Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

Why Does Everybody Strawman Libertarianism?

jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.

2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"

Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".

3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"

This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.

4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"

So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.

All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2014 5:48:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.



2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"


Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".



3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.




4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"




So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.


All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

The word is very broad in its meaning. Plus, libertarianism is not well understood by the public mind. But I think, above all, that its association with the right-wing makes it very confusing for people.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
Crescendo
Posts: 470
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.
My View of the World:
http://www.debate.org...

My Greatest Debate (As of so far):
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 6:17:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.

What would you say is the mainstream libertarian position? I always thought libertarians agreed with Ron Paul on this issue. Would you say that most libertarians would want it left to the states?
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Crescendo
Posts: 470
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 6:40:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.

By total legalization of drugs, does this include Cocaine, Crack, Ecstasy, Heroin, Opium, Steroids, and Methamphetamine?
My View of the World:
http://www.debate.org...

My Greatest Debate (As of so far):
http://www.debate.org...
slo1
Posts: 4,354
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 8:35:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.



2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"


Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".



3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.




4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"




So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.


All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

I think the main issue is that people have a hard time imagining a political and economical system which is more self voluntary than we have ever had as a nation.

Not to mention there is a wide variety of Libertarianism all the way from anarchism to having a strong but restricted state. Then you get into the overflow from conservatism who share some, but not many goals. In a way the libertarian party may be a more natural fit with the Democratic party and focusing on personal freedoms, limiting foreign interventions and cutting back military and draft, etc.

Libertarians have great ideas on personal freedom and foreign relations, but also tend to focus on laissez faire capitalism. This is the hard part for people to imagine as there is no example in history where laissez faire was free from hardship and unfair advantages between the rich and poor. Libertarian economic's is very much unproven utopian-ish.

Split back out of the conservative GOP and start talking about how to transition from what we have to the ideal vision and be willing to make compromise and I think the libertarian party could become a major force. There is no willingness to compromise the tenets though. Anarchism and laissez faire capitalism is just never going to happen lest we go under or have some smart people who can baby step us there.
jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 10:47:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 6:17:50 PM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.


What would you say is the mainstream libertarian position? I always thought libertarians agreed with Ron Paul on this issue. Would you say that most libertarians would want it left to the states?

Most libertarians want weed legalized and the war on drugs softened but not legalization of all drugs. I want legalization of all drugs.
jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 10:48:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 6:40:02 PM, Crescendo wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.

By total legalization of drugs, does this include Cocaine, Crack, Ecstasy, Heroin, Opium, Steroids, and Methamphetamine?

Yup. And everything else. I don't support the idea of victimless crimes. You should be able to do what you want with your own body
jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 10:51:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 8:35:00 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.



2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"


Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".



3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.




4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"




So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.


All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

I think the main issue is that people have a hard time imagining a political and economical system which is more self voluntary than we have ever had as a nation.

Perhaps. But, we used to have a more voluntary economic system in the late 1800s.


Not to mention there is a wide variety of Libertarianism all the way from anarchism to having a strong but restricted state. Then you get into the overflow from conservatism who share some, but not many goals. In a way the libertarian party may be a more natural fit with the Democratic party and focusing on personal freedoms, limiting foreign interventions and cutting back military and draft, etc.

Libertarianism doesnt' really fit with either party.


Libertarians have great ideas on personal freedom and foreign relations, but also tend to focus on laissez faire capitalism. This is the hard part for people to imagine as there is no example in history where laissez faire was free from hardship and unfair advantages between the rich and poor. Libertarian economic's is very much unproven utopian-ish.

Libertarian economics is basically free market economics. Not only has that shown to be successful. It is the ONLY system that has succeeded. You are way off here.


Split back out of the conservative GOP and start talking about how to transition from what we have to the ideal vision and be willing to make compromise and I think the libertarian party could become a major force. There is no willingness to compromise the tenets though. Anarchism and laissez faire capitalism is just never going to happen lest we go under or have some smart people who can baby step us there.

