|
Author
|
Topic: Make the right choice
|
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted October 29, 2006 12:42
   
quote:
Originally posted by Mezcalhead:
Please, Europeans, do not read these pages. I know the thought of the lack of government control in your lives is too scary, so for the sake of your sanity...please avoid at all costs.
As a european; this is NOT something new, it's a form of anarchism,if we don't need a goverment, why then vote for a party that don't want itself. Vote for the libertarians and you'll end up with them as a government.
I'm already a member of the swedish syndicalists but you cannot vote for them, only join one of their worker unions.
quote:
»To fight the empire is to be infected by its derangement. This is a paradox; whoever defeats part of the empire becomes the empire; it proliferates like a virus... thereby it becomes its enemies.« —
Philip K. Dick-------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted October 30, 2006 01:37
quote:
Originally posted by Mezcalhead:
Anna, libertarians do not want anarchy. ......... I was joking of course with you Europeans since most of your governments are socialist in nature....
Socialist... nah, have you read the news lately. Libertarianism is a political philosophy advocating that individuals should be free to do whatever they wish with their person or property, as long as they do not infringe on the same liberty of others. There are two types of libertarians. One type hold as a fundamental maxim that all human interaction should be voluntary and consensual. They maintain that the initiation of force against another person or his property, with "force" meaning the use of physical force, the threat of it, or the commission of fraud against someone who has not initiated physical force, threat, or fraud, is a violation of that principle (many of these are individualist anarchists or anarcho-capitalists). You still want governmental control Mez.But only in those isues that the Libertariand find suitable, now that is not total freedom. The other type comes from a consequentialist or utilitarian standpoint. Instead of having moral prohibitions against initiation of force, these support a limited government that engages in the minimum amount of initiatory force (such as levying taxes to provide some public goods such as defense and roads, as well as some minimal regulation), because they believe it to be necessary to ensure maximum individual freedom (these are minarchists). Libertarians do not oppose force used in response to initiatory aggressions such as violence, fraud or trespassing. Libertarians favor an ethic of self-responsibility and strongly oppose the welfare state, because they believe forcing someone to provide aid to others is ethically wrong, ultimately counter-productive, or both
Libertarians generally defend the ideal of freedom from the perspective of how little one is constrained by authority, that is, how much one is allowed to do, which is referred to as negative liberty. This ideal is distinguished from a view of freedom focused on how much one is able to do, which is termed positive liberty, a distinction first noted by John Stuart Mill, and later described in fuller detail by Isaiah Berlin.
You cannot have 'em both.. freedom from Governmental control AND Governmental control at the same time. Libertarians do want CONTROL. So If I'm organized in a union and me and my co-workers thinks that the one who ownes a factory pays us to little, can whe then go on strike to "force" the owner to
pay us more? Or will they see this as a crime? Or is it a crime of the owner to force us to go to work?
Total freedom from government = anarchism.
-------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted October 31, 2006 02:04
You want to sell out all properties that the government own but have you thought about one thing. That beautiful park for recreation that was bulit for the citizens (let's pretend this scenario) of the specific city. WHO paid for that park???The tax-payers paid for it. Now it is going to be sold. A private person or a company is going to buy it. Who get's the money?? Do they refund the money to the taxpayers or do the taxpayers become shareholders? Think about it All properties (schools, librarys, hospitals) that now "belongs" to governments once was paid for by taxpayers. Maybe the rightful owners (taxpayers) want a word in this issue before you sell THEIR property!!!! Don't you know we now have private companies here in sweden that runs the medical service and such,some of our property in this community has been sold out. But they didn't manage to sell out our electric company. the citizens protested so it remsined public (WE, tha citizens owns it)!!
Lee, I kmow what you meen. we just have a differen't name for it over here, we call it the new libralism, it's the same ideology.
Our socialdemocrat party was built on solidarity but they failed to govern. Our foremer prime-minster was a "good-for-nothing". Let's see how this new one makes it.He's gonna cut the taxes drastically. More privatisations is to come. He's a liberalist.
-------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
LyKcantropen
VoivodFan
Member # 162
|
posted October 31, 2006 05:34
Yeah, they can't call it what it is (ie, classical liberalism) in America because they think that "liberalism" is a sort of bizarre business-oriented socialism.I've got a lot of time for the stance on personal liberty. The extent to which my government observes its people, legislates against them, and wants to do even more of this, frankly frightens me. I'm not so keen on such drastic economic liberalisation, as I think this would actually act against any efforts to emancipate people from those that rule them. Firstly, for reasons alluded to by Ann here, and because it would generally open up the rich-poor divide, with the added bonus of making an economic crisis bite even harder on the general population (without those nice social welfare measures to help). Secondly, you'd just switch power from an elected, accountable, democratic government to the unelected, unaccountable wealthy. Admittedly, these groups have a lot of power already, but this is hardly an argument to give them more. As an aside, now that you've rejected Booooooosh as your Lord and Saviour, I hope you'll be taking back all those sometimes unkind things you said about those that got there before you, so to speak. Y'know, sackcloth and ashes and all that.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted October 31, 2006 11:48
When I started to read about the Libertarian party it first seemed so very easy.... Freedom. A minimal government. How will this be done, I mean in real life IF the libertarians should win the election. I just would like to know what actions they are gonna take. those families that has got jobs that doesn't pay that much how will they be able to keep their children educated. The medical care: Accidents happen, Does the private hospital ask for insurace paper before they get sugery done on somebody that got shot and will die witout immediate care? These and many other question raise as I start taking this serious.
I would like to have an answer, now I mean a concrete answer. Families that aren't welthy enough to pay for education will their children have the opportunity to read at Univerities? There are in fact workingclass children that are very gifted and get high grades in school. What a waste if they don't get educated and get a job that ensure the welfare... Will some people end up saying: "-OH F*CK I WISH I HAD BEEN BORN INTO ANOTHER FAMILY"? While I'm at it: What if you have a child who is born with heartfaliure? No insurace company will sign an healtcare insurace for this child. -------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
LyKcantropen
VoivodFan
Member # 162
|
posted October 31, 2006 13:14
I'm not "afraid of revolutionary experiments". I just don't think it's a properly articulated, appropriate or workable solution to the world's ills. I also think that the original Enlightenment liberals (Mill, Locke, Montesqieu, Smith, several others) are probably a much better source for reading on the subject. Hell, go read Popper's The Open Society and its Enemies.It's always best not to just get the big-print-and-pictures version. That said, I do think it's nice, on the whole, that you've stepped out from under the wing of that vulgar non-starter of an ideology, "conservatism".
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted October 31, 2006 14:06
quote:
Originally posted by LyKcantropen:
(Mill, Locke, Montesqieu, Smith, several others) are probably a much better source for reading on the subject. Hell, go read Popper's The Open Society and its Enemies.It's always best not to just get the big-print-and-pictures version. That said, I do think it's nice, on the whole, that you've stepped out from under the wing of that vulgar non-starter of an ideology, "conservatism".
Well put , sir! 
Karl Popper, now that is the right choice. He also accomplikshed much in science theory and statstics. -------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mezcalhead
VoivodFan
Member # 26
|
posted October 31, 2006 19:42
So I guess nobody read any of the Primer.Since you guys refuse to read it here's an excerpt for everybody else: The 20th century has been a failed experiment in big government. Every day more people see more ways that problems could be better solved by profit-seeking companies, mutual aid associations, or charities than by government. Private capital markets can provide actuarially sound insurance and offer better retirement benefits than Social Security. One of the world's largest engineering projects, the $12 billion tunnel under the English Channel, was designed, financed, built, owned, and operated by a private consortium. A company called Human Capital Resources wants to sell equity investments in the future earning power of college students as an alternative to student loans--better return for investors, less post-graduation burden on students, and no cost to the taxpayers. Private communities, based on governance by consent, can be better tailored to the needs and preferences of 250 million diverse Americans than local governments can. Private schools provide a better education at lower cost than government schools, and in the next few years information technology and for-profit companies will revolutionize learning. Private charities get people off welfare rather than snaring them in it. Also check is video and audio clips with his debates and you should get an idea of libertarian fundamentals:
http://www.cato.org/people/boaz.html
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted November 01, 2006 04:43
quote:
Originally posted by Mezcalhead:
So I guess nobody read any of the Primer.Since you guys refuse to read it here's an excerpt for everybody else: The 20th century has been a failed experiment in big government. Every day more people see more ways that problems could be better solved by profit-seeking companies, mutual aid associations, or charities than by government. Private capital markets can provide actuarially sound insurance and offer better retirement benefits than Social Security. [/URL]
Lee please! This sort of thing already is happening in Sweden. When someone in my family have to go and see our family doctor we go to a privat privat seeking company where he works, have things gotten any better/ NO! I made my choice about what company should manage my retirement- money, everybody can make that choise.
I am free to choose what hospiatl I want to got to as long as it's swedish. We already have many hospitals owned by private companies. I can already make my choice to use a private hospital. as for schools, for my underaged daughter there at least 5 private schools that are open for her here in town. It doesn't cost me anything to have her there. Our city is managing the money from the taxpayers that is for education so I'm already now free to choose. I had to change union when I woked with ecconomics and that union do not have collective insurances so I have to make my own choice, unfortenately. As things are today I would have preferred a collective insirance. The future is alredy herethings didn't get any better, the gap between rich and poor is wider than ever. I have one book that I recommend you to read. The auhors anme is Leo Huberman
Title "Man's Worldly Goods" don't let it fool you that he obviously is a marxist, we had to read this as we studied ecconmy. Of course we read much more about the monetary sytem by other well known authors. -------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trollz
VoivodFan
Member # 393
|
posted November 01, 2006 08:50
quote:
Originally posted by Mezcalhead:
Ann, found a study of Sweden's economic history published in 1991. Very interesting story. I've got some studying to do. But why has your country moved towards privatization??? I'm going to harbor a guess and say that you had something different before that which was not working.
Partly because we are under the jurisdiction of the European Union. But it started before we joined so if you're interested in how it is today you have to read some book or articles dated in 2005 or 2006 because the change is going fast. EU's laws are above the swedish law's.
The governments administration grew too big, I also saw that problem, yeah. We need doctors, nurses, teachers and not all these administration people. Now we pay all the administrators in the European Union instead. Feeling we are trapped. Since joining EU there has been some trouble with the right to organize and what union the companies shall sign agreements with. *sigh*
EU: Talk about big administration *bleah* 
I can also tell you about how very hard it is for a one-man company to survive while the big corporations can do as they please. I've been working as an accountant and controller for both kinds. Now I have to make dinner for my daughter, talk to you later.
-Annki
-------------------- All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please read this (at least the intro and first chapter) before going into hysterics. Its a very well thought out piece I think you'll enjoy.
ARGHHH!!
posted November 08, 2006 15:44
posted November 09, 2006 02:38
