Libertarian's Forum - Libertarian forum for politics and economics

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.

Libertarian's Forum › Libertarian's Forum › Freedom Forum › What kind of libertarian are you?

(Moderators: Land of Freedom, ladyofliberty)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 3

What kind of libertarian are you? (Read 451 times)

meric

Libertarian Full Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 96

What kind of libertarian are you?
Feb 15^th, 2010 at 12:34pm

I'm quite sure there's a scale of libertarianism. Where do you stand?

I am a libertarian that supports:

-- Minimal economic interventions (No subsidies, tariffs, etc)
-- Higher consumption tax but lower income tax.
-- Reduction in local laws. (currently, parents doing a cake store for fund raising in a public park needs to pay several thousand dollars to the local council for the placement of ambulances and signage... not to mention forms to fill)
-- Welfare only for the disabled, carers and limited welfare for the unemployed and elderly.
-- No religion involved in state affairs.
-- Low military spending.
-- A constitutional limit to the number of laws the parliament may pass. It could be calculated from the national GDP rather than a fixed limit. (So, if they need room for a law they'll have to repeal one first.)
-- Banning firearms. (Not very libertarian of me, I know.

)
-- Free Public Education
-- Government loans for university fees.

IP Logged

BlackSand

Libertarian Senior Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 367
Arizona

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #1 - Feb 15^th, 2010 at 4:09pm

Its kinda nice to see a Libertarian thats not as extreme. I think we need more moderates if were ever gonna have any kind of base. I have a few questions for you though.

Lower income tax? Not abolished?

Keep welfare? I might agree with you a bit on this. But Its something I struggle with to decide whether or not it should be kept.

constitutional limit that parliament may pass? Are you from Britain? And would you go into more detail about that? Because this one confuses me.

Banning firearms...Cant disagree with you more. Tongue

How do you propose doing that with out a major black market, which results in a police state? The people who use guns illegally will only get guns illegally, and now the citizen who is obeying the law has no protection.

Public education...gross. haha. Our education system is so horrible. We need some sort of incentive for schools to improve, or a complete overhaul. Do you have any proposals of how to fix the system? I actually like the idea of public education. But when its as bad as it is...

As for the type of libertarian I am.

Pro life
anti-income tax
no economic intervention
Hard money if possible/plausible
Government out of the world of morality (drugs, prostitution, marriage)
Anti war. (We need to be like the swiss.)
pro-2nd amendment
Im questionable about welfare
Pro 10th amendment
anti-patriot act
Pro PBS Grin

IP Logged

meric

Libertarian Full Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 96

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #2 - Feb 15^th, 2010 at 8:39pm

BlackSand wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Lower income tax? Not abolished?

My ideal income tax rates are still quite extreme... it'll be like [15%, 20%, 25%] It'll be used for welfare.

BlackSand wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Keep welfare? I might agree with you a bit on this. But Its something I struggle with to decide whether or not it should be kept.

A family has a car crash. Only the 5 year old kid survives and he loses 1 arm and 1 leg. He lives in an orphanage (let's say there's people doing private orphanages). When he grows up to be 18, He comes out of the orphanage. What is he going to do? His job opportunities are going to be so much more limited.

A man retires at 65 with no family because he had reproductive problems. He's saved up $500,000 for retirement and uses $25,000 a year. That should be enough till he's 80. (he gets interest from his investments too). Yet, due to some 'divine intervention', this guy still lives at the age of 98 when he's finished up his last penny (He'd sold his house years before to keep living.). What's he going to do? Rely on voluntary donations? I've seen it. If voluntary donations worked beggars won't be homeless.

I don't think society should just abandon unproductive people, the revenue from income taxes would be used to support these people.

constitutional limit that parliament may pass? Are you from Britain? And would you go into more detail about that? Because this one confuses me.

BlackSand wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Banning firearms...Cant disagree with you more. Tongue

I'd be against it if it wasn't banned already. But in Australia it seems to work quite well. I rarely hear about gun deaths. And when I do 90% of it is the mafia killing themselves. The 10% remaining is there was some drunk guy with a gun (don't know where he got it) driving through a neighbourhood shooting. I might've heard about a dozen cases occurring in my life. There was 1 case where the victim having a gun might've led to a better outcome: This family was murdered in their house by some professionals. (The police said they were professional assassins or something...) But I don't think they'd have survived anyway.