I disagree. I would say free market capitalism is the only way humanity will survive.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 9:10:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.
Are you sure that is right?

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.
True.

2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"

Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".

LOL
Tell me how all rich people are productive.

3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.

Because small businesses employ so many people, right?


4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"
So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.
I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community.


All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

Leave it jimtim to bemoan strawmans as he creates them.
I have never heard a complaint about Libertarians due to these (except roads, but not really even then), and you responses are pathetic.

The criticisms I hear are regarding laws like welfare, social security, tax oversimplification (which benefits the rich and hurts the poor over the status quo), military, EPA, and various regulations and "feel good" policies, like the war on drugs, child porn, minimum wage, anti-racist regulations, and animal rights.
My work here is, finally, done.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 2:24:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.



2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"


Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".



3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.




4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"




So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.


All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

You hit enter a lot. You must be very emphatic about what you type.

Anyway, this is very ironic. It appears as though you're complaining about your ideology being strawmanned while simultaneously strawmanning arguments against your ideology.

I can give you a real argument against Libertarianism...

I disagree with Libertarianism, because I believe that it's uncomfortably likely that necessary utilities would be ignored, particularly if there's more profitable ventures, as there wouldn't be enough interest at one time or another for someone to create a private business to support it, and even if one did, then it's far too likely that the individual or group of individuals who start the company would end up with a monopoly, as it's even less likely that several businesses will open in support of those utilities.

I also disagree with Libertarianism, because it puts far too much power in the hands of business owners (more than they have now, and I believe they already have too much power), to the lament of their employees, which will create a national economy akin to the microeconomies found in the Midwest.

Here's an article that explains what I'm talking about:

http://www.cracked.com...

The thought of that terrifies me.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,306
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 3:36:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/18/2014 2:24:51 PM, Such wrote:
Here's an article that explains what I'm talking about:

http://www.cracked.com...

The thought of THAT terrifies me.

The thought of a small town, which is in fact a small town because it has low natural and human resources?

Or the thought that big businesses and high paying jobs should exist anywhere, even small towns?

or....what is it you are terrified of? I am confused.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 3:51:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 10:48:30 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:40:02 PM, Crescendo wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.

By total legalization of drugs, does this include Cocaine, Crack, Ecstasy, Heroin, Opium, Steroids, and Methamphetamine?

Yup. And everything else. I don't support the idea of victimless crimes. You should be able to do what you want with your own body

Do you think people should be able to drive drunk?
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 3:52:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 6:17:50 PM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.


What would you say is the mainstream libertarian position? I always thought libertarians agreed with Ron Paul on this issue. Would you say that most libertarians would want it left to the states?

I'm pretty libertarian and I hate Ron Paul. IMO a lot of his support came from anti-war and anti-Israel people.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 4:05:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/18/2014 3:36:14 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 5/18/2014 2:24:51 PM, Such wrote:
Here's an article that explains what I'm talking about:

http://www.cracked.com...

The thought of THAT terrifies me.

The thought of a small town, which is in fact a small town because it has low natural and human resources?

Or the thought that big businesses and high paying jobs should exist anywhere, even small towns?

or....what is it you are terrified of? I am confused.

Big businesses does not necessarily lead to high paying jobs... :\ As explained by that article.

The thought of a small/midwestern town's economic situation replacing the national economy scares me, which, I believe would occur as a result of Libertarianism.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 4:07:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
...and small towns aren't necessarily small because they have low natural and human resources. There are small towns with relatively high natural resources, in fact. As far as human resources are concerned... per square mile, small towns, by definition, have small populations, but that's why I also indicated Midwestern towns... because, like Detroit, they're not exactly small, but often suffer from the same situation.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 4:15:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/18/2014 3:52:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:17:50 PM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.


What would you say is the mainstream libertarian position? I always thought libertarians agreed with Ron Paul on this issue. Would you say that most libertarians would want it left to the states?

I'm pretty libertarian and I hate Ron Paul. IMO a lot of his support came from anti-war and anti-Israel people.

