Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

I think the problem with "libertarians," at least in my area...

24

Replies

  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,877 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    I see what you are saying. Using the restaurant example, there is no reason that a private association couldn't fill the shoes of a health inspector, or a chain setting their own standards. With guns, we have SAAMI and it works well, motor oils use the API for their standards. These organizations do a great job of regulating the industry without government interference.

    I do see a need for stuff that makes more sense to be a monopoly (municipal water, sewer, stuff like that) that a fair, transparent and honest government could make better use of resources. I also see a need for stuff like zoning and building codes (many municipalities around here already contract with private companies to provide the inspection services).
    Friedman actually believed in some government agencies and such, but on a much more limited scale. However at the same time, the government can't run a monopoly on those goods. Using the water and sewer example, if you want to put in your own well and have a septic company handle your water and waste, that is fine.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • Pelagic KayakerPelagic Kayaker Banned Posts: 1,503 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Libertarians represent a certain portion of the general bell curve that ranges from total government control of all aspects of our lives, and on the other end, anarchy. The "pure" libertarians simply want less government intrusion into our lives, which is what, I think, most of us would prefer.

    The question is, where do you draw the line?

    Calif says that restaurant inspectors aren't needed. Mmm, I disagree. Not everyone wants to go to a certain restaurant and then be taken on a kitchen tour and question the chef on the freshness of the shrimp, inspect the kitchen Gordon Ramsay style. Nor does everyone exactly know what to look for or ask about. I usually leave my oven thermometer at home when I go to a nice Italian or French or whatever restaurant and I really don't remember or know in the first place what temp food is supposed to be stored at. I suppose Calif does this on a regular basis?

    As for code inspectors? Whom among us is cognizant of, for example, structural building codes? Who is informed enough to go to a new building under construction and check on the size and welding pattern of the rebar mat prior to pouring? Or to determine the correct cantilever moment of angle for a 12th floor balcony that's supported by a W12x120 (or even knows what a W12x120 is)? Or the structural steel dual-guide tracks for elevator cars? Or inspect the concrete during a pour to ensure that there aren't voids?

    Or maybe inspectors who determine that the power company is sending us single-phase 120VAC instead of 320VAC 3-phase?

    I'm kind of guessing that most of us are reasonably okay about having competent professional inspectors whose job it is to determine these things on our behalf. Excesses and errors and fraud still occurs, sure. But generally, in a structured society with technology and airliners flying overhead and roads and bridges and trucks and cars and such, maybe having some inspectors isn't a bad idea overall.

    Few of us are capable of being food, structural, electrical, construction, transport, aeronautical, and piping engineers or inspectors to ensure that our lives are a bit more orderly.

    When we get a new gun, for example, do we take metal scrapings of the frame and other parts to analyze them in our home spectrographic labs to ensure that they're made of the right metal? Do we do the same for, say, cars or trucks we buy -- testing the tire rubber in our home chem lab, analyzing the piston alloy with our mass spec that we keep in the basement, right next to our low temperature fusion reactor?

    I'm saying that Calif doesn't think we need code inspectors or other government officials for things like restaurant standards. I however disagree.

    Excellent post Sam. You are a gentleman and a scholar.
    I would further add that there is a huge difference between a true Libertarian and the total anarchy scheme that certain groups propose. For instance the organization known as "Anonymous" proposes total and complete anarchy (no rule). They are not unlike Mao Tse Tung in that they believe in the utopian fallacy but their very actions, unknowingly, promote monarchy. Vladimir Lenin once referred to these people as "useful idiots".
    The more sensible and bold citizen speaks out demanding constitutional law and order, while at the same time, with less intrusive government. I will always be a conservative republican christian at heart as there are just too many ideologies that I disagree with about the libertarian party...abortion being one.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,244 Senior Member
    Using the water and sewer example, if you want to put in your own well and have a septic company handle your water and waste, that is fine.
    ...which I can still do at my suburban home (and I am seriously thinking about doing a well). It would almost be impossible to do in an urban environment though. In some situations, I do see where socialized services make more sense.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,877 Senior Member
    Well it would all come down to economics. It may be cheaper to go gov., but if you get a better service from private you can go there.

    Kinda like UPS and FedEx vs. the mail...
    I'm just here for snark.
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Kinda like UPS and FedEx vs. the mail...