BlackSand wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Public education...gross. haha. Our education system is so horrible. We need some sort of incentive for schools to improve, or a complete overhaul. Do you have any proposals of how to fix the system? I actually like the idea of public education. But when its as bad as it is...

One of the things people perceive libertarian values is "Income Inequality" and "Richer gets richer". They are right. That is a problem.
Inequality per se isn't unfair. (e.g something like top 10% of programmers produce 90% of quality software, so it won't be unfair if they be paid a dozen times more. )

However, it becomes a problem when the wealth gets inherited. As Warren Buffet said, its like picking the 2020 Olympic Team from the eldest sons of 2000 Olympic gold medalists.

This is where public education comes in. Without it, only those who can afford it can go to school, and they'll have inherited the "educated" status. Thus there would emerge 2 different classes. "Educated" and "Uneducated" and people would become Marxists all over again.

In Australia we have 3 types of schools. "Selective", "Private" and "Public". The private school is your traditionally privately funded school (Given 80% of government funding to a normal public school too. they're RICH $$) and the public school is your traditional government funded schools. Public schools suck here too, I know because I was in one. Selective schools are also government schools. Here, the best selective schools outperform the best private schools and the 'worst' selective schools outperform the worst private schools also. (notice no quotes for private Wink

)

There is only one way to get in a selective school. You take a test to get in. e.g if there are only 50 free spots then only the top 50 applicants can get in. These 'selective' schools start at year 5.

If you're from a poor background but is very bright and hardworking (at least when you were young), you'd get into one of the selective schools and avoid the 'effects' of the public education system. If you work hard there also, you'll be able to get in university and study medicine (if you want, could be anything else, but med is hardest to get into), with all your fees loaned by the government. The loan is indexed to inflation so technically it never grows. You only have to start paying it back when you earn $40,000 or more. (e.g I think every dollar above that amount is siphoned off to pay the loan. could be 80 cents or something)

In a libertarian society, there is going to be inequality but you should be guaranteed equal opportunity. That's why we support banning murders, remember?

IP Logged

meric

Libertarian Full Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 96

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #3 - Feb 15^th, 2010 at 8:45pm

Quote:

As for the type of libertarian I am.

Pro life
anti-income tax
no economic intervention
Hard money if possible/plausible
Government out of the world of morality (drugs, prostitution, marriage)
Anti war. (We need to be like the swiss.)
pro-2nd amendment
Im questionable about welfare
Pro 10th amendment
anti-patriot act
Pro PBS

I have no idea what the amendments are lol. As for 'Pro life', old people with terminal cancer and hurting like hell every day must live? It's like making it illegal to die. Although there are more borderline cases and that's where its really controversial... I don't think I want to die yet if I go into a vegetarian state, unless I'm like 95 then I probably won't mind.

And regards to hard money: The money supply needs to be increased as the economy grows and thus the government must then obtain the equivalent gold... How're they going to do that with so low taxes? :p

IP Logged

Floyd

Libertarian Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4
USSA

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #4 - Feb 16^th, 2010 at 11:28pm

meric wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 8:45pm:

And regards to hard money: The money supply needs to be increased as the economy grows and thus the government must then obtain the equivalent gold... How're they going to do that with so low taxes? :p

The government has nothing to do with mining gold. Private firms mine gold. And the money supply does not need to grow with the economy. Increasing the money supply leads to distortions in the market and has no social benefit (unless you consider enriching the government and those close to it a benefit). Increasing the money supply (paper with no value) simply causes each unit to be worth less. The more you print, the less it's worth, because a higher amount of money is chasing the same amount of goods. But, under a gold standard, where the money supply is stable, the opposite happens, where more goods are chasing the same amount of money, causing prices to fall and enriching everyone's standard of living. This was the case during the 19th century, when the supply of money remained roughly stable (especially when compared to the years since the Fed) there was a general lowering of prices and a rising standard of living.

As for the kind of libertarian I am, it is this: I believe in freedom, and that all people should have equal rights. I oppose all forms of socialism because they violate the rights of others.

http://lquotes.com

IP Logged

BlackSand

Libertarian Senior Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 367
Arizona

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #5 - Feb 17^th, 2010 at 3:25am

This is going to be a long one.

