This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Liberal here. On the fence about switching to Libertarianism.

#41Sativa_RosePosted 7/23/2013 2:40:23 PM
LightSnake posted...
Ah, yes, we hear support from the libertarians to support the EPA and to promote gay rights all the time.

Oh, no, wait. They want to abolish the former and let the free market dictate it. The latter? Just get government out of it, that'll solve all the problems!

Oh, wait when you think about it for ten seconds, it won't.


It's really pointless to argue ideologies because not everyone who labels themselves as that ideology has the exact same views.

Let's just argue the issues. Arguing about labels like "libertarian" "liberal" "socialist" "conservative" etc. is pretty pointless in the long run, because those words all mean different things to different people. Let's just argue the issues instead.
---
Not changing my signature until Canadian citizen and marijuana legalization activist Marc Emery is released from U.S. federal prison.
#42LightSnakePosted 7/23/2013 2:42:17 PM


That would be true if the money were actually being kept and held. But instead the money got taken and replaced with essentially IOUs from the government. When SS falls short(did I say 'when'? its already happening), that money will have to be paid back from other taxes.


How quaint. "We want to cut entitlements!....what do you mean people aren't receiving their benefits!?"

It was 'IOUS' from the start for people who paid in all their lives. A ton of things are essentially IOUs in this world, get over it.




That would be ok, maybe, if you were only required to purchase insurance for emergency care. But the ACA mandates that people purchase 'insurance' for a variety of routine and non-emergency services. Criminal or not, it aint gonna help the situation at all.


You mean preventive care that ensures there will be less emergency care and thus less money needing to be spent
---
"An Emperor should die on his feet." -Titus Flavius Vespasianus.
#43LightSnakePosted 7/23/2013 2:43:05 PM
Sativa_Rose posted...
LightSnake posted...
Ah, yes, we hear support from the libertarians to support the EPA and to promote gay rights all the time.

Oh, no, wait. They want to abolish the former and let the free market dictate it. The latter? Just get government out of it, that'll solve all the problems!

Oh, wait when you think about it for ten seconds, it won't.


It's really pointless to argue ideologies because not everyone who labels themselves as that ideology has the exact same views.

Let's just argue the issues. Arguing about labels like "libertarian" "liberal" "socialist" "conservative" etc. is pretty pointless in the long run, because those words all mean different things to different people. Let's just argue the issues instead.


How nonsensical. There are multiple things that are at the core of the ideology.
---
"An Emperor should die on his feet." -Titus Flavius Vespasianus.
#44blacktrancePosted 7/23/2013 3:05:19 PM
Ah, yes, we hear support from the libertarians to support the EPA and to promote gay rights all the time.

For what it's worth, Gary Johnson (the Libertarian Party presidential candidate!) supports the EPA. In general, libertarians are opposed to the EPA but not to environmental protection in general - they view it as a property rights issue. Ever heard of free-market environmentalism?

As for gay rights, libertarians have been strong supporters of individual liberty and freedom of association. As far as the Libertarian Party goes, they applauded the end of DOMA[1], their 2012 candidate supported recognizing same-sex marriage at the federal level, rather than leaving it to the states[2], and their 2012 platform says, "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws."[3].
Reason Magazine, which is libertarian the vast majority of the time (I can only think of one case in which they took an explicitly unlibertarian position), supports the recognition of same-sex marriage: "[T]here is no compelling governmental reason to deny gay couples equal marriage rights or the benefits that attend them. Government’s elemental duty consists of protecting individual rights from aggression. Same-sex marriages imperil nobody’s rights. They harm no one."[4], "The beauty of gay marriage is that it grants something to one group that doesn't come at the expense of anyone else."[5], and are critical of Russia's stance on gay rights[6].
And even libertarians who oppose federal recognition of same-sex marriage still support legal equality for homosexuals (because they want to end government's role in marriage), and also oppose laws against sodomy and gay adoption.

But by all means, continue misrepresenting libertarianism.