    I have to point out that the ONLY reason the mail still exists is because the taxpayer replentishes the billions in losses. If FedEx or UPS ran in the red for more than a few years they'd cease to exist. As it should be.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,244 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    I have to point out that the ONLY reason the mail still exists is because the taxpayer replentishes the billions in losses.
    And that whole Constitutional mandate thing.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,877 Senior Member
    Well, Friedman wasn't too happy to have a USPS...
    I'm just here for snark.
  • Pelagic KayakerPelagic Kayaker Banned Posts: 1,503 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    And that whole Constitutional mandate thing.

    Excellent point.
  • Pelagic KayakerPelagic Kayaker Banned Posts: 1,503 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    And that whole Constitutional mandate thing.

    Article I, Section VIII, clause VII.

    This is PRECISELY my argument to the anarchist crowd--- very dangerous ground when screwing around with our Constitution in the name of "no rule".

    Thanks fot posting that Jermanator-- sharp man!
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 7,958 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »

    Let me simplify this a bit. Would you be opposed to me growing weed, or brewing moonshine, or picking mushrooms, or even cooking meth on my own property for my own personal comsumption? Just me, no one else. I'll stay out of the market place completely. Let the government control the public market as is done today.
    Sure, but when you croak, you better have enough cash on hand to handle the clean up. If you expect ANYONE to take care of you when you mess your insides up from bathtub gin or to do as much as bring a hay bale and 2 gallons of diesel to take care of the body, then you are not really a libertarian. When the toxic waste from the meth lab messes the ground that your corpse is laying on, who has to pick up the tab?

    BTW, if drugs are legalized, then addiction can no longer be a disease. It is a choice and needs to be treated as such. 300 dollar card payable to BFI, I will step over you laying on the sidewalk for a day or two since you have prior arraignments.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Article I, Section VIII, clause VII.

    This is PRECISELY my argument to the anarchist crowd--- very dangerous ground when screwing around with our Constitution in the name of "no rule".

    Thanks fot posting that Jermanator-- sharp man!

    But you have no problem with ignoring the COTUS when you demand neverending regulation over all aspects of our lives. You're in California...how's the Second Amendment right working for you? You are deemed too damned irresponsible/dangerous to buy a pistol that isn't approved by the gov't, or buy a 10+ magazine, or hunt with lead, or buy NFA items, or pick up your firearm from the LGS in less than 10 days, or purchase more than one handgun in a month, or buy a hangun without a gov't approved safety card. Should I go on? Drive to the LGS and look for a Bushmaster AR-15 or a 50 BMG...oh wait you can't. Your right has been regulated to DEATH. And you demand the same type of regulations for things that are far less dangerous than firearms.

    BTW, my first point was to show how the gov't cannot run a business. Not even gov't business.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,457 Senior Member
    The USPS would be solvent and not have the problems they have now if the U.S. Government wasn't milking them dry. The government is taking huge sums from the post office and placing it in the general fund. Gotta have that cash to buy the votes.

    Lots of 'so called' libertarians are long on liberty and real short on personal responsibility and accountability. It's like trying to balance on a three legged stool with two legs sawed off. Ain't gonna work out real well.

    As far as the inspections and services y'all are talking about, those are better provided by local government. Local government is closest to the people, and if the people aren't asleep at the switch, the people can reign in unnecessary spending and costs, and keep the locals honest. But that requires an informed electorate, and that is where the problem lies.

    Going way back, the Founders warned about political parties and tried to discourage them. But they were doomed to them, too, with the Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and Whigs. The power grab started before the ink on the Constitution was dry, and has been on a roll since.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Sure, but when you croak, you better have enough cash on hand to handle the clean up. If you expect ANYONE to take care of you when you mess your insides up from bathtub gin or to do as much as bring a hay bale and 2 gallons of diesel to take care of the body, then you are not really a libertarian. When the toxic waste from the meth lab messes the ground that your corpse is laying on, who has to pick up the tab?

    Now we're talking! This is exactly the kind of personal responsibility I'm referring to. However, if you fall off your ladder painting the house, and break your neck and die, I want you to have the same $300 for your body removal AND the expenses of cleaning up the paint (toxic waste) that spilled when you fell. Afterall, painting your house is a choice YOU made.

    BTW, if drugs are legalized, then addiction can no longer be a disease. It is a choice and needs to be treated as such. 300 dollar card payable to BFI, I will step over you laying on the sidewalk for a day or two since you have prior arraignments.


    I've never said anywhere that addiction is a disease. In fact, I said that drug use is a choice in an earlier post. This is where the LP platform and myself differ.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    As far as the inspections and services y'all are talking about, those are better provided by local government. Local government is closest to the people, and if the people aren't asleep at the switch, the people can reign in unnecessary spending and costs, and keep the locals honest. But that requires an informed electorate, and that is where the problem lies.

