.
All of them

Anyone can list a bunch of companies.
Show how this list proves your assertion.

So all of those companies have been found guilty of the above (okay, maybe not Chrysler). Does anyone really believe that those companies would have spent the millions of dollars necessary to make their products or practices safer / fairer without government imposed consequences? The only people I know who do, are Libertarians.

Let me make this clear: I THINK WE OVER-REGULATE IN MANY CASES. Is that clear? Good.

But the idea that "The Market" will for example, prevent drug companies from literally killing people, is beyond naive. yet that is exactly what many libertarians claim.

Now, rather than constantly dodging, deflecting etc... perhaps you or other Libertarians would like to provide all those examples to the contrary?

I do give you credit btw. No petty insults or projecting inaccurate extremes. That certainly sets you far above the bottom-feeders who often have nothing but such prattle as responses.

The biggest consequences to any misdeed by business are lawsuits by victims. And yes, the lawsuits and fear of lawsuits, drive a lot of safety concerns. And none of that has to be done by regulation.

 

[IndependntLogic]

So your complaint is that if a company has one dissatisfied customer they won't go out of business, and therefore the free market theory is wrong?
Really?
That's pretty ******* simplistic. Even for you.
And that isn't a narco-libertarian idea. That's a conservative idea.

So let's see. You can't tell the difference between one customer being dissatisfied equate to thousands of people dying.
Yes, having seen your other post, I could see where that would be difficult for you.

What do thousands of people dying (and a gross exaggeration, btw) have to do with the free market?

A gross exaggeration? Want to bet I can prove it's not? If I can't prove it, I'll put Rabbi is the Greatest or whatever you want on my signature.
If I can prove it, you put "Obama is the Greatest President in History and Liberals are Obviously the Most intellegent people on Earth!"
Time to Cut & Run junior...

Once you let me know if the wager is on, I'll educate you on what that has to do with the free market.

 

[The Rabbi]

So let's see. You can't tell the difference between one customer being dissatisfied equate to thousands of people dying.
Yes, having seen your other post, I could see where that would be difficult for you.

What do thousands of people dying (and a gross exaggeration, btw) have to do with the free market?

A gross exaggeration? Want to bet I can prove it's not? If I can't prove it, I'll put Rabbi is the Greatest or whatever you want on my signature.
If I can prove it, you put "Obama is the Greatest President in History and Liberals are Obviously the Most intellegent people on Earth!"
Time to Cut & Run junior...

Once you let me know if the wager is on, I'll educate you on what that has to do with the free market.

It doesn't make any difference. It is an exaggeration. But even if it were true, so what? Industrial accidents happen all the time. It is irrelevant to whatever point you are futilely trying to make.

 

[Ed Spacer]

The problem is when regulation interferes wuth the cyclical fiduciary growth cycle due to tge variable of those in control of such regulation working for their own interests,and in larger part,pushing a greater agenda rather than the purity of such guidance without opinion.

 

[IndependntLogic]

What do thousands of people dying (and a gross exaggeration, btw) have to do with the free market?

A gross exaggeration? Want to bet I can prove it's not? If I can't prove it, I'll put Rabbi is the Greatest or whatever you want on my signature.
If I can prove it, you put "Obama is the Greatest President in History and Liberals are Obviously the Most intellegent people on Earth!"
Time to Cut & Run junior...

Once you let me know if the wager is on, I'll educate you on what that has to do with the free market.

It doesn't make any difference. It is an exaggeration. But even if it were true, so what? Industrial accidents happen all the time. It is irrelevant to whatever point you are futilely trying to make.

Knew you'd cower from that one!

Take a guess how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards for clinical trials and reporting?
Yes, the sound you hear would that of you being owned.
And yes, thousands of lives are saved through regulation. Also BILLIONS of dollars. Obviously it doesn't work all the time but there are good regulations. Duh.

Gotta love the "But if it were true that companies kill thousands of people, so what?" thing, btw. Reveals much.

 

[Ed Spacer]

Socialism has worked its fingers in a disguise to scammed american in the form of overregulation to suit its greater agenda.

