What is a small government libertarian?

[bripat9643]

Note that kaz doesn't believe there should be public schools. That in and of itself dismisses libertarianism as idiocy,

if kaz thinks she speaks for what libertarianism is.

Nothing could be more sensible or reasonable than abolishing government schools.

Setting aside the simple idiocy of that, how do Libertarians propose to ABOLISH public schooling?

Wouldn't that require some sort of draconian prohibition imposed by an authoritarian statist governmental power?

You really don't understand how it would be done? Just consider the United States in 1914. Virtually no public schooling existed. Now repeal all legislation passed with regard to schooling since that date.

It's so simple even you could understand it. Or do you think the country in 1914 was "authoritarian and statist?"

 

[Bush92]

Someone that lets businesses do as they damn well please and hates maintaining the country...

Pretty much someone that thinks the corporate world should do it all.

You don't grasp free markets. In free markets, companies can do what they want. When they do bad things, their customers leave them, their employees quit, and they are replaced by companies that don't do that.

In your socialist system, bad companies get bailed out by government and thrive by paying them off and contributing to their campaigns. It is in reality you who victimizes people by propping up bad companies with the force of government.

Kudos Copper Lady!

 

[kaz]

These two:

5) Roads - To acquire and manage the massive land requirements to move freely about the country
6) Management of limited resources - Access to and distribution of things like water

are in conflict with:

7) Recognition of property rights - Land, possessions and so forth.

Private owners are far better stewards of land and resources. The government "owning" and controlling property and rights to use just leads to graft and corruption.

I'm not clear why you picked those three, by it's nature all of government is a limit on our rights in a absolute sense. As I said, I am not referring to anarchy but limited government. So yes, everything I said is a limit on our individual rights including the ones you picked. The things I pick as being a legitimate function of government are those things in practicality lead to the net liberty gain. They are functions only government can provide and expand my liberty more than ceding those powers costs me. It's worth it.

Logically, the existence of government conflicts with property rights so having a government to protect property rights is an inherent logical contradiction. Again, I said I am not speaking for anarchists. Also again, I'm not clear why you picked those three since your point applies to every one, but to address those.

5) Roads - To acquire and manage the massive land requirements to move freely about the country

- Roads span the nation and it clearly expands my liberty to travel to the grocery store and across the country. I don't see greater liberty if I live my life in a 10 mile radius because travel is impractical beyond that and traveling to the grocery store costs a half dozen tolls. Yes, I give up that my land may be taken, but it's a net gain over living my life in the same place my great grandparents did.

6) Management of limited resources - Access to and distribution of things like water

- I understand your point less on this one. How is government managing things like water infringing on your property rights? Suppose the person upstream from you is taking the water and selling it to you for $100 a gallon? Suppose you have a radio station and someone blasts static on your frequency and blackmails you to stop. Suppose like in the old days we had hundreds of phone companies not connected or power can't practically get to your home. How is that an expansion of your liberty to not have that because we want pure and absolute property rights that cannot be infringed by government under any circumstance?

are in conflict with:

7) Recognition of property rights - Land, possessions and so forth.

- This does not just refer to protection of property rights, but recognition of them. I am a capitalist. Capitalism is based on property rights. If you can't sell your home because you can't establish boundaries or even ownership, if you can't trade stocks because you can't establish you own a company, how does that expand your liberty?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What makes you think there's anything good abut a "common, unifying experience?" I thought you libturds believed in "diversity?"

Be your own person, within the larger society, the one you don't believe exists because you are an infant.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Someone that lets businesses do as they damn well please and hates maintaining the country...

Pretty much someone that thinks the corporate world should do it all.

You don't grasp free markets. In free markets, companies can do what they want. When they do bad things, their customers leave them, their employees quit, and they are replaced by companies that don't do that.

In your socialist system, bad companies get bailed out by government and thrive by paying them off and contributing to their campaigns. It is in reality you who victimizes people by propping up bad companies with the force of government.

I always enjoy Sunday School capitalism, such as that above.

 

[kaz]

birthers ... 911 conspiracy hounds etc etc

What do those have to do with libertarians?

Glenn Beck.