That's interesting actually. Would you mind explaining why you dislike him?
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 4:27:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/18/2014 4:15:00 PM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 5/18/2014 3:52:52 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:17:50 PM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 5/17/2014 6:08:02 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

That wouldn't be a strawman against me, because I do support total legalization of drugs. But, most libertarians (the mainstream ones) disagree. So, it would be a strawman against the entire movement.


What would you say is the mainstream libertarian position? I always thought libertarians agreed with Ron Paul on this issue. Would you say that most libertarians would want it left to the states?

I'm pretty libertarian and I hate Ron Paul. IMO a lot of his support came from anti-war and anti-Israel people.

That's interesting actually. Would you mind explaining why you dislike him?

His foreign policy is terrible, he's a liar (throughout the 90s he either wrote or approved very bigoted newsletters, which he promoted and marketed as his own and later claims he didn't review or promote them), he's either a conspiracy theorist or an enabler of them (http://www.salon.com...), and he got literally nothing done (he passed one bill, approving the sale of a customhouse in Texas, in 20+ years in Congress and only four went to a vote).

In other words, he's a delusional loudmouth conspiracy theorist who achieved practically nothing productive or useful in his Congressional tenure.
jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 5:13:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/18/2014 9:10:17 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.
Are you sure that is right?

Yup.


No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.
True.

2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"

Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".

LOL
Tell me how all rich people are productive.

Not all. But, as a whole, rich people are the most productive group by far. That means that taxing the entire group is taxing productive people.


3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.

Because small businesses employ so many people, right?

Actually yes. Yes, they do.



4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"
So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.
I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community.

Government does force you to fork over part of your income to them and follow their silly rules.



All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

Leave it jimtim to bemoan strawmans as he creates them.
I have never heard a complaint about Libertarians due to these (except roads, but not really even then), and you responses are pathetic.

Um. That means you just don't pay enough attention.


The criticisms I hear are regarding laws like welfare, social security, tax oversimplification (which benefits the rich and hurts the poor over the status quo), military, EPA, and various regulations and "feel good" policies, like the war on drugs, child porn, minimum wage, anti-racist regulations, and animal rights.

All these are silly laws.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/20/2014 9:09:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/18/2014 5:13:27 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/18/2014 9:10:17 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.
Are you sure that is right?


Yup.
I'll drop this, but it seems more libertarians would be for private roads then government ones. Smaller government and all that (i.e. less regulation/laws)



No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.
True.

2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"

Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".

LOL
Tell me how all rich people are productive.

Not all. But, as a whole, rich people are the most productive group by far. That means that taxing the entire group is taxing productive people.

1. Define "taxing the shiit out of" them.
2. Define productive.
3. The income tax taxes income, not wealth. So, in their retirement years, the productive people aren't being taxed "the shiit out of" are they?



3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.

Because small businesses employ so many people, right?


Actually yes. Yes, they do.
Really?
The census would disagree.
78.2% of businesses in 2008 had ZERO employees.
17.1% of businesses in 2008 had no more than 9 employees.
That's 95% of businesses that regulations are likely to not effect, due to their size.

Keep in mind the remaining 4.7% of businesses employ 89.3% of employees.
So, tell me again how small businesses employ sooooo many people?
http://www.irs.gov...

4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"
So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.
I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community.

Government does force you to fork over part of your income to them and follow their silly rules.

I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community is what I said.
Silly rules and taxes are not being part of the community.



All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

Leave it jimtim to bemoan strawmans as he creates them.
I have never heard a complaint about Libertarians due to these (except roads, but not really even then), and you responses are pathetic.

Um. That means you just don't pay enough attention.
Or maybe I just deal with real complaints about the ideology.


The criticisms I hear are regarding laws like welfare, social security, tax oversimplification (which benefits the rich and hurts the poor over the status quo), military, EPA, and various regulations and "feel good" policies, like the war on drugs, child porn, minimum wage, anti-racist regulations, and animal rights.