 

[Ed Spacer]

For any sort of a true check and balance to be in place,agenda and opinionation should be eliminated.the liberals again,are using this as "LAW"to push,again,its agenda.

 

[IndependntLogic]

For any sort of a true check and balance to be in place,agenda and opinionation should be eliminated.the liberals again,are using this as "LAW"to push,again,its agenda.

Is that just your opinion or is it also your agenda?

 

[midcan5]

Libertarianism (L) is the modern Marxism without the good stuff and I guess some of the bad stuff. What I find particularly interesting and hopeless about L is it has reduced many youthful people to worshippers of markets and money and things, that while necessary, hardly count as positive or moral values. But I've written and posted lots on L and a few links are below.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/189696-libertarian-flame.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/50564-libertarianism-in-a-nutshell-ii.html
Why is libertarianism wrong?


"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke The American Conservative -- Marxism of the Right


"Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them." Tony Judt 'Ill Fares the Land'

"Libertarian solutions favored by the political right have contributed even more directly to the erosion of social responsibilities and valued forms of communal life, particularly in the UK and the US. Far from producing beneficial communal consequences, the invisible hand of unregulated free-market capitalism undermines the family (e.g., few corporations provide enough leave to parents of newborn children), disrupts local communities (e.g., following plant closings or the shifting of corporate headquarters), and corrupts the political process (e.g., US politicians are often dependent on economic interest groups for their political survival, with the consequence that they no longer represent the community at large). Moreover, the valorization of greed in the Thatcher/Reagan era justified the extension of instrumental considerations governing relationships in the marketplace into spheres previously informed by a sense of uncalculated reciprocity and civil obligation. This trend has been reinforced by increasing globalization, which pressures states into conforming to the dictates of the international marketplace." Daniel Bell in Communitarianism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[Ed Spacer]

This is why unions SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.and left for the sake of workplace safety..
slackers have no.businesses getting paid the sane as high producers.professional redistribution needs to end.

 

[bripat9643]

There is a theory that seems almost holy to Libertarians and which many posters dodge like hell. So if there are any Libertarians who would like to take a crack at responding directly to a point, I'd like to hear their views. Of course, if they all use the same dodges and analogies I got from another Libertarian, then quit asking why no one takes you guys seriously.
Here it the central economic theory I've heard from Libertarians and why I dispute it:

"The Market Will Correct Itself". They claim if a company is not nice, people won't buy its' products and services, they won't work there and The Magical Market will make the bad ol' company go away! Wrong. It doesn't.
Without government regulation, companies hurt people (e.g. unsafe working conditions, denial of health benefits, toxic dumping, unsafe oil rigs etc...).
They make harmful products (e.g. dangrous drugs, cars that blow up etc...).
They treat employees horribly (e.g. discrimination, wrongful term, etc...).
And no - those companies don't disappear if they are bad because "the Magical Market Corrects All".
The Market does little to correct anything a company does, once it gets big enough. That's just plain fact.
So the biggest flaw I find in Libertarianism is the belief that companies will regulate themselves, if simply left alone. History proves this is not the case.

This is why a strong centralized government and reasonable level of regulation is necessary to the well-being of citizenry.

I would welcome any commentary from Libertarians on this and will not stoop to the petty insults, labeling etc... that the weak use as their only means of debate. However, I will challenge you if your reasoning is flawed! Cheers, FS

So your complaint is that if a company has one dissatisfied customer they won't go out of business, and therefore the free market theory is wrong?
Really?
That's pretty ******* simplistic. Even for you.
And that isn't a narco-libertarian idea. That's a conservative idea.

So let's see. You can't tell the difference between one customer being dissatisfied equate to thousands of people dying.
Yes, having seen your other post, I could see where that would be difficult for you.

What "thousands of people" are you referring to? How many people has the government killed? Apparently you believe that if even on person dies, then capitalism is a failure. That's a standard that no government could live up to, so why should capitalism be held to it? No human institution could possible achieve perfect results, but if capitalism isn't perfect, then turds like you claim it's a failure.

 

[Ed Spacer]

For any sort of a true check and balance to be in place,agenda and opinionation should be eliminated.the liberals again,are using this as "LAW"to push,again,its agenda.