I'm not sure which is dumber, that what one person says defines an entire ideology, or that he's not even a libertarian. Yes he says he "leans libertarian," but he is a conservative and he supports far more government than libertarians do. And he says that. He just says he thinks we should cut a lot more than Republicans do, which he calls leaning toward libertarian.

 

[kaz]

Note that kaz doesn't believe there should be public schools. That in and of itself dismisses libertarianism as idiocy,

if kaz thinks she speaks for what libertarianism is.

That is just for starters. People like him want to do away with
-The clean air act
-Nasa
-Nws/noaa
-Regulations stopping monopolies
-Regulations creating a clean work environment.
-Regulations on all businesses
-Taxing the rich at all
-Epa, cdc, fda and down the list
-Infrastructure funding

This guy is all about fuck you and you better be able to do it all yourselve or die.

Government controlling education is a plank of the communist manifesto for a reason. What is taught in Christian schools? Christianity. Jewish schools? Judaism. Parochial schools? Catholicism. Government schools? Love of government.

As for the others.

-The clean air act - I said actually in the post that the things I listed are the "primary" functions of government. I am open to environmental laws where people do things on their property which affects someone else's property, though the clean air act goes beyond that
-Nasa Absolutely
-Nws/noaa absolutely
-Regulations stopping monopolies absolutely
-Regulations creating a clean work environment. If you harm your employees, there are civil and criminal courts to seek remediation.
-Regulations on all businessesHand waiving, don't know what that means
-Taxing the rich at all Bull, you pulled this out of your ass. The rich would pay more because they earn and spend more
-Epa, cdc, fda and down the list Pretty much, yeah
-Infrastructure funding I said I support roads and management of limited resources, please clarify what else you are referring to
- This guy is all about fuck you and you better be able to do it all yourselve or die.I'm not saying that to everyone, only to you

if kaz thinks she speaks for what libertarianism is.

Read the OP, pussy, I clearly did not say I speak for it. I said what I think it is and ASKED people to comment if they agree. Stop being such a moron. Got by the ignore setting by getting quoted, didn't you? You reminded me why you are on ignore.

 

[kaz]

Note that kaz doesn't believe there should be public schools. That in and of itself dismisses libertarianism as idiocy,

if kaz thinks she speaks for what libertarianism is.

Nothing could be more sensible or reasonable than abolishing government schools.

Yeah, it's not they ever helped anyone, or gave most American children a common, and therefor unifying, experience which allowed them to see how the rest of their peers lived.

I hated public school, and would happily fund them to the very end of time since for most kids it's a great thing, it just wasn't for me.

Based on your posts, no school was for you. I am a strong believer in education, which is why government needs to stop doing it.

 

[kaz]

Nothing could be more sensible or reasonable than abolishing government schools.

Setting aside the simple idiocy of that, how do Libertarians propose to ABOLISH public schooling?

Wouldn't that require some sort of draconian prohibition imposed by an authoritarian statist governmental power?

The key I believe is the funding. Libertarians don't feel they should have to pay for public schools.

True for most people, but more basic than that I think government should not control them. I would be in favor of at the local level government making sure every kid who can't afford it gets a voucher paid for by the community. But government controlling schools is leading to our crappy education. We're getting crappy education at steep prices, and the reason for it is the objective of government schools is not to educate.

 

[kaz]

"Streets, roads, and above all, schools, should all be privately owned and privately run. The separation of state and economics. The government should be concerned only with those issues which involve the use of force. This means: the police, the armed services, and the law courts to settle disputes among men. Nothing else. Everything else should be privately run and would be much better run"
--Atlas Shrugged

Maybe roads could be managed privately, but only government can acquire the land to build a national network of roads and I like that I don't live my entire life within 10 miles of where my great grandparents were born.

Ayn Rand was a great writer, a thought leader and very educational, but just because she says it doesn't mean I have to think it.

 

[kaz]

Note that kaz doesn't believe there should be public schools. That in and of itself dismisses libertarianism as idiocy,

if kaz thinks she speaks for what libertarianism is.

Not really.

My OP post is clear that I am not claiming to do so. NYCarbineer is an idiot who pulls crap like that out of his ass which is in direct conflict to what I actually said.

