The Libertarian Party

I dont really have time to respond to each misconception or thought about the Libertarian Party today. But if you read the executive summary you will gain more insight. And you will see that nobody wants to discriminate against others or live in an state of anarchy or allow business`s to pollute with impunity.

http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml

i`ll be back tomorrow.

Good trading to you.
 
Quote from dddooo:

I don't want your stinking world of liberty. I don't want people to have the liberty to yell fire in a theater, I don't want people to have the liberty to put "no dogs or blacks/jews allowed" signs in front of their houses, stores, universities, businesses. I don't want open borders, I don't want discrimination, I don't want the liberty to spread hatred and bigotry or encourage violence...

I don't want businesses to have the liberty to polute and destroy the envirnoment, I don't want banks to have the liberty to steal my money and disappear in the night without FDIC insurance and other governmental restrictions, I don't want insurance companies to have the liberty to cancel my coverage the day I need it, I don't want airlines to have the liberty to cut corners on safety and maintenance, I don't want CEOs to have the liberty to collude and fix prices, I don't want companies to have the liberty to merge and monopolize entire industries, I don't want hospitals to have the liberty not to accept patients if they are not profitable...

PS did I forget to mention that Libertarianism is nothing more than glorified Anarchism?
More...

..."I don't want your stinking world of liberty...".


Wow, you really have a terrible opinion of people. (... like all good liberals... )

Libertarians believe anything goes, as long as it doesn't adversely effect others.

Most of your list of "don't wants", fails this simple test.
 
If Libertarians were granted all the freedoms they wanted for themselves they would have no interest in the lack of freedoms for others...

Quote from nononsense:

Libertarians have more social conscience than most ....
More...
 
I was wondering when a subject like this would come up here. I'm sort of surprised it took this long.
I tend to believe that there are significantly more benefits associated with smaller, less involved governments. I think that attempts to protect people from their own poor decisions with overgrown bureaucracies are rarely justified or productive. I think the Libertarian party has a morally consistent base of principles for their platform (You are free to have what you earn, and spend what you earn as you see fit), and the 2 major political parties do not at all (they have some combination of contradictions involved in each one of their platforms (Reps: You can keep your money, but we are going to limit your consumption of things we don't like by limiting it's availability or declaring it illegal. Dems: You can do whatever you want, but we are going to take larger portions of your money, which will by necessity limit some of your options to actually do the things you want to do.))
I also see large holes in the LP platform which they will have to contend with at some point. I remember reading about a year ago that they believed welfare would be replaced by charities that people could choose to contribute to. At some point, they are going to have to acknowledge that this is counterintuitive to their principles (people with freedom to do as they please might not choose to support others, and shouldn't feel obligated to because of some sort of abandonment of government duties, if that is how they view them), and they should probably be prepared to somehow deal with the consequences if people choose not to contribute.
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

If Libertarians were granted all the freedoms they wanted for themselves they would have no interest in the lack of freedoms for others...
More...

I think that the freedoms they want, by definition in their parties platform, would be those freedoms that wouldn't impinge on the freedoms of others.
 
Yes, but if they had their freedoms, I don't think they would be concerned for the lack of freedoms of others.

Libertarianism is all about self interest, not what is good for society as a whole.

Quote from davidlynch2000:

I think that the freedoms they want, by definition in their parties platform, would be those freedoms that wouldn't impinge on the freedoms of others.
More...
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Yes, but if they had their freedoms, I don't think they would be concerned for the lack of freedoms of others.

Libertarianism is all about self interest, not what is good for society as a whole.
More...

What sorts of freedoms do you find to have a binary nature like that? Would you say that the freedom to smoke in public is a restriction on the freedom of others to breath "clean" air? Would you say that the freedom to provide a cheap flight is a restriction on the freedom to recieve a safe plane flight? I tend to disagree with these positions, (I think people should be held accountable for their actions and not "protected" from choice... e.g. don't go to places that allow smoking if you don't want to and pick your plane flight after considering the company's policies and previous results) but I understand the arguments people make in their favor.

I think in general, a libertarian's view everyone getting to pick their what is best for themselves, is best for society. They at the very least assert that the government getting to pick what is best for everybody is a non optimal solution for society.
 
Say a Libertarian could move to a desert island, pay no taxes, make as much money as he wanted, live with full freedom.

You think he would care what happens to others and their freedoms around their world?

Libertarians have been around for a long time.

Very few if any marched with Dr. King, or care about civil rights of others, women's rights, etc.

Thinks most Libertarian are members of Amnesty International?

LOL....

The issues I have seen Libertarians get vocal about are drug use (which I agree with, drug prohibition while alcohol is not restricted for adults is absurd...legalize it, tax it, and control it) and taxation.

Social issues? Champions of gay rights? Champions of the poor and downtrodden?

No way....

Quote from davidlynch2000:

What sorts of freedoms do you find to have a binary nature like that? Would you say that the freedom to smoke in public is a restriction on the freedom of others to breath "clean" air? Would you say that the freedom to provide a cheap flight is a restriction on the freedom to recieve a safe plane flight? I tend to disagree with these positions, (I think people should ba held accountable for their actions and not "protected" from choice... e.g. don't go to places that allow smoking if you don't want to and pick your plane flight after considering the company's policies and previous results) but I understand the arguments people make in their favor.
More...
 
The only way the LP will ever be a contender is to field candidates on the local and state level FIRST. They seem to go about it in a bassackwards way, trying to win the highest office in the land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top