This Is Why We Have Libertarians

You want to justify FDR's notorious EO 9066 and unconstitutional decisions by the S.C. on the basis of Hitler and Putin? WTF?

I’m not justifying it at all. There is absolutely no justification for anything that was done to Japanese Americans or Japanese Canadians during World War II.

When the Canadian immigration minister during WWII was asked how many Jewish refugees Canada was prepared to take in, he famously answered “None is too many”. Every Canadian school child knows that quote. It’s in our history books. Canada has apologized and paid reparations to the Japanese families harmed.

Canada now takes in more refugees from conflict zones and natural disasters coming in our ports of entry than any other first world nation. We have been named the “Most welcoming nation in the world”.

Acknowledging our past mistakes. Apologizing to those we harmed, making sure our children know what happened. Trying not to do it again.
 
I think libertarians are grossly naïve. They think that if left to their own devices people will do the right thing and not take advantage of others or harm or steal from them.
No. We don't think that. Where did you get that idea?
I believe that the vast majority of people are decent and honest, I just want to live a good life. Sadly, there is a sizeable chunk of the population who are lazy, conniving, and greedy and who will take advantage of the honest people.
Not all people in government are like that. But the stereotype exists for a reason.
So laws have to be passed to prevent these dishonest people from taking advantage of others, and defrauding them of their money, or stealing it. Or cutting corners on expensive pollution cleanup, leading causing to cancer and death.
Yep. You seem to be confusing libertarians with anarchists. I've never met a libertarian who thought the above crimes should be legal.
 
No. We don't think that. Where did you get that idea?

Not all people in government are like that. But the stereotype exists for a reason.

Yep. You seem to be confusing libertarians with anarchists. I've never met a libertarian who thought the above crimes should be legal.

I got that idea from every libertarian I’ve ever talked to or heard speak on the Camera campaign trail

The people I referred to as conniving, greedy and lazy are the guys like Donald Trump, and other is at the top of the corporate world who have been allowed to utterly impoverish working people.

These guys will twist every law so every dollar possible will go into their pockets and not into the pocket of some working person or some poor person who might actually need the money. Sea taxi, cab, licensing.

Donald Trump twisted the bankruptcy laws so that he could walk away with millions while his sub trades and investors went broke and his bankers lost hundreds of millions of dollars.

I’ve never met a libertarian who is in favour of labour laws, environmental laws, or any laws that protect consumers from corporations. That’s what the courts are for.
 
The link is just an ad to subscribe to WAPO. I expect it's about abortion but the post is a typical hit an run and fails to explain it.
 
I got that idea from every libertarian I’ve ever talked to or heard speak on the Camera campaign trail
Can you cite examples, or specific quotes? I'm not "demanding evidence", just curious what you're hearing. It seems like a misinterpretation of what's being said.
The people I referred to as conniving, greedy and lazy are the guys like Donald Trump, and other is at the top of the corporate world who have been allowed to utterly impoverish working people.
Yep. Unfortunately, there many of them around
Donald Trump twisted the bankruptcy laws so that he could walk away with millions while his sub trades and investors went broke and his bankers lost hundreds of millions of dollars.
Yep. You're not thinking of a Trump as a libertarian, are you?
I’ve never met a libertarian who is in favour of labour laws
This is mostly true. We favor free trade.
environmental laws
Depends on the laws. Laws that more or less say "thou shalt not pollute" make sense and are appropriate. Laws that say "thou shalt install air cleaners manufactured by the company who has successfully lobbied congress" are another matter.
or any laws that protect consumers from corporations.
Again, libertarians support laws punishing fraud. But laws that mandate conformity in the name of convenience, not so much. For example, laws against false advertising are appropriate, but laws like the EU requirement for those cookie permission popups on all websites are just idiotic annoyances.
 
Can you cite examples, or specific quotes? I'm not "demanding evidence", just curious what you're hearing. It seems like a misinterpretation of what's being said.

Yep. Unfortunately, there many of them around

Yep. You're not thinking of a Trump as a libertarian, are you?

This is mostly true. We favor free trade.

Depends on the laws. Laws that more or less say "thou shalt not pollute" make sense and are appropriate. Laws that say "thou shalt install air cleaners manufactured by the company who has successfully lobbied congress" are another matter.

Again, libertarians support laws punishing fraud. But laws that mandate conformity in the name of convenience, not so much. For example, laws against false advertising are appropriate, but laws like the EU requirement for those cookie permission popups on all websites are just idiotic annoyances.

I’m in favour of free trade true but I’m also in favour of a balance of power, and I believe the “golden rule” favours the owners. “Them that has the gold makes the rules”.

In every jurisdiction, where you have unfettered capitalism, you have high poverty, low wages, and high prices for goods You also need a strong right wing government and few civil liberties to quell the unrest high poverty etc. create. See South America 1970’s.

In the Robber Baron days, rich men owned whiole towns. Workers were paid wages at the mill or the mine, but rented their housing from the Company and bought their goods and supplies from a “company store”, which happily gave them credit. All of the money they earned went back into their employers coffers.

Where are you have well regulated capitalism which balances the power of those with the gold to say no to unsafe conditions or poverty wages. That’s what labour law and tax codes do.
 
I’m in favour of free trade true but I’m also in favour of a balance of power, and I believe the “golden rule” favours the owners. “Them that has the gold makes the rules”.

In every jurisdiction, where you have unfettered capitalism, you have high poverty, low wages, and high prices for goods You also need a strong right wing government and few civil liberties to quell the unrest high poverty etc. create. See South America 1970’s.

In the Robber Baron days, rich men owned whiole towns. Workers were paid wages at the mill or the mine, but rented their housing from the Company and bought their goods and supplies from a “company store”, which happily gave them credit. All of the money they earned went back into their employers coffers.

Where are you have well regulated capitalism which balances the power of those with the gold to say no to unsafe conditions or poverty wages. That’s what labour law and tax codes do.
Is that what China has? For we certainly purchase a huge number of their products which is made by Chinese citizens who make far less than we do, and we get those products at lower prices. China has married Communism with Capitalism.
 
If I was a jaded person, I might think the woman is being blocked entry into the respite care business because other respite care businesses own the Health Department and don't want competition.

Oh, wait. I AM a jaded person!
G,

This isn't Libertarian v Social Democracy... This is just basic corruption
 

Forum List

Back
Top