Please comment those of you who consider yourself small government libertarian on what you agree and disagree on.

 

[kaz]

"Streets, roads, and above all, schools, should all be privately owned and privately run. The separation of state and economics. The government should be concerned only with those issues which involve the use of force. This means: the police, the armed services, and the law courts to settle disputes among men. Nothing else. Everything else should be privately run and would be much better run"
--Atlas Shrugged

Case in point. Immoral children worshiping their little god Ayn.

What part of I am not talking about anarchy did you not understand? What about that confused you?

 

[eagle1462010]

bump

 

[kaz]

Someone that lets businesses do as they damn well please and hates maintaining the country...

Pretty much someone that thinks the corporate world should do it all.

You don't grasp free markets. In free markets, companies can do what they want. When they do bad things, their customers leave them, their employees quit, and they are replaced by companies that don't do that.

In your socialist system, bad companies get bailed out by government and thrive by paying them off and contributing to their campaigns. It is in reality you who victimizes people by propping up bad companies with the force of government.

I always enjoy Sunday School capitalism, such as that above.

Right, you're a realist who wants a system where people with money buy government to restrict their competition and prop them up and bail them out when they fail. That is so much more pro-employee. You are a simpleton.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nothing could be more sensible or reasonable than abolishing government schools.

Yeah, it's not they ever helped anyone, or gave most American children a common, and therefor unifying, experience which allowed them to see how the rest of their peers lived.

I hated public school, and would happily fund them to the very end of time since for most kids it's a great thing, it just wasn't for me.

Based on your posts, no school was for you. I am a strong believer in education, which is why government needs to stop doing it.

Nonsense, but noted. And the education you get in a public school isn't just about formal learning, which is why, in a society like ours, as diverse as ours, it's so very necessary...

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

birthers ... 911 conspiracy hounds etc etc

What do those have to do with libertarians?

Glenn Beck.

Glenn Beck is not a libertarian. He's a conservative.

 

[kaz]

Yeah, it's not they ever helped anyone, or gave most American children a common, and therefor unifying, experience which allowed them to see how the rest of their peers lived.

I hated public school, and would happily fund them to the very end of time since for most kids it's a great thing, it just wasn't for me.

Based on your posts, no school was for you. I am a strong believer in education, which is why government needs to stop doing it.

Nonsense, but noted. And the education you get in a public school isn't just about formal learning, which is why, in a society like ours, as diverse as ours, it's so very necessary...

It's not about learning at all. It's about instilling our children with love of government, unions and authoritarian leftism.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You don't grasp free markets. In free markets, companies can do what they want. When they do bad things, their customers leave them, their employees quit, and they are replaced by companies that don't do that.

In your socialist system, bad companies get bailed out by government and thrive by paying them off and contributing to their campaigns. It is in reality you who victimizes people by propping up bad companies with the force of government.

I always enjoy Sunday School capitalism, such as that above.

Right, you're a realist who wants a system where people with money buy government to restrict their competition and prop them up and bail them out when they fail. That is so much more pro-employee. You are a simpleton.

What I want you don't know, because you don't ask, you assume, but even if you did ask you would not be very likely to understand. For that you have to know capitalism and other economic systems, which you undoubtedly do not.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Based on your posts, no school was for you. I am a strong believer in education, which is why government needs to stop doing it.

Nonsense, but noted. And the education you get in a public school isn't just about formal learning, which is why, in a society like ours, as diverse as ours, it's so very necessary...

It's not about learning at all. It's about instilling our children with love of government, unions and authoritarian leftism.

Sure thing. Off you go little man...

 

[kaz]

I always enjoy Sunday School capitalism, such as that above.

Right, you're a realist who wants a system where people with money buy government to restrict their competition and prop them up and bail them out when they fail. That is so much more pro-employee. You are a simpleton.

What I want you don't know, because you don't ask, you assume, but even if you did ask you would not be very likely to understand. For that you have to know capitalism and other economic systems, which you undoubtedly do not.

I have the crazy idea that you want what you post. If you're saying you're a liar and you don't, then I don't see the point in asking. Why is it when you chose to post we can ignore it but if you're asked for some reason we can trust we got the truth?