    If a private group regulates business (like breamfisher's SCUBA example) then the rest of us are not paying for services we don't use, as opposed to gov't regulators. For example: I don't eat in restaurants, why should I pay taxes for an inspection?
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 9,327 Senior Member
    Another case in point is if drugs are legalized, how does an employer screen and accept occasional/recreational (like there really is such a thing) meth/heroin/cocaine use? I can just picture an airline pilot who uses crack; "but since tests proved he used yesterday and not today it's perfectly safe to let him or her fly". In short, if we legalize drugs why not legalize theft, murder or rape?---because when someone is high on that crap that's what the end result commonly is.

    Recalling as best I can what Eli said a couple years ago: You can walk down the street while freebasing on coke with an AT-4 strapped to your back for all I care - until you point that AT-4 at me, we don't have a problem.

    Your logic is essentially in the same league as saying that because I have a belt-fed machine gun, I am going to misuse it by default. It is not the place of government to regulate what harm people do to themselves through taking drugs. Government's job is to regulate what harm people do to others - crime should be treated as crime. Referring to it as "drug crime" or "gun crime" merely blurs the issue.

    Sure, you need some regulation of folks who are responsible for the safety of others - airline pilots and the like - but that is the responsibility of Delta, Southwest, United, etc... and not Uncle Sam. Let the market and the free press dictate what corners they can cut in their employee screenings.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    I'm ALL FOR legalizing pot. Still on the fence with meth and the like. But I'm not sure why, I don't see drug use increasing because of legalization.

    It won't. The current junkies will self correct in a short period of time. Your airline pilot won't run out and smoke himself silly. Employers will still have the right to forbid drug use by their employees. I can't show up for work drunk, even though there is no LAW against it.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,877 Senior Member
    Article I, Section VIII, clause VII.

    This is PRECISELY my argument to the anarchist crowd--- very dangerous ground when screwing around with our Constitution in the name of "no rule".

    Thanks fot posting that Jermanator-- sharp man!
    I see your straw man...
    I'm just here for snark.
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,933 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    The USPS would be solvent and not have the problems they have now if the U.S. Government wasn't milking them dry. The government is taking huge sums from the post office and placing it in the general fund. Gotta have that cash to buy the votes.

    Lots of 'so called' libertarians are long on liberty and real short on personal responsibility and accountability. It's like trying to balance on a three legged stool with two legs sawed off. Ain't gonna work out real well.

    As far as the inspections and services y'all are talking about, those are better provided by local government. Local government is closest to the people, and if the people aren't asleep at the switch, the people can reign in unnecessary spending and costs, and keep the locals honest. But that requires an informed electorate, and that is where the problem lies.

    Going way back, the Founders warned about political parties and tried to discourage them. But they were doomed to them, too, with the Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and Whigs. The power grab started before the ink on the Constitution was dry, and has been on a roll since.
    True Libertarianism relies on the general populace being responsible for their own actions. That will never happen. There are to many now who rely on the government to support them and others who will prey on the law abiding and responsible citizens. I wish Libertarianism could work. I consider myself a Constitutionalist. It is the law. I am a law abiding citizen. I have also sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all Enemies Foreign and Domestic. I will never support politicians who ignore the law. If the Constitution needs to be changed it can be done with an amendment. Not by being ignored.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    I can't show up for work drunk, even though there is no LAW against it.

    Sure you can- - - - -just join the United Auto Workers! A bunch of Chrysler employees were caught on camera smoking dope and drinking on a lunch break, and after they got fired, they were rehired, and even got back pay! Of course, Chrysler spent our tax dollars for that little fiasco because it was after the bailout!
    Jerry
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,933 Senior Member
    Friedman actually believed in some government agencies and such, but on a much more limited scale. However at the same time, the government can't run a monopoly on those goods. Using the water and sewer example, if you want to put in your own well and have a septic company handle your water and waste, that is fine.
    No! If the city expands to rural areas you will be forced to switch to city water and sewer and pay for the hookups! It happened to my parents in the mid 1960s. They just condemn wells and septic! Same thing if they decide you "need" sidewalks! We are not by any means "FREE"!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Sure you can- - - - -just join the United Auto Workers! A bunch of Chrysler employees were caught on camera smoking dope and drinking on a lunch break, and after they got fired, they were rehired, and even got back pay! Of course, Chrysler spent our tax dollars for that little fiasco because it was after the bailout!
    Jerry

