Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Libertarian Thread # 3: Liberty will never die
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Libertarian Thread # 3: Liberty will never die

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 286>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15443
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Equality 7-2521 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Libertarian Thread # 3: Liberty will never die
    Posted: 33 minutes ago at 09:15
Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

Wait, you're kidding right?  If not, thanks for the laugh anyway.  Keep observing real life instances of things that don't exist though, buddy.  Personally I blame ghosts and the Loch Ness monster for all economic ills.

The market is a naturally occurring thing.  That's it, that's all, that simple.  It doesn't break, it doesn't need fixed, any and all government intervention in the naturally occurring free market corrupts it by creating an imbalance.  When government force is introduced it invariably creates inequality.  This is almost always done in the name of equality, oddly enough, because for some reason people believe that's an achievable result of force.  There is no utopia so stop poking here and fiddling there and expecting things to balance out for everyone because it doesn't work that way.  Nothing will ever be perfect, there is no such thing.  Also, we all die.


You can't honestly expect anyone to take this argument seriously. Can you?

We need some reasonable way to know that these things you say are true. Even if the market is naturally occurring, nothing else you say follows. Potatoes are natural. Potatoes were also poisonous before the Andean people artificially selected them for lower alkaloid levels.

The reason we don't have answers to this and that we don't have 'the' theory of economics is because economics is complicated and hard to measure and hard to model and hard to even understand basic causal forces. I don't think free market theory does itself any good by trying to market itself as a simple modus ponens from some mysterious set of axioms.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 53 minutes ago at 08:55
Yeah, I don't think the Eurozone is an example of libertarianism though it may tick some boxes like having a currency movement and (relatively) free movement of labour.  Most countries in Eurozone also have a large welfare state, I suppose, which requires significant govt intervention.  What I will say is you cannot follow piecemeal libertarian policies if you are going to have a large welfare establishment.  To that extent, I'd agree that massive public spending was a better solution than austerity to the 2008 crisis.  In the long run, though, not having only fiat money would be a much better solution.  The problem is not necessarily that central banks are as dumb as Friedman insinuated.  It is that ultimately they are political too.  Greenspan kept easy money going too long as a populist measure.

I  learnt the other day that Zimbabwe actually accepts a few foreign currencies as local legal tender, including the Indian Rupee!  LOL  The reason is their terribly debased local currency is now worthless.  Foretaste of the future?


Edited by rogerthat - 51 minutes ago at 08:57
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4082
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 hours 47 minutes ago at 20:01
Wait, you're kidding right?  If not, thanks for the laugh anyway.  Keep observing real life instances of things that don't exist though, buddy.  Personally I blame ghosts and the Loch Ness monster for all economic ills.

The market is a naturally occurring thing.  That's it, that's all, that simple.  It doesn't break, it doesn't need fixed, any and all government intervention in the naturally occurring free market corrupts it by creating an imbalance.  When government force is introduced it invariably creates inequality.  This is almost always done in the name of equality, oddly enough, because for some reason people believe that's an achievable result of force.  There is no utopia so stop poking here and fiddling there and expecting things to balance out for everyone because it doesn't work that way.  Nothing will ever be perfect, there is no such thing.  Also, we all die.
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 33303
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 hours 42 minutes ago at 17:06
Anywho MoM I find it harder and harder to believe there is much right about libertarian econ. I mean I'm not using models or math here, I just observed real life. 

We've had 30+ years now of testing and it seems to all point to: incorrect. In my book. 
Taxes on the top have been coming down down down, especially on capital, more deregulation, more slashing of services and I'm sorry but I don't see how things have been better, seem worse. Brownback even had his "experiment" in Kansas which led to: no growth spurt, just a massive deficit that got his states credit downgraded and he's had to cut $50 mill to education to pay for it now. 


This whole euro crisis is in a way an indictment of libertarian econ. This common currency behaves like the gold standard, it removes the authority of a gov to "do much" and restrains what can be spent. Well that seems to be falling over like a house of cards...The strength of Germany seems to be holding it together, which only comes from their export power thanks to forcing exports on the EULOL The austerity (word may not be used but it's what libertarians basically call for) has caused a disaster. 

