Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › What Libertarians need to do
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2]  Send TopicPrint
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) What Libertarians need to do (Read 1829 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45214
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: What Libertarians need to do
Reply #10 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 11:54am
Print Post  
rnewton wrote on Sep 18th, 2014 at 10:47pm:
Where should a line be then drawn, and how should a common plank be formed about income redistribution?  All going to their individual drummer seems to me a disastrous policy in the real world, even when faced with a many sided, seductive notion like income redistribution. 


Redistribution of wealth isn't "many sided", it's simple and straightforward. The government takes from productive people and gives to whoever it favors.
If you think allowing individuals to be free to make their own decisions is a "disastrous policy", you're in total agreement with 'progressives' of all stripes, and must be as economically ignorant and ideologically blinded as they are.
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JW
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 385
Joined: Jul 4th, 2014
Re: What Libertarians need to do
Reply #11 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 2:21pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 11:46am:
'Progressives' hate individual liberty. They are not a "straw man" but actual enemies of liberty, classical liberalism/libertarianism. To the extent that they control the government of any country, they destroy liberty and prosperity and progress. If they have total control and exercise it, you get Maoist China or the Stalinist U.S.S.R., or Venezuela.


Progressives:  N-Pl.  Enemies of liberty.  Destroyers of liberty and progress.  Ex:  Mao, Stalin and Hugo Chavez were progressives that got total control, destroying liberty in their respective states.

Understood.  I might point out, that Mao, Stalin and Chavez may have been acting with enlightened self interest, and came out pretty handsomely for their efforts.  So maybe they were objectivists.  Wink

Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 11:46am:
All types of socialism subtract from the ability of people to create wealth, so they all cause poverty in some degree.


Is this a definition?   Whether something is Socialism can be evaluated by whether it subtracts from the ability of people to create wealth.

If so, then the government imposed legal system, and government imposed corporate structure would NOT be a form of socialism since it adds to the ability of people to create wealth, by giving a framework for creating and conserving wealth.  So there might be some statist functions that are non-socialist (i.e. do not subtract from wealth) because they enhance the ability to create wealth.

Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 11:46am:
A very libertarian society was created by the U.S. Constitution, and it existed, with more individual liberty than the world ever knew, before or since, well into the 20th Century.


This is a common view.  I would suggest a different view.

A very libertarian society was created by the Declaration of Independence.  This, combined with the vast frontier, ushered in a decade of liberty from 1783 to 1789 (end of Revolution to the final approval of the Constitution).  If you ever disliked a rule, you just moved a mile down the road.  That's about all you -could- move because it took six days to go from Boston to New York by horse, and you could not do it in a wheeled carriage because the roads were not very good.  Even afer 1789, if you wanted liberty, you just went West.

The Constitution itself reflects this libertarian and frontier era in which it was drafted.  However, it's very purpose was to create a Federal government and assign powers to it.  Although it reflects the libertarianism at the time, the passage of the constitution was the death knell for the frontier form of libertarianism.  Once the structure existed, it could be interpreted.  Once subject to interpretation by Madison, Hamilton and later Jackson, the mechanisms for big Federal government were put into place.

So while the Constitution is commonly believed to be a hallmark of libertarianism, I think it actually is the wooden stake that killed liberty in the fledgling US.  The founding documents that best exemplifies Libertarianism is the 1776 Declaration and the 1781 Articles of Confederation, not the 1789 US Constitution.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 45214
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: What Libertarians need to do
Reply #12 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 4:47pm
Print Post  
JW wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 2:21pm:
Is this a definition?   Whether something is Socialism can be evaluated by whether it subtracts from the ability of people to create wealth.

What? The Black Plague subtracted from the ability of people to create wealth. So did every King and Emperor and Czar.
Something is obviously wrong with your mind.
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JW
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 385
Joined: Jul 4th, 2014
Re: What Libertarians need to do
Reply #13 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 5:36pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 4:47pm:
What? The Black Plague subtracted from the ability of people to create wealth. So did every King and Emperor and Czar.
Something is obviously wrong with your mind.


Jeff I was just asking clarification of this statement:
Quote:
All types of socialism subtract from the ability of people to create wealth, so they all cause poverty in some degree.


Are you defining socialism here?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alan Jones
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2721
Joined: Apr 19th, 2014
Re: What Libertarians need to do
Reply #14 - Sep 19th, 2014 at 9:06pm
Print Post  
JW wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 2:21pm:
If so, then the government imposed legal system, and government imposed corporate structure would NOT be a form of socialism since it adds to the ability of people to create wealth, by giving a framework for creating and conserving wealth.

No, because the imposed framework is inferior to the framework that exists naturally.

JW wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 2:21pm:
So there might be some statist functions that are non-socialist (i.e. do not subtract from wealth) because they enhance the ability to create wealth.

Sure, but not what you suggested above. The state function of helping people to protect their liberty and property from aggressors is an example of one that enhances the ability to create wealth.

JW wrote on Sep 19th, 2014 at 5:36pm:
Are you defining socialism here?

Jeff was characterizing, not defining, socialism. The general definition is state (or collective) control of the economy. The result is reduced wealth creation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › What Libertarians need to do
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy