Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
My point was concerning the article and the attempt by it and most here to imply that since he stated we should be like Singapore as it concerns minimum wage and disability laws that it meant we should also adopt all other aspects of their system. They used this to straw man his mention.
That was my point. It appears you missed it as you attempted to argue the success of libertarian principals (which was not the main point of my response), but did so in a meaningless way through a single mention of a country.
So either you are trolling, or just terrible at critical reading. Either way, it is a waste of discussion.
But isn't that exactly what conservatives do all the time when they label Obama a "socialist" (or worse) for some of his policies?
Wow. So one Libertarian makes a statement and all you: A. Assume he speaks for all libertarians. B. You also assume that he endorses (and thus, all libertarians) every aspect of Singapore's government. C. Act like silly/giddy school girls that thinks they one up'ed their school girl rival. You are as bad as those that compare your preferenced form of gov to that of communism just because you voted for Obama.
I'm just making a point than if you are trying to get to mainstream, having a libertarian go on foxnews or an major media outlet, and suggest that we implement anything from Singapore won't do your party any good.
It was a libertarian suggesting we implement policies like Singapore. When you are a 3rd party trying to make it into the mainstream, suggesting we be like singapore will get you nowhere.
So no minimum wage is not a libertarian position?
The point was that you (or rather the article you were agreeing with) was treating his mention as if it were an "all or nothing" comment. He didn't say we should be emulate them entirely, it was within the context of the policies they were discussing.
If we accept the premise of your articles position, then to agree with a part is to agree with the whole. Is that true?
Ehhh, doesn't Singapore have the death penalty in place for drug crimes? Libertarian haven, it is not.
Perferred method is public hanging.
Singapore is amongst about 20 nations with strict drug laws and therefore the society is not burdened with crimes attributed to drug addiction or the costs to incarerate and rehabilitate.
Conversely, the U.S. is on target to spend about $40 billion on the federal and state level this year as it seems to do every year due to the War on Drugs and yet, hard core drug addiction is a growing epidemic.
The U.S. could have a federal surplus and fund all pensions if it chose to impose similar consequences on hard core drug trade, posession or affiliation.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,408,773 times
Reputation: 2394
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55
I'm just making a point than if you are trying to get to mainstream, having a libertarian go on foxnews or an major media outlet, and suggest that we implement anything from Singapore won't do your party any good.
I disagree. There are a lot of things we can learn from other people. This one (though) is an American idea (and once a practice) that Singapore uses. We have just forgotten what works in this country. It's all part of the mess both of the worthless parties have gotten us into. The fact a democrat thinks this is dumb means it will probably work.
The point was that you (or rather the article you were agreeing with) was treating his mention as if it were an "all or nothing" comment. He didn't say we should be emulate them entirely, it was within the context of the policies they were discussing.
If we accept the premise of your articles position, then to agree with a part is to agree with the whole. Is that true?
My entire premise is, having a libertarian go on tv and suggest we be more like Singapore, will get you nowhere. Ask yourself this, imagine Gary Johnson, or whoever the flavor of the month is, go on national tv and say, we should implement policies like Singapore, how do you think that is going to play out?
I disagree. There are a lot of things we can learn from other people. This one (though) is an American idea (and once a practice) that Singapore uses. We have just forgotten what works in this country. It's all part of the mess both of the worthless parties have gotten us into. The fact a democrat thinks this is dumb means it will probably work.
so tell me, how did that work out for you in the primaries and general election?
I'm sure the libertarians would love Singapore's state run industries too especially big government projects like how Singapore's state run oil company built a multi-billion dollar underground facility for a new refinery. See, there was no space to build a refinery but the strong government wanted to keep oil refining business in the city state so the state paid to have a giant underground tunnel complex built at taxpayer expense just so the state oil company could have new digs (pun intended).
The hard truth is libertarianism has never worked any where nor will it ever work any where. The closest we have to the libertarian ideal right now is Somalia and Afghanistan and those two countries are just such shining examples of success, right? Strip away all the flowery BS language from libertarianism and all you really have is anarchy. Shockingly, a lack of law and order doesn't make for a good economy.
But isn't that exactly what conservatives do all the time when they label Obama a "socialist" (or worse) for some of his policies?
Some may. I guess it all depends on the subject of discussion. Obama has supported socialist polices and has promoted socialist ideals as some of his goals (you have read his book I hope?). Does it make him a socialist, it does if he supports them. The argument at the point would be to define what "type" of socialist he is.
The difference here is that the policies mentioned in the video of what we should emulate are libertarian principals. It was not a support for all policies they have in government, simply the specific ones mentioned.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
