No. Both Liberals and Conservatives share that characteristic because both believe in democracy and the idea that a society can onluy be organised by politicians and a the State. Liberals want to, for example, impose their morals of "guns are evil", "health care is a right", "the poor must be handed welfare checks" etc onto everybody. Same coin. Different sides.
No, liberals and Democrats defend rights, NOT "morals"....You don't see the difference between "morals" and rights...well, shrug...
Liberals only support positive rights and completely resent negative rights. For all I know, there is no actual difference between a Republican and a Democrat.
And what do you object to? Let’s have grenades? ...why should people who are poor have healthcare? Why should we help the neediest? You are so busy bashing liberals and conservatives but offer nothing. I think you just might want to be different. You don’t seem to offer much but you criticize a lot . I do understand your reaction to abortion. Personally you were opposed to it but you would not deny it to any woman. What about giving cracked two kids who are 12? What about food inspections? If a restaurant wants to sell horse meat should that be their right? You claim to be neither right nor left but you are an extremist. All or nothing
I regard the government just as you view a fetus - as a parasite that must be aborted. If you want one, you should be allowed to buy one. Or ten. Voluntary charity, different kinds of crowd-funding and special insurances the willing can provide to would solve this problem. At the same time, theree would be no minimum wage, so tne poor would be allowed to have a job and work up their salary. See above. Because we haven't discussed much! This is the abortion-sub, so we are therefore sticking to abortion. I am very active in otner tnreads and have discussed everything you mentioned above countless of times. [QUOTR]I do understand your reaction to abortion. Personally you were opposed to it but you would not deny it to any woman. What about giving cracked two kids who are 12?[/QUOTE] How ridiculous! Why, yes of course. However, they do not have any right to force people come and eat it. A dirty restaurant or a restaurants that serves gross food would lose the competition pretty fast. PS. Horse meat is actually a luxury in some corners of the world. I never said that I am neither left nor right. Neither did I say I am not an extremist. I am pretty radical and more right-wing than most. Anyways, if you are curious about Libertarianism, you should start a thread in another section.
Libertarianism was already tried once in this nation and it was a complete and abject FAILURE. There is no reason to believe that it won't be an even bigger failure in the future. Now back to the actual topic which is that women must have the right to make decisions about their own bodies without anyone else dictatorially imposing their own personal "moral values" on them.
Here's where political beliefs fail: Other poster talks about food inspections and you reply: """Why, yes of course. However, they do not have any right to force people come and eat it. A dirty restaurant or a restaurants that serves gross food would lose the competition pretty fast. PS. Horse meat is actually a luxury in some corners of the world."" TOTAL impracticality. Living in a dream world... Never asked yourself WHEN customers find out the food is "bad" . ?? Is it when they die from food poisoning? Or dozens just get sick and get hauled to the hospital . THAT is ACCEPTABLE to you !!! ?? WOW! What a shithole country that would make us... HOW does ""restaurants that serves gross food would lose the competition pretty fast.""" WHAT? "Lose the competition" ...that doesn't make any sense...their competitors would still be there ....you are so confused...your Utopia really needs to be thought through much better.. NO, I LIKE the government doing what I pay it to do with restaurant inspections and all food inspections... You say: "" I am pretty radical and more right-wing than most."""...and you're Libertarian.....thanks for letting me know who to avoid when voting... Then this : """At the same time, theree would be no minimum wage, so tne poor would be allowed to have a job and work up their salary.""" TOTAL impracticality. Living in a dream world... Uh, no minimum wage so the desperate will work for less than LIVING wage (slavery) and their employers have NO reason to raise that wage so they won't.... OK, I'm done with airyfairy political crap.....back to the topic which is ANOTHER Pie-in-the-Sky fantasy ...