The kid with one arm one leg. Well in the economy of the future that might be a good thing. Youd have a robotic arm that can do twice the work of a normal arm. Tongue

But in reality. The service industry is a much larger part of our economy than the goods/producing. Thats why education is more important now than ever before. Because if you want a job, youre best bet is to have a good education. One arm one leg, wont be such a bad thing. But I digress.

As for the old man. Reproductive problems wont stop him from marrying and adopting. But I digress again. I just like being contradictory.

I see the need for welfare. And like I said, im questionable with it. I need one of the other guys in here to argue the other side.

You didnt answer me about the constitutional limit on the number of laws passed.

Ill have to study Australias gun laws. But Id also like to point out Switzerland where everyone has a gun and the crime rate is extremely low (mandatory militia is the reason why there are so many guns). Granted its a small country, even if it does have big cities. How was Australia before these guns laws? Did you guys ever have gangs like we do here? Slums where crime is high? Today or in the past?

Warning: long tangent. You can skip this.

Good quote/paraphrase of warren Buffet. How very true. I personally think that everyone should be pushed according to their skills. When I was a kid, it took me till I was like 7 years old to tie my shoes. When I was in the 6th grade, i was part of a program called Bridges. I still dont really know what the program was, but it was suppose to help me improve my grades. I remember some of the kids I considered "stupid" were in the class. But last week I took an IQ test and got 133. I mean comparatively that should mean that the average person compared to me is a retard. (I dont know the PC term.) However, i obviously havent been pushed very hard because my grades are still average. And Im still only as knowledgeable as the nest guy (IQ is different than being knowledgeable). And when I was a kid, I think i may have had some legitimate mental issues that scarred me for the rest of my life (as Im only 18 almost 19

). It wasnt till late high school that I started pushing myself because I thought I was capable of something and not as dumb as I had always thought I was. So this idea of selective schools kind of repels me because I was a legitimate late bloomer. And some kids will be just on the edge, but wont make it, and so will get a regular education. (Which is considered bad? Or just normal where as selective school kids are put on a pedestal and considered way above average?)

When I try to think of ways to solve the education system, I imagine a sort of all encompassing computer program. A program that tests your skills, your talents, your strengths and also your weaknesses, the things you are interested in, the thing that bore you, and why. A program that kind of gives an all encompassing report of a child's IQ, their style of learning, their abilities in different subjects. I mean truly all encompassing. And then the program would move at the pace best designated for the child.

Age would no longer be a factor. Your style of learning would no longer be a factor. Nothing could really hold you back except yourself. Which is why teachers would still be needed. To motivate kids and teach when a computer cant (although hopefully the program could motivate too because it would know the areas your interested in, and could blend what youre interested in with what you arent, and use the style of learning you like to use the best possible method to teach you).

Imagine a child sitting for an hour in a classroom with 30 other students and one teacher as this program guides this child through basic division while the guy next to him is stronger in math, is practicing long division. And the the girl on the other side of him is also really smart, but has a hard time doing the math without understanding why. So the program gives her a story and a visual so she can understand why she wants to get the number she wants. But she still has a hard time, so she brings her work home with her. Eventually she figures it out, and its exciting, so she gets really far ahead. Now compared to other kids her age, she is the farthest in math. But it doesnt matter, because everyone is still learning at their ideal pace.

So this program pushes a student at the exact rate he or she needs to be pushed.

Hows that for a tangent? And a near impossible one at that. That would be some mega programming. Although I suppose a different program for each subject would be plausible...

End tangent

So I think technology will be the answer to our education woes. And the beauty of this is that technology doesnt necessarily involve having to go somewhere. However, the social impact on a kid could be extreme...

pro life means anti-abortion.

Second amendment is gun rights.

tenth amendment is states rights. Less power to the fed, and more power to the states.

And does hard money account for a growing population? If there is only a certain number of gold bars in the world. A growing population will mean that eventually gold will be very hard to come by. Impossible at one point. People will hoard them. And the poor would have to resort to bargaining.