[1]http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarian-party-applauds-doma-strikedown
[2]http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarian-gary-johnson%E2%80%99s-bold-and-consistent-stand-on-gay-marriage
[3]http://www.lp.org/platform
[4]http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/01/legalize-gay-marriage
[5]http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/01/gay-marriage-is-not-a-threat-to-freedom
[6]http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/31/2012-was-not-a-good-year-for-freedom-lov
---
"With enough brutal force the thieving rabble can be kept in line." - Rebelscum
#45SirThinkALotPosted 7/23/2013 3:07:49 PM
LightSnake posted...
You mean preventive care that ensures there will be less emergency care and thus less money needing to be spent


Or more likely will result in more people getting more unnecessary treatment, using more healthcare resources, pushing costs up even more....also known as 'how we got into this situation in the first damn place'
---
Learn real history and economics at liberty Classroom
http://www.libertyclassroom.com/dap/a/?a=1305
#46IamvegitoPosted 7/23/2013 3:12:33 PM
SirThinkALot posted...
LightSnake posted...
You mean preventive care that ensures there will be less emergency care and thus less money needing to be spent


Or more likely will result in more people getting more unnecessary treatment, using more healthcare resources, pushing costs up even more....also known as 'how we got into this situation in the first damn place'


*points at all the countries that spend less on health care yet offer comprehensive treatment*

Show yourself the door, please.
---
"A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."
#47LightSnakePosted 7/23/2013 3:16:48 PM
blacktrance posted...
Ah, yes, we hear support from the libertarians to support the EPA and to promote gay rights all the time.

For what it's worth, Gary Johnson (the Libertarian Party presidential candidate!) supports the EPA. In general, libertarians are opposed to the EPA but not to environmental protection in general - they view it as a property rights issue. Ever heard of free-market environmentalism?

As for gay rights, libertarians have been strong supporters of individual liberty and freedom of association. As far as the Libertarian Party goes, they applauded the end of DOMA[1], their 2012 candidate supported recognizing same-sex marriage at the federal level, rather than leaving it to the states[2], and their 2012 platform says, "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws."[3].
Reason Magazine, which is libertarian the vast majority of the time (I can only think of one case in which they took an explicitly unlibertarian position), supports the recognition of same-sex marriage: "[T]here is no compelling governmental reason to deny gay couples equal marriage rights or the benefits that attend them. Government’s elemental duty consists of protecting individual rights from aggression. Same-sex marriages imperil nobody’s rights. They harm no one."[4], "The beauty of gay marriage is that it grants something to one group that doesn't come at the expense of anyone else."[5], and are critical of Russia's stance on gay rights[6].
And even libertarians who oppose federal recognition of same-sex marriage still support legal equality for homosexuals (because they want to end government's role in marriage), and also oppose laws against sodomy and gay adoption.

But by all means, continue misrepresenting libertarianism.

[1]http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarian-party-applauds-doma-strikedown
[2]http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarian-gary-johnson%E2%80%99s-bold-and-consistent-stand-on-gay-marriage
[3]http://www.lp.org/platform
[4]http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/01/legalize-gay-marriage
[5]http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/01/gay-marriage-is-not-a-threat-to-freedom
[6]http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/31/2012-was-not-a-good-year-for-freedom-lov


And Bob Barr and Ron Paul supported DOMA, your point? What are you trying to show, libertarians are hypocrites? We already knew that.

Libertarians are against DOMA because they believe government shouldn't be defining marriage. Their policies would harm homosexuals a huge deal because they'd strip out any federal protections or benefits they enjoy.

The stance is "let gay people marry" but they tend not to want it recognized in any meaningful legal way.


And for Sir Think?

Yeah, we can swing a few doctor's visits on health care. Is it bankrupting insurance companies when people pay premiums they use to pay for those?

Hate to tell you, but other countries do fine with universal care and public options. Preventative care means you spend less in the long run.
---
"An Emperor should die on his feet." -Titus Flavius Vespasianus.
#48SirThinkALotPosted 7/23/2013 3:23:37 PM
Iamvegito posted...
SirThinkALot posted...
LightSnake posted...
You mean preventive care that ensures there will be less emergency care and thus less money needing to be spent


Or more likely will result in more people getting more unnecessary treatment, using more healthcare resources, pushing costs up even more....also known as 'how we got into this situation in the first damn place'


*points at all the countries that spend less on health care yet offer comprehensive treatment*


You mean the ones that explicitly ration care?
---
Learn real history and economics at liberty Classroom
http://www.libertyclassroom.com/dap/a/?a=1305
#49IamvegitoPosted 7/23/2013 3:24:09 PM
SirThinkALot posted...
Iamvegito posted...
SirThinkALot posted...
LightSnake posted...
You mean preventive care that ensures there will be less emergency care and thus less money needing to be spent


Or more likely will result in more people getting more unnecessary treatment, using more healthcare resources, pushing costs up even more....also known as 'how we got into this situation in the first damn place'


*points at all the countries that spend less on health care yet offer comprehensive treatment*


You mean the ones that explicitly ration care?

That'd be... none of them. Thanks for trolling, come back and play again!
---
"A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."
#50IamvegitoPosted 7/23/2013 3:27:05 PM
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89626309

Woof woof woof woof woof
---
"A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."