[ I understand where you’re coming from and agree with a lot of libertarians. But there is always one thing I find lacking and that is the reality check ... no government regulations and everything will be fine! Ah yes, No minimum-wage and we know that they will have special insurance that will raise the salary .and voluntary charities will solve the problems. .you are so naive. The rich would only get richer and the poor would only get poorer,....but you could blame the poor for “not working up their salary” That’s kind of sad that you don’t want restaurants to have food regulations. So if a restaurant wants to grind in a mouse or two because it would save them money and you would never know hey what’s the big deal? Why inspect meat? No need, because the restaurant looks clean.Well while you are defending horsemeat because it is a luxury somewhere, it might upset you to know that even that is regulated and they let you know what it is
Ever asked yourself why restaurants would want to serve bad food? Why not have food inspections at every damn home there is because "won't somebody please think of the children?" What if mommy serves food from a dirty plate? What if mommy poops in the lasagne? Omg! How long do you think that restaurant would survive? No, the only confused one here is you. Only way for their competitors to still be there is if they satisfy the customers. How deluded are you to think a restaurant would want to kill their source of income? Absolutely laughable. Besides, who says inspections can't be private? If customers prefer to know the restaurant is clean, restaurants could hire private companies to do the inspections so that they earn a certificate they can show their customer. Really this is a non-issue and just the silliest of strawmen. If you really like this service so much one would assume you would be willing to finance it even if private or else it is rather hypocritcal from you. Oh, I have an idea! Why not let the government bake our bread. Now sure if you love the government services so much, you wouldn't have any problems with this, would you? Sorry, but the only Libertarian thing about the Libertarian Party is their name. You do good in not voting for them. Not to be rude or anything, but you seem too stuck up in party politics and seem unable to think outside the box of parliamentarism. Perhaps you are not that interested in political philosophy and that is fine, but then you should be more careful speaking about it unless you wish to make a fool out of yourself. [QUOTR]Then this : """At the same time, theree would be no minimum wage, so tne poor would be allowed to have a job and work up their salary.""" TOTAL impracticality. Living in a dream world... Uh, no minimum wage so the desperate will work for less than LIVING wage (slavery) and their employers have NO reason to raise that wage so they won't....[/QUOTE] Your definition of slavery is factually incorrect as voluntarily applying for a job in exchange of an agreed amount of money is in no way compareble to slavery since slavery is the very opposite of that - forcing someone to work you withput paying them. Oh! If you want to have a philosophical discussion about slavery we could do that too, but I think it is pretty obvious that you are not in shape for that. Lmfao.
Good post! Especially hitting the heart of the "argument", """ But there is always one thing I find lacking and that is the reality check ...""" Some just don't like to deal in reality.
And you claim you're not a Republican? Well, your "" let people (OTHER people) die as long as we have no regulations" attitude sure puts you firmly in their camp.
Oh yeah? Organising a society around non-aggression, self-ownership and property rights is unrealistic to you? Then why even bother teaching our children this? Yes, that's really all that Libertarianism is; an ideology based on the same rules we want our kids to follow in the sandbox. Do you even know what a minimum wage is? It does not mean that everyone gets a raise or that "unskilled labour" is rewarded with more money. What it is, is a law that makes it illegal to work under x amounts of money - this of course put people who cannot be productive enough to live up the minimum wage out of the market and employers trash the simple jobs because it becomes to expensive for them to hire. The only way in which the rich can get richer is if the "non-rich" want their services. It is a win-win situatiion where everyone is a winner. Liberals and Conservatives think the market is a zero sum game, but it is actually the opposite. I already told Foxy how these absolutely ridiculous worst case scenarios would be handled in a Libertarian society.
Could you please stop being passively aggressive? Also, you should not take cred for Renee's posts. She is nothing like you. She is not on the site to spew hate and laugh at her opponents. This thread should be locked anyways as it has sailed waaaay off topic. If you two are curious about Libertarianism you should seek the debate in another sub-forum.
No, I wasn't interested enough to check anything about you.....but if it walks like a Repub and talks like a Repub, it's a Repub. your "" let people (OTHER people) die as long as we have no regulations" attitude sure puts you firmly in their camp. ...and I don't care what country you're from...
How utopian....let’s organize a society around non aggression..bye bye aggression! How do propose all this self ownership? Minimum wage is the least anyone can pay a worker....but without that, we know employers will never pay them less than a respectable wage...and all those charities will just jump in Please explain how paying a minimum wage is too expensive for employers. You sound very republican .. What about healthcare?
She is not taking credit for my posts and please don’t pit us against each other! I am sure you will see hate in my posts as well..as I am guilty of using sarcasm So what if it has gone off topic there are just a few of us discussing it
I didn't....that is another lie like saying you didn't quote me when you did and the post was proof you did Unlike you. Uh, YOU were the one who declared that YOU decide the topic and went way off topic.. . Curious about Libertarianism? No..... I live in the real world....