IP Logged

Angus Libertarian Full Member Offline Libertarian's Forum Posts: 161 St. Louis, Mo	Re: What kind of libertarian are you? Reply #6 - Feb 17^th, 2010 at 12:21pm To simplify things, I define my libertarianism as I have a right to do as i wish as long as I do not infringe on others. The big if is what infringing on others entails.
Back to top	"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Ben Franklin http://freespchdre.blogspot.com/ IP Logged

Land of Freedom

Libertarian's Forum Administrator

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 371
The Land of Freedom

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #7 - Feb 17^th, 2010 at 11:36pm

BlackSand
Your idea of education is a big improvement of what exists. Schools do a poor job because of a one size fits all approach. They try to teach a bunch of kids that have different backgrounds, knowledge, they each learn at a different pace, are less motivated or more so by the day or hour and subject matter and distracted at times among many other differences. People are different yet they try to teach all the same way. Schools are run like socialist institution. Actually they are socialist when run by government but private schools are also run basically the same way. Many children hate learning because of the terrible system. Home schooling is better than most schools.

LibertariansForum.com The LF Administrator.

IP Logged

meric

Libertarian Full Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 96

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #8 - Feb 18^th, 2010 at 9:25pm

About the gold.
Gold is not capital. A block of gold does not produce. It sits pretty on someone's neck, finger, bank deposit box, in the central bank vaults.

Yet, you'd like it if the value of gold to increase as the economy goes up because there is only a limited amount of gold.

That would only encourage more gold mining. (with lesser and lesser gold mined) I believe this wastes efforts that could be spent doing something else, like mining iron instead for building ships. Money isn't wealth. The oil tanker is wealth. The computer in front of you is wealth. Company stock, machinery, A4 office paper, cameras are all examples of wealth. Money only represents it. Printing money to represent wealth instead of mining it seems a much better deal to me.

The currency is strong when the economy behind it is strong; not just when it is backed by gold. i.e when you know you can trade your piece of paper with for iron, instead.

Given the opportunity, the government is going to print too much money with or without hard currency system anyway (and if it has a hard currency system before it'll eventually collapse, e.g USA) I don't see the benefits of having one.

Blacksand:
I like your idea for education. If you really believe in it, start a private coaching college implementing that idea. It taking off wildly successful would affect all sorts of politicians and teachers. You have an idea, now put it to work or it'll remain a piece of gold.

Angus: Not every parent have the luxury to afford teaching their kids at home. Without public education these parents' kids are not going to be educated at all. You're currently free to home school kids but there should be a public service to those who cannot. Yes, it does cost you in taxes, but I don't think you mean to be taking away the availability of others' education just because their mother is a widow working 16 hours a day taking care of 3 kids and have no time or money for home schooling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia
Quote:

Historically, Australia has had relatively low levels of violent crime. Overall levels of homicide and suicide have remained relatively static for several decades, while the proportion of these crimes that involved firearms has consistently declined since the early 1980s. Between 1991 and 2001, the number of firearm related deaths in Australia declined 47%

I should be shot for taking statistics from wikipedia, but I think this can't be too wrong. I'm not saying that the gun laws had any effect on the downward trend of firearms death, but I don't want any change in those laws because it might change the downward trend itself.

My idea for constitutionally limited number of laws was just that, my idea... I haven't thought too much about it though, I just felt it could be useful to us.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/aborigines-may-be-technically-banned-...

Random laws from 1800's still exist. Imagine 500 years later when some authority figure uses forgotten laws to arbitrarily imprison his opposition. A confusing bureaucracy is as good as a corrupt one. Therefore the limit will be a mechanism for 'lawmakers' to clean up old random pieces of laws and keep the government a bit smaller.

Remember the government was our idea. We just didn't realise it'll grow so big.

What happens with too much red tape:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/take-my-pound-of-flesh-and-sleep-well-software-engin...

IP Logged

Angus

Libertarian Full Member

Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 161
St. Louis, Mo

Re: What kind of libertarian are you?
Reply #9 - Feb 18^th, 2010 at 11:51pm

Floyd wrote on Feb 16^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

Actually the government does/has had a role in gold ownership. Recently, the IMF sold off a bunch of gold bars including $6.7 billion to India.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/bad-news-for-gold-bugs-imf-to-sell-o...

In the past, the government has taken away gold from citizens in order to help pay for the government debt.... like FDR in 1933 with an executive order.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Ben Franklin

http://freespchdre.blogspot.com/

IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 3

Libertarian's Forum › Libertarian's Forum › Freedom Forum
(Moderators: Land of Freedom, ladyofliberty)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Twitter LF
Libertarians Chat Room
Mises.org
Right to work Foundation
Walter E. Williams
Libertarian Party
Wikipedia Libertarian
Libertarian News