All these are silly laws.
That doesn't address the point I made in the least.
The fact that you disagree with these laws, and by extension these criticisms, does not negate their existence.
My work here is, finally, done.
jimtimmy3
Posts: 189
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2014 8:53:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/20/2014 9:09:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/18/2014 5:13:27 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/18/2014 9:10:17 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.
Are you sure that is right?


Yup.
I'll drop this, but it seems more libertarians would be for private roads then government ones. Smaller government and all that (i.e. less regulation/laws)

By definition, libertarians tend to favor smaller government. But, most of them want to keep roads public (not me)




No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.
True.

2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"

Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".

LOL
Tell me how all rich people are productive.

Not all. But, as a whole, rich people are the most productive group by far. That means that taxing the entire group is taxing productive people.

1. Define "taxing the shiit out of" them.

Rich people are already taxed at around 40% and apparently that's a lot less than their "fair share", which has never been defined.

If you think around 40% is way too low, then you are for taxing the shiit out of people.

2. Define productive.

Enhances productive capacity.

3. The income tax taxes income, not wealth. So, in their retirement years, the productive people aren't being taxed "the shiit out of" are they?

Where does that wealth come from?

Income. So, it has already been taxed.

And, if someone is retired, they are no longer being productive, by definition.




3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.

Because small businesses employ so many people, right?


Actually yes. Yes, they do.
Really?
The census would disagree.
78.2% of businesses in 2008 had ZERO employees.
17.1% of businesses in 2008 had no more than 9 employees.
That's 95% of businesses that regulations are likely to not effect, due to their size.

Keep in mind the remaining 4.7% of businesses employ 89.3% of employees.
So, tell me again how small businesses employ sooooo many people?
http://www.irs.gov...

Actually, small businesses do create a lot of jobs:

http://smallbusiness.house.gov...


4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"
So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.
I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community.

Government does force you to fork over part of your income to them and follow their silly rules.

I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community is what I said.
Silly rules and taxes are not being part of the community.

I don't know what your arguing against. The point I was making was that a lot of people think community=government. That is entirely wrong. The opposite is actually true.




All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

Leave it jimtim to bemoan strawmans as he creates them.
I have never heard a complaint about Libertarians due to these (except roads, but not really even then), and you responses are pathetic.

Um. That means you just don't pay enough attention.
Or maybe I just deal with real complaints about the ideology.

No. It just means that you don't deal in reality.



The criticisms I hear are regarding laws like welfare, social security, tax oversimplification (which benefits the rich and hurts the poor over the status quo), military, EPA, and various regulations and "feel good" policies, like the war on drugs, child porn, minimum wage, anti-racist regulations, and animal rights.

All these are silly laws.
That doesn't address the point I made in the least.
The fact that you disagree with these laws, and by extension these criticisms, does not negate their existence.

I know they exist, but they shouldn't.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2014 9:37:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/21/2014 8:53:47 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
At 5/20/2014 9:09:37 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

1. Define "taxing the shiit out of" them.

Rich people are already taxed at around 40% and apparently that's a lot less than their "fair share", which has never been defined.

If you think around 40% is way too low, then you are for taxing the shiit out of people.
Name one person who pays 40% in taxation.
Hyperbole gets you nowhere.

2. Define productive.
Enhances productive capacity.
Meaning?
How is their having money attributable to productivity?
If they invest in a failed business, is that productive?
If banks don't lend money, is their money being productive?

3. The income tax taxes income, not wealth. So, in their retirement years, the productive people aren't being taxed "the shiit out of" are they?


Where does that wealth come from?

Income. So, it has already been taxed.

And, if someone is retired, they are no longer being productive, by definition.
Hold on, now.
So, if I make a million off of my assets, I am being productive, aren't I?
If not, then how do you measure productivity?

Actually yes. Yes, they do.
Really?
The census would disagree.
78.2% of businesses in 2008 had ZERO employees.
17.1% of businesses in 2008 had no more than 9 employees.
That's 95% of businesses that regulations are likely to not effect, due to their size.