You did NOT answer any of Renee's questions about the restaurant scenario so here are some "real world" questions on your proposal:. WHO determines what level of safety is acceptable? WHO determines if it's safe to eat at that restaurant? HOW do they determine if it's safe? WHAT do they do if they think it's not safe? WHAT does the owner do if their restaurant is safe but someone says it isn't (like their competitor)?
That is what we have always done, so why the heck not? The only difference is that Libertarianism pushes the principles in absurdum which illegitimises the State (or at least most parts of it). Most Western countries already do a good job here. Although there - of course - still are many violations, it is not like Euro-merica is Saudi Arabia. What a "respectable wage" is, is entirely subjective and there is absolutely no objective way to measure value. If employers offer a salary that the employee perceive as "unrespectable", (s)he can leave his job. The free market would create competition that would always ensure salaries meet the demand. Assume Jorge performs a job where his salary is symmetric to the relation between productiveness and profit. Then, one day, the omnipotent government steps in and says; "The minimum wage must be x, so that Jorge too can buy a Ferrari!" This new minimum wage means that the profit the employers makes out of Jorge is lower than that of what he actually produces. The employer now has to fire Jorge because he has become too expensive for him. Even if Jorge is an awesome guy who works really hard, it has now become illegal for him to work. This also fastens automation since, say, Teenage Stacy's cashier job at Burger King is too expensive to hire for, a demand for cheaper solutions is created and Burger King are provided with robots that replace Teenage Stacy. Republicans are pretty Socialistic imo. Have a guess. Did you just assume their gender?
The customer. Demand and supply, you know. The customer. Demand and supply, you know. Freedom of association. They go eat at another restaurant. The customer decides.
I have an idea; let us regulate the dating market and open a Boyfriend Inspection. I mean there obviously are alot of risks involved in the dating game and letting people choose by themselves is just barbaric when we have an Omnipotent Gov that can help the poor, helpless, little women with their picks: - WHO determines what type of man is acceptable? - WHO determines if it is safe to date a given man? - HOW does one determine it's safe? - WHAT does a woman do if it isn't safe? - WHAT does a woman do if the man she likes is a good guy, but someone else says he is a rapist? How can a woman possibly answer these questions by herself? Huh? Huh? Huh? That's right; we must have Donald Trump walk her to the date, holding her hand. Because no one is as omnipotent and good as our leader, the President and our holy church of government. Right? Right? Right? Regulate everything! And, oh. By tne way; - WHO determines if a woman can have an abortion? - WHO determines if it is the right thing to do? - HOW can they know it is the right thing to do? - WHAT does the woman do if told it is not right? - WHAT if it is both safe and right , but the Pope tells her she'll go to hell? Huh? Huh? Huh?
So every time a person wants to eat in a restaurant they do an inspection of the kitchen, restrooms, cleaning methods and schedules, check the food supplies with a lab to see if everything is fresh and safe so they don't get "surprised" with food poisoning.... Gee, that sounds so realistic....and so much fun going out to eat! HOW does the customer KNOW it's safe to eat there? Your idea of getting sick or dying as a clue is ASSinine. THAT is how you think food will be determined to be safe for consumption? First, It's meaningless and second that's no answer (but I didn't expect any real life answers) Oh, OK, after they perform the miracle of determining it's not safe by : A. a thorough inspection B. not eating the food C. Getting sick or D. dying they then go to another restaurant and let others worry about their own health at that restaurant. (THAT sounds VERY Republican) So the customer(even if they are a competitor) can say anything they want about that restaurant with no proof. They can commit slander and the restaurant owner has no recourse.....what a mess....I don't think many people would open restaurants if every customer gets top do an invasive inspection and then tell everyone anything they want to about the restaurant. BTW, WHO determines what is safe ? By that I mean who determines how many rat turds can be in your salad? How much rotten meat can be stored next to fresh meat? How much mold can be on the fruit? You might not mind rat turds in your salad but somone else might. STANDARDS are needed.... standards are regulations....no, you can't have a "regulations free" society without chaos...
Great old rant about "Nobody can tell me what to do" I'd try to explain rights and "public good" to you but it would be wasting time.... BTW, I love how a meth lab or a hog farmer could move in right next store to you....no regulations on that !
