-->
@Username
If you read the post, I am not a extremist, I have moderate beliefs. I still think regulation is needed, but basic regulations
Growing Older I've Lost Identity To A Political Party
Posts
Total:
110
-->
@Vader
What do you 'identify' as then? A Centrist or a Libertarian?
-->
@RationalMadman
Libertarian Conservative Centrist. More Libertarian than Conservative
-->
@Vader
If you read the post, I am not a extremist, I have moderate beliefs. I still think regulation is needed, but basic regulations
The problem is that the libertarian position is in staunch support of capitalism. At least that's the way I lean.
-->
@Greyparrot
One can only choose if one possesses the ability to choose.....Irrespective of whether choice is an option or not.
So how do you think that the Turing Test is relevant to a wholly human experience?
-->
@Username
Capitalism itself is the only truly success economic system in America. While Europe has socialist policies, they have smaller populations. America has the 3rd largest population.
Then with communism, well, do I need to even explain myself?
Then with communism, well, do I need to even explain myself?
-->
@Vader
Capitalism itself is the only truly success economic system in America. While Europe has socialist policies, they have smaller populations. America has the 3rd largest population.
Population is not analogous with success. In fact, our massive populations are a big harm right now.
In a moral and democratic sense, capitalism is a failure.
I'm not a communist.
-->
@Vader
Happy to see you getting there. Even though libertarianism isn't the answer, certain elements of it are, and while it's wrong on a lot of levels it is still more right than traditional Reagan/Thatcher style conservatism. I walked a similar path around your age, so you might find my opinion of some interest. Or maybe I am just being pretentious...but:
To put it simply, I trust corporations more than I trust government. Corporations themselves are the people with the biggest impact. With the recent fiasco with Robinhood, my outright anger at Robinhood and anger at AOC for dividing the party when there is bipartisan agreement, I lose faith in both parties. Thus is where Libertarianism comes in. Corporations think for themselves by using the people to compete. In short, corporations are the people who help understand the consumer more than the government.
Unfortunately, you can't really trust either one here. The fundamental problem isn't with the governmental or the corporate structure, even if they could be tweaked. The problem is with American culture and the people running both the government AND the corporations. For a variety of reasons (social media, the destruction of the community, declining religiosity, the destruction of the family, wage stagnation, poor diets, environmental contaminants, etc.) everyone has gone insane. This means that BOTH the corporations and the government are going to do a poor job of acting in the general welfare of the populace. Government and corporations are just tools, and if the underlying culture is a toxic cesspool of warring factions, neither of these tools are going to be wielded appropriately.
The current economic model of large corporations dominating a weak central government excessively rewards early entrants. This results in quasi-monopolies and actually ends up stifling competition/economic opportunity and resulting in further inequality. US copyright law is basically set up to ensure that the most valuable assets of large companies NEVER come out of their control (see Mickey Mouse, who is still copyrighted a century later), and anti-trust laws are so antiquated that they are a joke. While corporations are typically better at managing resources due to the fact that even the most advantaged corporation could go bust, don't think for even a minute that they are where they are solely due to their own merits. The corporation crushes its opponents by any means necessary, and in America where it isn't considered a conflict of interest for a presidential candidate or a Treasury Secretary to accept large bribes from banks and large corporations in exchange for "speeches" it's easy to see the kind of corruption that results. We saw the strength of financial power this week with Robinhood, which all but committed suicide to appease financial players above their head. Explain THAT from an efficient market viewpoint. All this is to say that while there are some insights to be had, the economics 101 explanation for how the economy works leaves a lot to be desired.
What I think libertarianism gets right is that decision making should happen as at low a level as possible, whenever possible, to minimize conflict. But our modern society and economy is so complex that the number of these decisions that can be made at a local level is more limited than we would desire. I don't mean to sound too demoralized, but I don't really see any positive outcome for the United States. I think the die has been cast, and you seem like a smart kid so you're probably just going to lose more and more faith in the system the more you see. This isn't to say that people should give up all hope--that's stupid because you can always improve your personal situation even if you have no control over the broader political/economic picture. Go to church, find productive and enjoyable hobbies, exercise, save and invest wisely, be a positive influence on the people in your life and your community. The future belongs to those who show up, so get married and have children--your ancestors reproduced in situations far worth. Not only are these things more important on a personal level than politics, but they actually have a more positive influence on the world than coming up with the "perfect" ideology.
-->
@thett3
Unfortunately, you can't really trust either one here. The fundamental problem isn't with the governmental or the corporate structure, even if they could be tweaked. The problem is with American culture and the people running both the government AND the corporations. For a variety of reasons (social media, the destruction of the community, declining religiosity, the destruction of the family, wage stagnation, poor diets, environmental contaminants, etc.) everyone has gone insane. This means that BOTH the corporations and the government are going to do a poor job of acting in the general welfare of the populace. Government and corporations are just tools, and if the underlying culture is a toxic cesspool of warring factions, neither of these tools are going to be wielded appropriately.
I agree with this statement, hence why I am a moderate. I believe that corporations can't be fully trusted to the extent that Radical Libertarians trust, but at the same times, corporation may have influence on govt officials, but govt itself is the ultimate authority over the land and can create a laws. In a world where the government has more power, more people become suppressed under the government rule. Both should not be fully trusted, but the government should have basic regulations on corporations. Ultimately both parties themselves contribute to the toxic spread of society (where Liberals are willing to destroy the middle class and where the Conservatives will put the wealthy on a pedestal).
Look at an example now with the left. They are pushing $15 an hour minimum wage. Do you really think small business can afford to pay their employees such a high payrate? It's ludicrous what they are doing and how the government is trying to interfere by forcing policies to businesses by changing the status quo.
What I think libertarianism gets right is that decision making should happen as at low a level as possible, whenever possible, to minimize conflict. But our modern society and economy is so complex that the number of these decisions that can be made at a local level is more limited than we would desire. I don't mean to sound too demoralized, but I don't really see any positive outcome for the United States. I think the die has been cast, and you seem like a smart kid so you're probably just going to lose more and more faith in the system the more you see. This isn't to say that people should give up all hope--that's stupid because you can always improve your personal situation even if you have no control over the broader political/economic picture. Go to church, find productive and enjoyable hobbies, exercise, save and invest wisely, be a positive influence on the people in your life and your community. The future belongs to those who show up, so get married and have children--your ancestors reproduced in situations far worth. Not only are these things more important on a personal level than politics, but they actually have a more positive influence on the world than coming up with the "perfect" ideology.
All empires are doomed to fall, it only matters when and how, and as a person, you need to live to the fullest. As you can see, I don't talk much on politics as I believe there is no point in trying to convince people who are so "dense" in their beliefs to even consider the other side. I try to stray away from this side, although I do the occasional response. For people to surround themselves with such burdens is mentally taxing.
Ultimately, I put trust in what god has put into motion at the end of the day.
Ultimately, I put trust in what god has put into motion at the end of the day.
-->
@Username
I see nothing wrong with capitalism at it's purest form. The problem comes with human instinct to do evil, which ultimately, is where I believe basic regulation help.
I see it as this way, give a human either a big corporation (Amazon, Microsoft) to run or an entire government. What causes more risk to the general population
-->
@Vader
I see it as this way, give a human either a big corporation (Amazon, Microsoft) to run or an entire government.
The government has many safeguards and limitations to how much even the president (in president-led nations) or prime minister (in the other type) can truly corrupt it. What corporations and those who rank high in them can do is far more devastating. They can influence many nations, many media stations and get away with it too because they can say they acted in their company's interest whereas corrupt politicians can't feign having acted in the nation's best interest when caught.
In time you will see how the game is really played and that donors and money movers are more potent and able to get away with being it, than the politicians doing their dirty work.
-->
@Vader
Milton Freidman says the only tried and true way to protect the consumer is to give the consumer unlimited choices through competitive services. The government is a monopoly on those services with no competition.
-->
@Greyparrot
Many nations, including Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ghana, Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, India and many more have tried that approach. The problem is that it merely ends up in thugs serving rich people and some of said thugs can even become the leader.
You can't have competitive services without the protection of private property from thugs.
Think of the BLM thug riots. The people there now have no choices and are at the mercy of any service left even if it's a shitty government service. All because government failed to protect private property.
You can't have a free market without the protection of private property.
-->
@Greyparrot
Most of the 'thugs' that made it into 'riots' were not with BLM at all, some weren't even black nor ever talking well of blacks, they had come along for the thrill.
-->
@Greyparrot
In truly free market, protection is something to purchase, zero guarantee.
Which is why you can't have a free market with anarchy.
-->
@Greyparrot
Anarchy is the freest market there is, even the money itself is up for debate.
-->
@Vader
I see nothing wrong with capitalism at it's purest form. The problem comes with human instinct to do evil, which ultimately, is where I believe basic regulation help.I see it as this way, give a human either a big corporation (Amazon, Microsoft) to run or an entire government. What causes more risk to the general population
Are you pro-democracy?
-->
@Username
Yes
-->
@Vader
Political parties represent the interests of those who run them, they could not give a shit what their supporters think about anything. The Libertarian party is no different. Any political party is only as good as its most corrupt self serving asshole.
-->
@Vader
Yes
So why not have it in the economy?
-->
@Username
I don't get what you are trying to say
-->
@Vader
I don't get what you are trying to say
Economies where businesses are democratically owned are a type of socialist economy.
Where businesses are required* to be democratically owned
-->
@Vader
To put it simply, I trust corporations more than I trust government.
corporations are the main reason why America is in the mess that it is in.
-->
@Intelligence_06
libertarianism is the opposite of based, only auth right or left uses based
-->
@thett3
Unfortunately, you can't really trust either one here. The fundamental problem isn't with the governmental or the corporate structure, even if they could be tweaked. The problem is with American culture and the people running both the government AND the corporations. For a variety of reasons (social media, the destruction of the community, declining religiosity, the destruction of the family, wage stagnation, poor diets, environmental contaminants, etc.) everyone has gone insane. This means that BOTH the corporations and the government are going to do a poor job of acting in the general welfare of the populace. Government and corporations are just tools, and if the underlying culture is a toxic cesspool of warring factions, neither of these tools are going to be wielded appropriately.
couldn't have said it any better!
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Just because you don’t see them using it doesn’t mean it is excluded from the definition.
-->
@Vader
With the recent fiasco with Robinhood, my outright anger at Robinhood and anger at AOC for dividing the party when there is bipartisan agreement, I lose faith in both parties. Thus is where Libertarianism comes in.
I haven't read to see if everyone has added their two cents in on this, but this seems a little contradictory, friend. The private market supposedly colluded to protect billionaires. That was private corporations working together to further their interests.
So I don't see how giving corporations more power over our lives will necessarily solve that. What really needs to happen is two things: get money out of politics and primary to remove incompetent imbeciles like AOC who cares more about virtue signaling for attention than working with people like Ted Cruz to solve the Robinhood issue.
The government is in many ways incompetent, but that is mainly due to the incompetence and/or corruption of the politicians in power. You need to balance government and the private sector. The private sector is competent and efficient, but rarely has your intentions in mind. The public sector should hypothetically have your interests at heart and it is possible for that to happen (it was that way once), but they are inefficient.
Don't make the mistake of going down the libertarian "do as you want" cesspit. That is why we live in a degenerate society right now. Don't falsely believe that corporations are benevolent entities: they would outsource your job in a heartbeat to save money.