Is that just your opinion or is it also your agenda?

Not an opinion or agenda.its a FACT.

 

[bripat9643]

Knew you'd cower from that one!

Take a guess how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards for clinical trials and reporting? .

Tell us, how many people died from bad drugs prior to the FDA setting standards? One thing we do know is that thalidomide was approved by the FDA. We also know that thousands of people die waiting for the FDA to approve life-saving drugs. So, every life lost due to lack of regulation you have to offset with the lives lost because of regulation.

 

[dblack]

"The Market Will Correct Itself". They claim if a company is not nice, people won't buy its' products and services, they won't work there and The Magical Market will make the bad ol' company go away! Wrong. It doesn't.
Without government regulation, companies hurt people (e.g. unsafe working conditions, denial of health benefits, toxic dumping, unsafe oil rigs etc...).
They make harmful products (e.g. dangrous drugs, cars that blow up etc...).
They treat employees horribly (e.g. discrimination, wrongful term, etc...).
And no - those companies don't disappear if they are bad because "the Magical Market Corrects All".
The Market does little to correct anything a company does, once it gets big enough. That's just plain fact.
So the biggest flaw I find in Libertarianism is the belief that companies will regulate themselves, if simply left alone. History proves this is not the case.

This is why a strong centralized government and reasonable level of regulation is necessary to the well-being of citizenry.

I would welcome any commentary from Libertarians on this and will not stoop to the petty insults, labeling etc... that the weak use as their only means of debate. However, I will challenge you if your reasoning is flawed! Cheers, FS

Cool thread.

Mostly what I see here is disagreement over terms. The "self regulating market" doesn't resolve bad actors. It's simply an observation that free markets optimize toward a balance of the conflicting desires of the players involved. But that mechanism requires laws that prevent fraud and punish businesses that hurt people.

 

[bripat9643]

So all of those companies have been found guilty of the above (okay, maybe not Chrysler). Does anyone really believe that those companies would have spent the millions of dollars necessary to make their products or practices safer / fairer without government imposed consequences? The only people I know who do, are Libertarians..

First prove that these companies caused anyone's death. Second prove that goverment would have done any better.

 

[Paulie]

There is a theory that seems almost holy to Libertarians and which many posters dodge like hell. So if there are any Libertarians who would like to take a crack at responding directly to a point, I'd like to hear their views. Of course, if they all use the same dodges and analogies I got from another Libertarian, then quit asking why no one takes you guys seriously.
Here it the central economic theory I've heard from Libertarians and why I dispute it:

"The Market Will Correct Itself". They claim if a company is not nice, people won't buy its' products and services, they won't work there and The Magical Market will make the bad ol' company go away! Wrong. It doesn't.
Without government regulation, companies hurt people (e.g. unsafe working conditions, denial of health benefits, toxic dumping, unsafe oil rigs etc...).
They make harmful products (e.g. dangrous drugs, cars that blow up etc...).
They treat employees horribly (e.g. discrimination, wrongful term, etc...).
And no - those companies don't disappear if they are bad because "the Magical Market Corrects All".
The Market does little to correct anything a company does, once it gets big enough. That's just plain fact.
So the biggest flaw I find in Libertarianism is the belief that companies will regulate themselves, if simply left alone. History proves this is not the case.

This is why a strong centralized government and reasonable level of regulation is necessary to the well-being of citizenry.

I would welcome any commentary from Libertarians on this and will not stoop to the petty insults, labeling etc... that the weak use as their only means of debate. However, I will challenge you if your reasoning is flawed! Cheers, FS

Capitalism is self-regulating... We don't live under a true capitalist economy - our economy is Keynesian, or a mixed economy.

IMO, I don't believe the United States has really ever practiced true capitalism. Obviously back in the day there was less government intervention but there was still some intervention.

Not to mention, even as a libertarian I do believe in some common sense intervention - like monopoly laws.

Theoretically capitalism is a self-regulating economic model..

Monopolies still exist and mostly BECAUSE of regulation.

 

[IndependntLogic]

So your complaint is that if a company has one dissatisfied customer they won't go out of business, and therefore the free market theory is wrong?
Really?
That's pretty ******* simplistic. Even for you.
And that isn't a narco-libertarian idea. That's a conservative idea.