Keep in mind the remaining 4.7% of businesses employ 89.3% of employees.
So, tell me again how small businesses employ sooooo many people?
http://www.irs.gov...
Actually, small businesses do create a lot of jobs:
http://smallbusiness.house.gov...

Yeah....I don't consider an employer of 200 people a small business, and neither does the federal government...at times.
http://www.sba.gov...
Anywhere from 50 - 1500.

The issue is, is that what people mean when they say "small businesses", because when I think of "mom-and-pop" businesses, I don't envision them with 100 employees.

Obamacare refers to small businesses as those with fewer than 50 full-time employees.
http://www.apsa.org...

But, yes, if you define them that way, then, yes, there is quite a few employed by them.

4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"
So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.
I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community.

Government does force you to fork over part of your income to them and follow their silly rules.

I wasn't aware that government currently forced me to be part of the community is what I said.
Silly rules and taxes are not being part of the community.
I don't know what your arguing against. The point I was making was that a lot of people think community=government. That is entirely wrong. The opposite is actually true.
Look at what you say here.
You say people believe that government = community.
Then, you say that government should not coerce me into the community.
This does not jive, as these statements are paradoxical.
Um. That means you just don't pay enough attention.
Or maybe I just deal with real complaints about the ideology.
No. It just means that you don't deal in reality.
Is insulting really necessary?
Why do I not deal in reality?
Do you know the types of discussions I get into? No, you don't.
Maybe, pundits and news people and maybe even the discussions you get into are more what you bemoan here, but I find that hard to believe.

I suppose I shouldn't have distrusted you, but those people you are discussing with are morons, then.




The criticisms I hear are regarding laws like welfare, social security, tax oversimplification (which benefits the rich and hurts the poor over the status quo), military, EPA, and various regulations and "feel good" policies, like the war on drugs, child porn, minimum wage, anti-racist regulations, and animal rights.

All these are silly laws.
That doesn't address the point I made in the least.
The fact that you disagree with these laws, and by extension these criticisms, does not negate their existence.


I know they exist, but they shouldn't.
And this is the arguments against Libertarianism.
So, feel free to defend them here if you wish, but I don't think it is necessary.
My point should be clear.
My work here is, finally, done.
Mrlowe
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2014 5:42:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:54:09 PM, jimtimmy3 wrote:
I know. Every ideology has been turned into a straw man at some point, but libertarianism is strawmanned far more than any other ideology. Examples:

1.) "I'm not a libertarian because I think we need roads!"

Most libertarians favor government roads and other utilities. The few that don't still favor these services being provided by the private sector.

No libertarians think roads shouldn't exist.



2.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think the rich are special"


Neither do libertarians. Just because we don't want to tax the shiit out of productive people doesn't mean we think they are "special".



3.) "I'm not libertarian because I don't think giving money and advantages to corporations is a good economic policy"


This is actually the opposite of what libertarians support. Indeed, progressives tend to be more for this in terms of green subsidies and massive regulations.




4.) "I'm not a libertarian because I believe in community"




So do libertarians. We believe in voluntary ties instead of coercion.


All of these are entirely strawmen that are all too common. It seems that non libertarians simply can't deal with libertarian arguments so they make up their own.

Why are you strawmanning people who strawman libertarians? I've never heard any informed person argue these points against it.

The real question is, if these are real arguments, why don't you just ignore them and get down to the actual meat of the debate? The stuff that actually matters. Actual issues of libertarianism that need addressed. I'm pretty neutral and uninformed on the topic myself, but by attacking the arguments that stupid, uninformed people make, you're really not helping the case for it.
WheezySquash8
Posts: 130
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 5:29:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 3:22:48 PM, Crescendo wrote:
How about:
"I am not a Libertarian because I don't want deadly drugs legalized."

But seriously, the Libertarian movement's anti-BG (Big Government) stance is a good thing. In this regard I'm with them.

Amen.
Pacifist Since 3/12/14
Wheezy