Japan slight growth spurt was flipped back to recession after their sales tax hike (aka austerity)   Sorry but I just couldn't believe in it anymore. Reality has proven it incorrect and in fact shown the true results: Allowing those with money and power to just grab more of it, using the power structure to entrench themselves and create social strife. All the non elites of society seem ready to kill each other, some scary forces are slowly creeping up in Europe, the middle classes of some countries like Ireland and Greece are simply moving away...the people, those with money, that libertarianism/right wing want to cater to are simply jumping ship. As always I'll be open minded, I've changed twice, but I'd really like to hear how libertarians are right on economics. If you want to stick to "we need a true free market" mantra, well best of luck...I think you are waiting for something nonexistent. 


Edited by JJLehto - 16 hours 33 minutes ago at 17:15
"It's fine, luckily we're all English so no one will ask any questions. Thank you centuries of emotional repression."
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 33303
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 hours 13 minutes ago at 16:35
Originally posted by manofmystery manofmystery wrote:

We have economics correct too.  I fear you've probably fallen under the illusion that economics must be far more complex than it actually is.

I am thoroughly confused about this statement. 
I have heard many of the libertarian ilk, in fact it was summed up in the rap battle videos, say that the other side makes it too simple: static models and formulas, circular flow models and equations and aggregation that fail to grasp the amazing complexity of the economy and boil it down to overly simplistic and unrealistic models. 

I guess you don't adhere to this, which is fine just want to point out I'm confused the same camp now says economics is both more and less complex than the mainstream makes it out to beLOL

Anyway, I disagree with that because I don't need the advanced calculus and all types of crazy stuff top tier programs do. I don't even need charts or simple models, I have explained many things to people using just words, people with little idea of econ and they all get it quite fine. I myself became interested in the study from blogs, that spelled it out so laymen like myself can grasp. So I don't think I make any more or less complex than needed, just try to fully understand! 

I think you guys make it too simple I mean the word "socialism" and "socialized" is thrown around like it's nothing, no explanation ever and if so, it's shockingly straw man, for example. It's not only wrong, sorry the US is still not socialist and bamacare is not socialized, but misinformed. So too simple isn't always a good thing, especially when it keeps people dumb, like railing against the bad liberal socialism and no one bats an eye at the socialized losses of capital we've absorbed in recent years.... TOO simple aint always a good thing, especially since it tends to be used to misinform or cover. 


Edited by JJLehto - 16 hours 60 minutes ago at 16:48
"It's fine, luckily we're all English so no one will ask any questions. Thank you centuries of emotional repression."
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5065
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Toaster Mantis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 15 2015 at 04:04
Ann Sterzinger, a horror novelist of a vaguely libertarian political bent though she prefers to identify her political views as "alternative right-wing" as they're rather hard to categorize, is currently working out a plan to escape Obamacare tax penalties.
"Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité. Choose one." - Lemmy Kilmister
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2014 at 10:46
For a change, throwing out something from a more leftist point of view (it is not necessarily apparent on a plain reading of the article but I base this statement on having read the writer's earlier articles).  I don't necessarily agree with everything he says here but all the same, it's a brilliantly written piece.

Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4082
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2014 at 21:52
We have economics correct too.  I fear you've probably fallen under the illusion that economics must be far more complex than it actually is.
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 33303
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 06 2014 at 17:11
The thread has been resurrected yet again!

No doubt, while I had to break up with my fling with libertarian economics...what they DO have right is foreign policy, the true third rail neither party or most politicians will touch. Even now, there may have been some cuts but no where near the drastic ones needed! 

Also besides the war on drugs, have to say the "militarization of the police force" libertarians would complain about that everyone scoffed at and said "bleh quit being paranoid loons" or "lol we need police to protect us k" has come to really grip America at the moment...
"It's fine, luckily we're all English so no one will ask any questions. Thank you centuries of emotional repression."
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4082
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2014 at 11:55
Guess we have to expect such when the nation's chief law enforcement officer has his own kill list. 
Speaking of which:
"U.S. Drones Kill 28 'Unknowns' for Every Intended Target"
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 16449
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The T Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 05 2014 at 08:58
Much as the issue of taxation might be of interest on this thread, the most important thing for me is the fact that the US, the supposed "lad of the free" (yeah right) is a police state where police can get away with murder whenever they want. Police are militarized, and ready (and willing, apparently) to kill without consequences. 

Oh yes taxes yes bad yes.
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4082
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 04 2014 at 17:00
Yeah, because murder doesn't cost the government any money
Back to Top
timothy leary View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Online
Points: 3612
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote timothy leary Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 04 2014 at 10:45
Evidently murder is more forgivable then selling individual cigarettes
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4082
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 04 2014 at 09:47
"If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can, and will, hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists." - Lysander Spooner

Just thought I'd dust off this thread to revisit the murder of Eric Garner, seeing as the government soldier that killed him has avoided indictment.  Taxation was the reason Garner found himself being choked to death in the street by a government official.  There should never be any doubt that taxation is force.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2014 at 21:09
Well, on the subject of demand, the current crude oil price slide has the potential to improve cost conditions and give producers more elbow room to reduce prices and in this way spur demand.  This is what could and would have happened in the normal course a couple of years earlier anyway, if the G8 hadn't prevailed on emerging markets to put their economies on steroids to 'maintain' growth.  When there's a global slowdown in consumption, commodity prices start to fall and lower costs and the balance of power slowly begins to favour producers again (at the height of the boom, it's commodity suppliers who make a killing).  This is how the market adjusts but the various heads of state in their infinite wisdom have shown scant faith in it.   And by trying to pump up economies, they unwittingly helped commodity sellers keep their prices firm which was pretty bizarre. 

Edited by rogerthat - November 15 2014 at 21:10
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 33303
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2014 at 15:52
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

@JJlehto

I don't think staying right out of the way in the face of fraud is either libertarian or even liberal, it's just crony capitalist.  Wink 

Well that's exactly it! I find it funny how today, both left and right seem to have agreed upon ignoring fraud, even trying to justify it!, when as pointed out, even the most libertarian of folk say that is ONE area of government necessaryLOL That was the classic line "rules, courts, fight fraud, make the foundation for a true free market" amazing what crony capitalism has done indeed...

Also the reinforcing cycle of exec pay! I sincerely don't care if people are making $20 million a year, but I do think the stock based pay has been negative: lots of reasons, one  being it pressures regulators and lawmakers to de regulate/not enforce regulations. 

Oh yeah, that rant was just because I always see liberal people, though they don't realize it, supporting trickle down-ish policies, and it makes me a bit crazy. Also I had a bit of a debate with someone about the need to lower taxes more, lower corporate taxes, the basic bullet points, so yeah I was angryLOL
That video by Nick Hanauer says it all in my opinion but yeah, I just don't see real life evidence at all supporting trickle down ideas. As stated before I'm all for just eliminating the corporate tax, but I still don't think that'll do much, until demand is boosted. As for wealthy people, I think it's just a silly idea. Like, how will they create jobs? Esp today...most super wealthy are finance, they don't make jobs or products (not good ones at least!) and I don't buy the consumption rationale either. I know Rob here often said how them going out and buying will help us all but again: 1- How will buying Ferraris, Yachts and Mansions trickle down to the Bronx, 2- even if they buy more "regular" or weekly items, there's only soooo much one can buyLOL This isn't a theory or philosophy of mine, just how much can a few thousand people really buy?

That's all fair, but that's kind of why I'm into the idea of more jobs, higher wages. As you say, if supply won't increase it means demand is not there, so why not boost demand? But NOT in "new Keynesian" ways...I think they're not super effective and would be inflationary before successful...I DO believe in NAIRU still, so it's not wise to try to prod from the outside, maybe demand could be boosted long term and sincerely, though I see that only happening through more gov. 
I count ZIRP and printing money as part of the New Keynes ideas btw, which I agree I don't see as very effective. This should be obviousLOL 



Edited by JJLehto - November 15 2014 at 16:14
"It's fine, luckily we're all English so no one will ask any questions. Thank you centuries of emotional repression."
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2014 at 21:47
Trickle down, as Bush sr himself put it, is just voodoo economics.  More to the point, a political sugarcoating of a market-based economic policy to get a buy-in from voters.  Since the days of Keynes, the long run has been dead so you can't tell voters that we must move to a free market economy for the sake of the long run.  Trickle down makes it sound like they might get a slice of the pie too and artificially conjures up an image of capitalism as a system with income redistribution (like socialism).  

By the by, I don't doubt that reducing the tax rate will in fact increase the incentive to invest by allowing for more capital formation.  But I doubt there's any empirical basis to derive the exact amount of trickle down at different income levels from a particular tax rate.

And if even neo liberal thought suggests that the govt should do something to jumpstart the private sector, then we are still in a demand-based trap, still stuck in Keynesian economics, one way or the other.  Supply should form the basis of demand.  If the producers do not want to produce more, then that means there isn't enough demand to warrant more supply.  The thing to do in such a situation is to wait, which of course is what Keynesians feel is the wrong thing to do.  But, really, the only feasible option is to wait till other conditions like say the interest rate have altered sufficiently to spur demand.  If even near zero interest rates don't spur demand, which we have seen in advanced economies recently, then the problem is very fundamental and printing more money will only temporarily paper over these problems.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator

Crossover Team

Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 5982
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2014 at 21:30
@JJlehto

I don't think staying right out of the way in the face of fraud is either libertarian or even liberal, it's just crony capitalist.  Wink  For any free market system to work effectively and for people in a democratic society to believe in it, legal rights cannot be compromised.  Not being illegally conned of money is a right I am entitled to, under any Contract Act of any number of national jurisdictions.   That right should be upheld, whether by private legal enforcement agencies (in a hypothetical fully libertarian society) or by the govt.  If people start saying that's anti-markets, then what we are involved in is just a race to the bottom, driving down market conditions to an unregulated, Wild West mess where none of the entities involved can trust each other to make good their word after a point.
Back to Top
Toaster Mantis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 12 2008
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 5065
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Toaster Mantis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2014 at 14:44
The authors at that webzine I linked to, The Mitrailleuse, do seem to be unified by coming from a libertarian political background but all making some kind of attempt thinking outside the "homo economicus" mentality: that they do so in different directions, but with a uniformly high level of writing quality, is one of the reasons I find that site so interesting even if I disagree with most of that write.
"Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité. Choose one." - Lemmy Kilmister
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 33303
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2014 at 11:40
So guess my question, if any of the libertarians are even still around, is how they feel about fraud?
The "old" market view that fraud is something that must be dealt with to ensure we have actual free markets?
Or the new market view, that just leave it be and it'll all sort itself out?

If no one responds, we can keep talking liberal sh*t I guess LOL

Though I don't think this is even liberal, just fact: Trickle down ANYTHING doesn't work. It's not just conservatives and their ridiculous beliefs about trickle down stuff, many liberal economists and people basically believe it too. "Spur on job creation" "jump start the private sector" The old Keynesian pump priming. I'm all for boosting the private sector, but with direct demand....not these outside attempts to spur job creation. Many liberals do seem to believe we can prod from the outside and have em create jobs, or some at least say huge military spending is OK since it IS gov spending after all, and all gov spending is good for the economy. One guy I like even said Wubya's military spending was at least beneficial to all, even if it was skewed to the top. 

I disagree there, I don't see how it is. Sure, it caused a huge swell in Northern VA, but not much else. How will benefiting defense contractors and DC Lobbyists trickle down to the Bronx? It's insane. The rest of the spending is then being sent out of country, basically, often getting destroyed (including potential labor). More military R&D is fine and that can benefit us, but not more war. 
Other liberal economists have, until recently, basically supported bubbles saying it is all we have for growth, and at least good does come from it. Insane! These bubbles DO benefit only the top, increasingly, and hurt the rest. But ya know, it'll trickle down. These words may not be said by the left, but I've thought about their words and policies, and I think many also believe in trickle down. It's a shame, we need "bump up" economics. The Reagan days brainwashed us allLOL liberals at best accept we need a little bit more gov, progressive go farther but still seem to be in a "trickle down" mindset. Only fringe people dare go as far as post WWII policy....our golden age of high employment, high wage capitalism with strong gov backing


Edited by JJLehto - November 14 2014 at 11:44
"It's fine, luckily we're all English so no one will ask any questions. Thank you centuries of emotional repression."
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 286>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.250 seconds.