    Yeah, unions are right in step with free markets...
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,877 Senior Member
    sgtrock21 wrote: »
    No! If the city expands to rural areas you will be forced to switch to city water and sewer and pay for the hookups! It happened to my parents in the mid 1960s. They just condemn wells and septic! Same thing if they decide you "need" sidewalks! We are not by any means "FREE"!
    That's not what I said. I said that Friedman argued that in a true market-driven society (capitalism) you would, if you had the money, be able to keep your own septic and wells. I know that that's not the situation, but I'm speaking to what Milton Friedman, economist, espoused.
    I'm just here for snark.
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,249 Senior Member
    Unfortunately, we are talking about government intrusion in our lives as if the camel had just stuck his nose into the tent when in reality I think the only thing left out of the tent at this point is the tip of the tail. There are some services that can best be provided by government, many of which have already mentioned. Getting government out of providing food, clothing and every necessity for a significant portion of society, close down the department of education, IRS and we would have made a good start on it.
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,244 Senior Member
    Getting government out of providing food, clothing and every necessity for a significant portion of society, close down the department of education, IRS and we would have made a good start on it.
    That pretty much says it all. Not all of us are going to agree on exactly how far the government should butt out of our lives, but I pretty much promise that most of us are on the same page as far as getting them out of some very basic things. If we were to even get that little bit done, it would be a monumental task. We can argue about the other stuff later.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,249 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    That pretty much says it all. Not all of us are going to agree on exactly how far the government should butt out of our lives, but I pretty much promise that most of us are on the same page as far as getting them out of some very basic things. If we were to even get that little bit done, it would be a monumental task. We can argue about the other stuff later.

    Exactly, take away the free trough and work will ensue.....
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,429 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    3. People that truly believe in self-governing. Not just for our own lives but for everyone else as well. This concept includes legalization (not just drugs) and a bit of anarchy. Anarchy defined as "absense of government".

    I don't mean removal of all government, but MASSIVE reduction in all aspects. The free market can replace many of the government services we feel we "need".

    As a simple example, we can eliminate restaurant inspectors. If you are concerned about your local diner, ask the manager if you can see the kitchen. If they refuse, do not eat there. There are 100s of internet boards that are used to post reviews of service and conditions. Yet we still pay corrupt inspectors.

    Extrapolate this concept into code inspectors, safety inspectors, health services, etc and move on from there.

    The biggest obstruction I foresee, is fear. Real freedom scares the ship out of most people.


    This is the main problem with a lot of government service: " Yet we still pay corrupt inspectors." And it ain't goin away!
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • Pelagic KayakerPelagic Kayaker Banned Posts: 1,503 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    For example: I don't eat in restaurants, why should I pay taxes for an inspection?

    Yeah, sure you don't.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,813 Senior Member
    Getting government out of providing food, clothing and every necessity for a significant portion of society, close down the department of education, IRS and we would have made a good start on it.

    I would support any candidate that would run on this, alone.

    In reality, to accomplish all of that, illegal immigration would have to end, every government department would have to justify its existence before Congress, and government would have to de-regulate most of the things that are stifling the small businesses that are needed to employ all of those new job hunters. The chances are practically zero that our corrupt federal government, whose members consider themselves to be 'the ruling class,' will ever do that.

    I'm thinking that for anything like that to ever happen, it will have to start with states refusing to obey federal mandates and protecting its citizens when they refuse to pay their federal income taxes...very tricky, since most governors also get elected with quite a bit less than 60% of the vote.
  • tv_racin_fantv_racin_fan Senior Member Posts: 661 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    I don't eat in restaurants, why should I pay taxes for an inspection?

    It should be paid for by the restaurant and their customers. NOT by the tax payers.
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    Yeah, sure you don't.

    I've given my best effort to respond to everyone on this thread no matter how condescending their responses were. You have not answered one of my questions, nor offered any alternative solutions; but you have made a point to insult me at every turn. I can handle the insults; as I've been the primary libertarian cheerleader on this board for 10+ years, but c'mon, offer something in return!

    Now…I only eat at restaurants when I travel for work, and I make a point to eat at places where I can see the food or kitchen. Subway is a good example. I try to put as little steroid-hormone-antibiotic-vermin tainted food in my body as possible.

    I realize it is shocking for some of you urban dwellers, but I raise and process all of my meat & eggs, grow (& preserve) fruit and veggies, make cheese from *gasp* raw milk, make mayonnaise, consume wild plants and mushrooms, and even made soap from rendered bear fat.

    All accomplished safely without a government inspector.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement