Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Are homeless people libertarians?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Are homeless people libertarians? (Read 409 times)
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5050
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #20 - Nov 8th, 2017 at 1:40pm
Print Post  
burnsred wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 12:28pm:
Don,  you completely misread my post.  I specified that people from Vietnam or Cuba do NOT want socialism in the U.S. because because that's what f'cked them up in the first place.


I didn't misread, I qualified what you said to make some sense out of it. People leaving Vietnam or Cuba will bring with them a sense of social responsibility and that will not coincide with US politics. I haven't been to Vietnam yet but I've been to Cuba many times and I guarantee those people 'are' socially responsible.

If you tried to understand Cuba you would be able to rise above the constant criticism of the people and their communist system. The understanding is in their prosperity as opposed to other banana republics. It's just a fact. Good health care for all the people and free education puts a different light on poverty. And don't forget, Cuba is doing it with continuous interference by the US in an effort to destroy their system. That's not odds that Mexico, the D.R., or Haiti faces.

Can you be honest enough for a change to face the truth? I'm not promoting communism, that's not what my country is all about. I'm promoting people and them living a decent life. It just so happens that Cuba is still mainly communism that is succeeding, relative to some legitimate comparisons. That's not a bad thing!

[quote]Yet people from Syria want to bring Islamic extremism and Sharia law even though they are supposed refugees from those things.  Actually, only a tiny minority want that, but our media gives them air time and ignores Muslim immigrants who only want to be good Americans.[?quote]

I don't intend to make excuses for your media.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bickeran
Libertarians Full Member
***
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 116
Joined: Oct 14th, 2017
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #21 - Nov 8th, 2017 at 4:10pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Nov 7th, 2017 at 9:05pm:
Freetonia, being libertarian, complete with the right to travel, invites these few people to live in Freetonia.

After all is said and done, the Tyrannian libertarians don't want to actually live in Freetonia. They want to engage in terrorism which they say is justified to force their government to go libertarian. They want aid from the Freetonians. Since it's a free market and everyone can choose, some people do give the aid. Tyrannia has threatened Freetonia for this, and as a result, Freetonian private courts have dropped some of their customers who have given the aid.

Some Freetonians have even decided to double down and move to Tyrannia for the purpose of blowing a great deal of it up. They're justified, they say; they're fighting tyranny. They're fighting aggression. They're fighting a government that uses force.

But who are they fighting for? Less than 1%

What if they could just move to Freetonia and instead cried that no, they don't want to live in Freetonia, because it's a Hell-hole. Instead, America must simply implement all the policies of Freetonia.

My question is: Is the option enough, or must libertarianism be everywhere because it is objectively right?


everywhere cause it's right

the guys fighting the tyran gov't are justified and it dont matter that "oh they can just move". that gov't crushes rights they are wrong even terrorism is justifed end of story

what u are not getting about libertarian is that rights are objective not subjective

and u can say "i don't wanna help the tyrans who fight their gov't i give them no money" that's fine u don't have to, helping is not forced on you

but if you do it even if you move to there and blow them up u are right they are wrong period, once again for dumb white fcks rights objective not subjective

this applies to bum too he has a right not to pay taxes even if he does work and does have house, "oh he can just own nothing and make no money and not have rights crushed" = non-argument cause there is not a duty to avoid like duty to retreat in self-defense, rights are rights, and i will say it x3 so it sinks in

RIGHTS ARE OBJECTIVE NOT SUBJECTIVE
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #22 - Nov 8th, 2017 at 4:27pm
Print Post  
Bickeran wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 4:10pm:
everywhere cause it's right

the guys fighting the tyran gov't are justified and it dont matter that "oh they can just move". that gov't crushes rights they are wrong even terrorism is justifed end of story

Terrorism is never justified.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5028
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #23 - Nov 8th, 2017 at 10:39pm
Print Post  
burnsred wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 9:35am:
Under our current system prices are completely out of control because the people making decisions are not the people paying for it.  In spite of the fact that courthouses are regularly staffed and visited by armed government officials, they have begun in recent years to hire private security for an extra layer of protection provided at the expense of taxpayers who are themselves so poorly served by police that they put bars on their windows, keep guns and dogs in the house and form neighborhood watches.  Neighborhood watches are a great idea, but many Americans have no time to participate in them because they must work overtime to keep up with taxes that pay for all-but-useless police security.


All of that is true but it doesn't disprove my point. Even if the people paying for the service are the ones getting the service directly, the price will rise until at least some of them either find they can't afford it or find it's so expensive they can do without it.

And I am comparing less-than-ideal libertarianism to less-than-ideal tyranny. In our system (the latter) no matter how biased the system is, the poorest dog gets his day in court. He can choose not to plead guilty. If he has evidence, he may win.

At one point in my life, because my family kept making things up about me, and calling the police on me, I started self-recording. Instead of cameras on the outside of my apartment, I put them inside. I put that together with timecards from work and they couldn't accuse me anymore. The trick is realising that all bias can do is make it guilty until proven innocent for their enemies, or innocent until mathematically proven on a quantum level for their friends. If you have video evidence they can't really do anything against the truth. This is imperfect tyranny. It's not fair, but absolute evidence still wins. In imperfect libertarianism, I'd be in jail right now for things I didn't do.

burnsred wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 9:35am:
Your Rothbard quotes seem to support my ideas unless I'm missing something?


Rothbard supports entirely privatised police and courts. See that without government bit?

burnsred wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 9:35am:
Now we have some - definitely not all - immigrants who do want to bring to the U.S. the same failed system they claim to be escaping from.  We have the spectacle of "refugees" admitted under an emergency provision to save them from the horrors of their native lands taking vacations in those hellholes they claim to be escaping from.  Then demanding that many of the same policies that keep their native lands from succeeding be implemented here.  Which leads an analytical person to wonder if they were motivated more by a desire to spread their system than to escape it.


Absolutely, I do it all the time.  But you won't hear me say, "I believe in thus-and-such but it really doesn't pass the smell test."  Because when I realize that a particular belief doesn't pass the smell test, I change that belief.  Sounds elementary but some on this board seem unable to do that.


You're probably the only one, other than perhaps Skychief.

Jeff wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 7:23am:
Slander and liable and fraud are currently punishable under our laws.
Speech that you think is hateful, I might think is necessary.


Here's my point though: Freedom of speech can become toxic slander and libel (trust me over the spellchecker because I'm smarter) and end up being protected under free speech laws.

When slander and libel actually cause verifiable harm and end up being protected because free speech - which is what's happening in our time with the biased press - that is arguably as bad as people getting silenced for saying something that's merely mean.

Yes, slander and libel are technically illegal. Or at least, you can sue for it. What's actually happening is that slander and libel are getting protections because Americans love their free speech so much. This is an example of why people might choose, voluntarily, to live where there is not free speech: Because they prefer having to zip it over being destroyed by liars who enjoy government protection.

SkyChief wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 12:22pm:
And they are hypocrites for initiating force/agression.  They are NOT libertarians. They are LINOs


They're not initiating the force. They say they're defending. They say the Tyrannian government is initiating and that if collateral damage is caused to innocent Tyrannians:

1) There are no innocent Tyrannians. Every taxpaying Tyrannian is supporting the use of force and has a duty to resist even on pain of death, otherwise they are themselves guilty of aggression.

2) Even if there was one good Dalek Tyrannian, it is beyond reasonability to go out of one's way to protect that one. When someone - the Tyrannian government - initiates force, you can defend with whatever weapon you have. If you only have a machine gun, the fact that an innocent bystander will be hit does not prevent the self-defence. Self defence must be in the gentlest manner possible, but the Freedom Fighters' resources are limited and terrorism is what they've got. It's the gentlest manner possible.

See my reply to Bickeran also.
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5028
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #24 - Nov 8th, 2017 at 10:41pm
Print Post  
Bickeran wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 4:10pm:
the guys fighting the tyran gov't are justified and it dont matter that "oh they can just move". that gov't crushes rights they are wrong even terrorism is justifed end of story

what u are not getting about libertarian is that rights are objective not subjective


I was hoping someone would say this. I think it's the purest libertarian position.

My question to you would be: What if instead of 1% of Tyrannians being libertarian, it's 0%? What if not one single Tyrannian wants libertarian policy imposed in Tyrannia?

Then doesn't Tyrannia become 100% voluntary? More rules, above and beyond the NAP, are okay if they're voluntary, right? In this scenario doesn't Tyrannia become one great big Home Owners' Association? And don't libertarians think it's perfectly fine if a Home Owners' Association forms voluntarily, even if it has horrible tyrannical rules, like no clotheslines or no Jews?

Bickeran wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 4:10pm:
but if you do it even if you move to there and blow them up u are right they are wrong period, once again for dumb white fcks rights objective not subjective


Not all white people are dumb. I am white and I am most certainly not dumb.

I actually fully understand rights being objective, and I fully understand that this is why the Freetonian freedom fighters are justified in blowing stuff up; they're not the initiators of force. The Tyrannian government is.

My basic question is about the fact that most people don't want private courts and no government. If some people do want that, I think they should get the chance to live that way, but not at the expense of the people who don't. Gary Johnson got about 3% of the American vote, and I'd bet my gigantic top tenth of a percent of intelligence brain on the fact that if he'd been preaching no government and private courts, it would have been well below 1%. In other words, if he'd been preaching actual libertarianism.

So rights are objective, fine. Furthermore, your exact concept of rights is objectively perfect. I will concede all of that. I'm still wondering how you justify libertarianism everywhere when most people want at least basic rules. In a libertarian system they would form HOAs and adopt those rules, and you want to turn the world upside-down, take away their rules, and force them to readopt them, for less than 1% of the populace.

Wouldn't it make more sense to advocate the creation of a libertarian town, maybe somewhere out in the Midwest?
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #25 - Nov 9th, 2017 at 7:08am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
Here's my point though: Freedom of speech can become toxic slander and libel (trust me over the spellchecker because I'm smarter) and end up being protected under free speech laws.

The law that protects freedom of speech stands against the government. The government is prohibited from interfering with individual's rights to speak their mind.

Laws making slander and libel punishable are part of the common law of torts that constrain individuals from causing harm to others.

You fantasy that a tyrannical government will pass laws authorizing slander and libel by negating the common law are unrealistic.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #26 - Nov 9th, 2017 at 7:11am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 10:41pm:
I was hoping someone would say this. I think it's the purest libertarian position.

My question to you would be: What if instead of 1% of Tyrannians being libertarian, it's 0%? What if not one single Tyrannian wants libertarian policy imposed in Tyrannia?

Then doesn't Tyrannia become 100% voluntary?
You had your Cartoon Man set it up so you could claim that people will voluntarily subject themselves to tyranny so that you can call tyranny liberty? Cheesy

BTW, Individual Liberty isn't a "policy" that can be imposed. It is in fact one of those state of nature things that can only be either limited or allowed.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
burnsred
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 783
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #27 - Nov 9th, 2017 at 7:50am
Print Post  
Quote:
And I am comparing less-than-ideal libertarianism to less-than-ideal tyranny. In our system (the latter) no matter how biased the system is, the poorest dog gets his day in court. He can choose not to plead guilty. If he has evidence, he may win.
If he has evidence?  What happened to innocent until proven guilty?  What happened is that under our current system, that concept is reserved to those who can afford the legal muscle to enforce it. 

I'm not saying justice will be perfect under a system in which those who file lawsuits have to pay the costs.  I'm saying it won't be any less perfect than our current system in which courts are taxpayer-funded collection agencies for lawyers vying to enrich themselves.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 22008
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #28 - Nov 9th, 2017 at 10:50am
Print Post  
burnsred wrote on Nov 9th, 2017 at 7:50am:
If he has evidence?  What happened to innocent until proven guilty?  What happened is that under our current system, that concept is reserved to those who can afford the legal muscle to enforce it. 

I'm not saying justice will be perfect under a system in which those who file lawsuits have to pay the costs.  I'm saying it won't be any less perfect than our current system in which courts are taxpayer-funded collection agencies for lawyers vying to enrich themselves.

In your first point, you are still largely wrong. It is only in cases of asset forfeiture (theft under color of law) that people are forced to try to prove their innocence. In almost every instance at the local and state level, innocence is still presumed and evidence of wrongdoing must be presented to a jury.

You argument that our courts exist to enrich lawyers has some truth to it, but fee for service courts will not eliminate that problem and have new problems of their own. "The customer is always right" will carry weight in fee for service courts. The larger problem, one that reaches the fundamentals of justice, is that people who have been wronged but can't afford to hire courts are simply screwed under your fee for service system.

BTW, When you keep switching back and forth between advocating voluntarily funded government courts and fee for service courts. it's hard to understand what you really want.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4474
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Are homeless people libertarians?
Reply #29 - Nov 9th, 2017 at 12:35pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Nov 8th, 2017 at 10:41pm:
I actually fully understand rights being objective, and I fully understand that this is why the Freetonian freedom fighters are justified in blowing stuff up; they're not the initiators of force. The Tyrannian government is.

We could use this model to describe the relationship between US ans ISIS.  The US is the tyrannical aggressor by sending in it's Daleks troops and drones to harass the M.E. caliphates. The US represents the Tyrannian government.

ISIS trains and sends agents to the US to blow stuff up -  in defense of the caliphates. They represent the Freetonian freedom fighters.

So, ISIS is justified in taking US civilian lives, right?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Are homeless people libertarians?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy