Political Crossfire Forums

[yETII90]

In recent weeks I have become facinatated with the Libertarians (Not because of the Political Quiz thread).

It is because I have noticed things lately that our government is being involved in things that shouldn't be involved in. For example who gives a damn about who marries who or if somebody expresses the religion they practice. I am also dissatisfied with my current party (the Democrats) because I don't like their economic policies.

I do agree with most of the basics that the Libertarians practice, except for protective tariffs, gun laws, and Medicare. I believe that guns should be allowed but there should be stricter policies and I believe in protective tariffs because I feel they keep us alive in a market. Medicare I am not sure about


I may sound like an idiot, but for Libertarians reading this, could you guys send some links and give me your opinions to help me out a bit.

Thanks.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Any form of arms control is inefective.

[Wolverine]

Gun control really doesn't work. With a nearly open border, and lack of enforcement, the laws really just give you a "warm and fuzzy" feeling all over.

For more information on the Libertarian Party,
www.lp.org
Just click "Issues & Postitions", and see if you want to be a Libertarian. :wink:

[Gus]

Most new Libertarians have some problems with issues. They are quickly convinced of their own shortcomings ;).

But seriously, I'll address them right here:

yETII90 wrote: except for protective tariffs
Protective tariffs do the exact opposite of what they are designed to do. Instead of ensuring jobs for domestic citizens, it ensures least job stagnation and probably job loss. Why? Trade = good. Trade = prosperity. When you restrict trade, you restrict prosperity, and hence the growth of the market, and hence the growth of better jobs. The USSR took an isolationist economic policy, and millions of people died of starvation as the result. This is (in a nutshell) the pragmatic approach. The philosophical approach is that each human has rights--property rights being what we are concerned with presently. Ownership is understood to imply that one may do with one's property as one pleases. This includes trading it. To whomever you wish. A government enforcing a policy of telling you, or people overseas, with whom your or they may trade is a fundamental subversion of that right.

Tariffs also help the economy of the non-domestic country, thus helping its citizens. Outsourcing not only lowers domestic prices, it gives employment to those who need it the most. While I understand that outsourcing causes an immediate and unfortunate loss of jobs for domestic citizens, those citizens have no right to a job, and whether they are given a job is completely up to the discretion of the employer. Forcing the employer to employ domestic citizens is just as bad as forcing him not to trade with anybody outside of an imaginary line. The amount of jobs created by outsourcing far outweighs the amount lost. However, a large part of the outsourcing problem has to do with licensing and regulations here at home, but that's another issue...
yETII90 wrote: gun laws
I'm not sure to what extent you are referring to, but most Libertarians strongly support the Second Amendment as first a fundamental exercise of property rights and second as a last resort to a tyrannical government. Most Libertarians do not take this to the extreme in believing that nukes and such should be legal, however.

yETII90 wrote: Medicare A few moderate Libertarians think there should be some sort of very minimal "safety net," so you're not alone on that either. The official position is the complete elimination of that, but at this point it is a non-issue since Medicare, regardless of whether you believe it should exist or not, is in dire need of downsizing and reform.

Anyway, a much more extensive (but hidden) Libertarian platform is in my sig. Take a look through it, and if you want to join, I'm sure eXploiTed will let you in :-).

[yETII90]

Libertarian Party wrote: There can be no serious attempt to solve the problem of poverty in America without addressing our failed government-run school system. Nearly forty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, America's schools are becoming increasingly segregated, not on the basis of race, but on income. Wealthy and middle class parents are able to send their children to private schools, or at least move to a district with better public schools. Poor families are trapped -- forced to send their children to a public school system that fails to educate.

It is time to break up the public education monopoly and give all parents the right to decide what school their children will attend. It is essential to restore choice and the discipline of the marketplace to education. Only a free market in education will provide the improvement in education necessary to enable millions of Americans to escape poverty.


I agree with the problem, but are you guys advocating vouchers as the answer?

As for the other in the issues and positions page of the Libertarian Party, I agree with the others and am starting to see where you guys are coming from on the gun control issue, but I still think there should be some sort of restrictions such as licenses and background checks.

A second question. How can I be certain that the Libertarians won't turn into the Democrats and Republicans if they obtain major party status, and start putting the needs of the party ahead of the people and won't legislate with the buck on occasion?

[Shady]

yETII90 wrote: Libertarian Party wrote: There can be no serious attempt to solve the problem of poverty in America without addressing our failed government-run school system. Nearly forty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, America's schools are becoming increasingly segregated, not on the basis of race, but on income. Wealthy and middle class parents are able to send their children to private schools, or at least move to a district with better public schools. Poor families are trapped -- forced to send their children to a public school system that fails to educate.

It is time to break up the public education monopoly and give all parents the right to decide what school their children will attend. It is essential to restore choice and the discipline of the marketplace to education. Only a free market in education will provide the improvement in education necessary to enable millions of Americans to escape poverty.


I agree with the problem, but are you guys advocating vouchers as the answer?

As for the other in the issues and positions page of the Libertarian Party, I agree with the others and am starting to see where you guys are coming from on the gun control issue, but I still think there should be some sort of restrictions such as licenses and background checks.

A second question. How can I be certain that the Libertarians won't turn into the Democrats and Republicans if they obtain major party status, and start putting the needs of the party ahead of the people and won't legislate with the buck on occasion?

Short answer is- you can't. But by limiting the size of the government your on the track that even if they switch the damage they cause will be mitigated. Fact is their is going to be some corruption at every level but it's better to take a shot then stick with people you already KNOW are corrupt. I'd rather take a leap of faith.

[yETII90]

Shady wrote: yETII90 wrote: Libertarian Party wrote: There can be no serious attempt to solve the problem of poverty in America without addressing our failed government-run school system. Nearly forty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, America's schools are becoming increasingly segregated, not on the basis of race, but on income. Wealthy and middle class parents are able to send their children to private schools, or at least move to a district with better public schools. Poor families are trapped -- forced to send their children to a public school system that fails to educate.

It is time to break up the public education monopoly and give all parents the right to decide what school their children will attend. It is essential to restore choice and the discipline of the marketplace to education. Only a free market in education will provide the improvement in education necessary to enable millions of Americans to escape poverty.


I agree with the problem, but are you guys advocating vouchers as the answer?

As for the other in the issues and positions page of the Libertarian Party, I agree with the others and am starting to see where you guys are coming from on the gun control issue, but I still think there should be some sort of restrictions such as licenses and background checks.

A second question. How can I be certain that the Libertarians won't turn into the Democrats and Republicans if they obtain major party status, and start putting the needs of the party ahead of the people and won't legislate with the buck on occasion?

Short answer is- you can't. But by limiting the size of the government your on the track that even if they switch the damage they cause will be mitigated. Fact is their is going to be some corruption at every level but it's better to take a shot then stick with people you already KNOW are corrupt. I'd rather take a leap of faith.

Very good answer.





Quote: Protective tariffs do the exact opposite of what they are designed to do. Instead of ensuring jobs for domestic citizens, it ensures least job stagnation and probably job loss. Why? Trade = good. Trade = prosperity. When you restrict trade, you restrict prosperity, and hence the growth of the market, and hence the growth of better jobs. The USSR took an isolationist economic policy, and millions of people died of starvation as the result. This is (in a nutshell) the pragmatic approach. The philosophical approach is that each human has rights--property rights being what we are concerned with presently. Ownership is understood to imply that one may do with one's property as one pleases. This includes trading it. To whomever you wish. A government enforcing a policy of telling you, or people overseas, with whom your or they may trade is a fundamental subversion of that right.

Tariffs also help the economy of the non-domestic country, thus helping its citizens. Outsourcing not only lowers domestic prices, it gives employment to those who need it the most. While I understand that outsourcing causes an immediate and unfortunate loss of jobs for domestic citizens, those citizens have no right to a job, and whether they are given a job is completely up to the discretion of the employer. Forcing the employer to employ domestic citizens is just as bad as forcing him not to trade with anybody outside of an imaginary line. The amount of jobs created by outsourcing far outweighs the amount lost. However, a large part of the outsourcing problem has to do with licensing and regulations here at home, but that's another issue...

I see your argument but.........
If protective tarrifs are really a bad thing than why is it that nations that the Japanese car companies are doing so well, it's because we don't implement tariffs in our country so they get high sales, while they implement tariffs and we get almost nothing.

[Korimyr the Rat]

yETII90 wrote: I may sound like an idiot, but for Libertarians reading this, could you guys send some links and give me your opinions to help me out a bit.

As a former Libertarian, there is only one piece of advice I would impart upon you: do not allow the extremists and Randroids to tell you that you cannot be a moderate Libertarian.

There is nothing wrong with joining and supporting a party that you mostly agree with.

[Gus]

yETII90 wrote: I agree with the problem, but are you guys advocating vouchers as the answer?
Yeah, that would be one of the first steps. Surprisingly, quite a few Libertarians don't want to end public education (or, if they do, want a voucher system to remain intact).

yETII90 wrote:
As for the other in the issues and positions page of the Libertarian Party, I agree with the others and am starting to see where you guys are coming from on the gun control issue, but I still think there should be some sort of restrictions such as licenses and background checks.
Licensing and background checks may be required by insurance agencies or something similar. A lot of the things that the government takes care of can almost always be done privately. But some Libertarians also think felons should not be afforded guns (thus basically arguing for background checks).

Libertarians get a bad rap because, like Korimyr said, we have our fair share of radicals (anarchists, Objectivists, etc.). There's quite a few radicals in the Democrats and Republicans also, so it's not an exclusive thing.

Essentially, whether somebody in the Libertarian Party is an anarchist, minarchist, Objectivist, austro-libertarian, etc., we are all consistent on one thing: smaller government.

[yETII90]

Gus wrote: yETII90 wrote: I agree with the problem, but are you guys advocating vouchers as the answer?
Yeah, that would be one of the first steps. Surprisingly, quite a few Libertarians don't want to end public education (or, if they do, want a voucher system to remain intact).

So you are looking to privatise education, is that it? (It was just really unclear on the Libertarian Website.)

If you guys are, I have a question, wouldn't privatiseed education make the segregated rift worse not better?


yETII90 wrote:
As for the other in the issues and positions page of the Libertarian Party, I agree with the others and am starting to see where you guys are coming from on the gun control issue, but I still think there should be some sort of restrictions such as licenses and background checks.
Licensing and background checks may be required by insurance agencies or something similar. A lot of the things that the government takes care of can almost always be done privately. But some Libertarians also think felons should not be afforded guns (thus basically arguing for background checks).

I don't mind guns, I just mind them being bought like a piece of candy, by 11 yr olds or something like that.

Libertarians get a bad rap because, like Korimyr said, we have our fair share of radicals (anarchists, Objectivists, etc.). There's quite a few radicals in the Democrats and Republicans also, so it's not an exclusive thing.

Essentially, whether somebody in the Libertarian Party is an anarchist, minarchist, Objectivist, austro-libertarian, etc., we are all consistent on one thing: smaller government.

We do need that pretty badly now






Quote:
As a former Libertarian, there is only one piece of advice I would impart upon you: do not allow the extremists and Randroids to tell you that you cannot be a moderate Libertarian.

There is nothing wrong with joining and supporting a party that you mostly agree with.

I'll keep that in mind, thanks.

[Gus]

yETII90 wrote: So you are looking to privatise education, is that it? (It was just really unclear on the Libertarian Website.)

If you guys are, I have a question, wouldn't privatiseed education make the segregated rift worse not better?


My personal opinion is complete privatization following a voucher system for quite some time. I think a lot, maybe even a majority, of Libertarians want a permanent voucher system, though.

And to answer your question, yes, at this point it would. That's why I want a voucher system and then a slow movement to privatization (perhaps vouchers that partly pay for education, slowly decreasing pay to zero). However, regardless of a voucher system or not, competition is sorely needed in the education market, and vouchers would provide that without limiting education to those who can afford it.

yETII90 wrote: I don't mind guns, I just mind them being bought like a piece of candy, by 11 yr olds or something like that.
Ya, sales to minors would be restricted. Our platform is not anarchy.

yETII90 wrote: derEikopf wrote: Essentially, whether somebody in the Libertarian Party is an anarchist, minarchist, Objectivist, austro-libertarian, etc., we are all consistent on one thing: smaller government. We do need that pretty badly now
Yep, and the Libertarians provide the most promise to bring that. We have been growing since 9/11, as disgruntled Republicans and Democrats defect to a party that promises to return America back to what it was originally intended--a country of and for free individuals.

[yETII90]

Gus wrote: yETII90 wrote: So you are looking to privatise education, is that it? (It was just really unclear on the Libertarian Website.)

If you guys are, I have a question, wouldn't privatiseed education make the segregated rift worse not better?


My personal opinion is complete privatization following a voucher system for quite some time. I think a lot, maybe even a majority, of Libertarians want a permanent voucher system, though.

Would these vouchers affect private institutions?

And to answer your question, yes, at this point it would. That's why I want a voucher system and then a slow movement to privatization (perhaps vouchers that partly pay for education, slowly decreasing pay to zero). However, regardless of a voucher system or not, competition is sorely needed in the education market, and vouchers would provide that without limiting education to those who can afford it.

yETII90 wrote: I don't mind guns, I just mind them being bought like a piece of candy, by 11 yr olds or something like that.
Ya, sales to minors would be restricted. Our platform is not anarchy.

That's better

yETII90 wrote: derEikopf wrote: Essentially, whether somebody in the Libertarian Party is an anarchist, minarchist, Objectivist, austro-libertarian, etc., we are all consistent on one thing: smaller government. We do need that pretty badly now
Yep, and the Libertarians provide the most promise to bring that. We have been growing since 9/11, as disgruntled Republicans and Democrats defect to a party that promises to return America back to what it was originally intended--a country of and for free individuals.

That also sounds nice


PS. Your sig is so true on so many levels

[Wolverine]

The LP is a truly wonderful party.

[zero18]

yETII90 wrote: As for the other in the issues and positions page of the Libertarian Party, I agree with the others and am starting to see where you guys are coming from on the gun control issue, but I still think there should be some sort of restrictions such as licenses and background checks.

Most libertarians have no problem with background checks. Licenses, however, are detested.

1. With a gun license the govt knows who exactly has guns. If we ever fell under a tyrannical govt then that would be a huge disadvantage.

2. A license implies that gun ownership is a privilege and not a right.


Quote: A second question. How can I be certain that the Libertarians won't turn into the Democrats and Republicans if they obtain major party status, and start putting the needs of the party ahead of the people and won't legislate with the buck on occasion?

As Shady said, we can't guarantee they won't. However, whats interesting about the Libertarian Party is that the party name itself represents an ideology. The Democratic and Republican parties have changed dramatically in the last 150 or so years but I can't see a Libertarian candidate 20 yrs from now advocating, say, the draft (which goes completely against libertarianism).

[zero18]

yETII90 wrote: I believe that guns should be allowed but there should be stricter policies

Its not antilibertarian to favor stricter laws on those who commit violent crimes with guns.

[Kindred]

ProGunAmerican wrote: The LP is a truly wonderful party.

Well, I'm convinced. :lol:

[Wolverine]

A.D wrote: ProGunAmerican wrote: The LP is a truly wonderful party.

Well, I'm convinced. :lol:
:lol:
It really is......
www.lp.org

[foadi]

Korimyr the Rat wrote: yETII90 wrote: I may sound like an idiot, but for Libertarians reading this, could you guys send some links and give me your opinions to help me out a bit.

As a former Libertarian, there is only one piece of advice I would impart upon you: do not allow the extremists and Randroids to tell you that you cannot be a moderate Libertarian.
Most of the Libertarians on this site are moderates.

[Korimyr the Rat]

foadi wrote: Most of the Libertarians on this site are moderates.

I'm not speaking specifically of the Libertarians on this site, who I would agree are rather more moderate in their outlook.

[zero18]

Yeah, I think we only have 3-4 'randroids' on this site.