So let's see. You can't tell the difference between one customer being dissatisfied equate to thousands of people dying.
Yes, having seen your other post, I could see where that would be difficult for you.

What "thousands of people" are you referring to? How many people has the government killed? Apparently you believe that if even on person dies, then capitalism is a failure. That's a standard that no government could live up to, so why should capitalism be held to it? No human institution could possible achieve perfect results, but if capitalism isn't perfect, then turds like you claim it's a failure.

Um hmmm. Well you're a uh, angry little fellow, aren't you? Not sure how to simplify this enough and doubt it would do any good.
So let's see. The government has killed lots of people! That has nothing to do with the topic.
I am a capitalist. I own a business and employ people. Nothing was discussed about capitalism. There is a difference between Capitalism and Libertarianism. Perhaps you could find a Liberal Elitist to explain it to you. In the meantime, no. I believe that if regulation can prevent thousands of deaths each year, then that is a good thing.
Where did I claim capitalism is a failure? Oh i didn't? Yeah that.
Now. When you hae come out of your hysterics and settled down a bit, perhaps you'd like to discuss whether a reasonable level of regulation is good for the citzenry.

 

[Liberty]

volunteerism. look it up.

Also, let me ask you this:

What makes government so great? The federal government of the 21st century (and most of the 20th) justifies its existence by constantly creating more and more red tape on freedom. That's a fact. Politicians are not serving the people, they are serving themselves. They want to be famous, they are ego maniacs (well 99% of them). If you don't believe me just look at the growth of the tax code. The government is growing in order to justify its own existence. If this is not troublesom then I-Logic, you are out of your mind. As far as markets go, unlike the government pointing a gun at you telling you that you HAVE TO help pay for SOMEONE ELSE'S PROBLEM (like having 30 children), how about the individual decides where their wealth goes? Which is morally acceptable? No one is pointing a gun at a laborers head forcing them to work for a specific company. People are FREE to innovate, create, and do what they want to do with their own lives. If some people don't have the talent to do that then that is what volunteerism is about. THE PEOPLE can take care of THE PEOPLE without the government forcing it on them. Human beings are naturally peaceful creatures...it is government that causes violence and death much more so than individuals living in a state of mutual respect and compromise. The Government's job is outlined in the constitution. Any more than that and well...you have the ******* shitfest we are living through today. Thanks, FDR.

The freedom movement is the only movement in the political world that is apolitical...and we would have it no other way. Limited and localized government is the best way to ensure liberty...i suggest you read Tocqueville sometime.

 

[bripat9643]

So let's see. You can't tell the difference between one customer being dissatisfied equate to thousands of people dying.
Yes, having seen your other post, I could see where that would be difficult for you.

What "thousands of people" are you referring to? How many people has the government killed? Apparently you believe that if even on person dies, then capitalism is a failure. That's a standard that no government could live up to, so why should capitalism be held to it? No human institution could possible achieve perfect results, but if capitalism isn't perfect, then turds like you claim it's a failure.

Um hmmm. Well you're a uh, angry little fellow, aren't you? Not sure how to simplify this enough and doubt it would do any good.
So let's see. The government has killed lots of people! That has nothing to do with the topic.
I am a capitalist. I own a business and employ people. Nothing was discussed about capitalism. There is a difference between Capitalism and Libertarianism. Perhaps you could find a Liberal Elitist to explain it to you. In the meantime, no. I believe that if regulation can prevent thousands of deaths each year, then that is a good thing.
Where did I claim capitalism is a failure? Oh i didn't? Yeah that.
Now. When you hae come out of your hysterics and settled down a bit, perhaps you'd like to discuss whether a reasonable level of regulation is good for the citzenry.

That's a lot of sound and fury that signifies absololutely nothing. You didn't answer a single question I asked. Who are these "thousands of people" you refer to? You reeled off a list of companies you dislike, but you didn't manage to name a single person they supposedly killed.

There is no "reasonable" level of regulation. It's all bad for the citizenry. The tort system is the only thing required to keep corporations in line.