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.
No. Which aspect is unusually appealing to white supremacists?
Abortion - up to the individual.
The state exists to protect individual rights
Prohibition of violence, coercion, and fraud.
Freedom of and from religion.
Repeal victimless crime statutes.
Sexual and personal relationships are up to the individual.
Govt's exist to protect people and their civil rights.
Self defense is the only legitimate use of force.
Governments need to be held accountable for their actions
Government should not rig or manipulate the market
Free trade and migration
Govt should not deny any individual right based on sex, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation
Possibly, but I doubt it. There isn't anything within the libertarian platform that is intrinsically appealing to white supremacists.
LOL, you mean they wouldn't find the repeal of things like the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act to be appealing?
Rand Paul has already come out in favor of allowing business owners to refuse to serve black customers, you don't think white supremacists might be attracted to that kind of policy position?
No. Which aspect is unusually appealing to white supremacists?
Abortion - up to the individual.
The state exists to protect individual rights
Prohibition of violence, coercion, and fraud.
Freedom of and from religion.
Repeal victimless crime statutes.
Sexual and personal relationships are up to the individual.
Govt's exist to protect people and their civil rights.
Self defense is the only legitimate use of force.
Governments need to be held accountable for their actions
Government should not rig or manipulate the market
Free trade and migration
Govt should not deny any individual right based on sex, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation
And the difference between this and the views of most liberal Democrats is what exactly?
2) We believe in a government that exists to protect our individual Constitutional rights, maintain law and order, provide defense for this nation, and provide a legal, social and infrastructural framework to ensure the integrity of a market based economy. We believe in government that is as local as possible because we believe the most change can occur there because it is more accessible. Wherein it is more efficient for the government role to be at the state level (college education), we believe the state government should handle it. Wherein it is more efficient for the government role to be at the federal level (defense), we believe the federal government should handle that. The key takeaway is bolded: "We believe in a government..."
In order to protect our rights we must have an entity that by its very existence breaks our rights?
How about a basket of everything? It's so simple, yet few seem to grasp the concept.
Put all of our resources in a basket and set the known total value as the benchmark. Once the benchmark is set, that's what we have to base a commodity backed currency on. The only fluctuations in value would be the fluctuations in production. Value for value, not debt out of thin air.
Right. Peg the currency to EVERYTHING.
Now we just have to go take an inventory of EVERYTHING and make sure we have it priced appropriately.
In this system, would we have no-reserve, fractional-reserve, or full-reserve lending?
And the difference between this and the views of most liberal Democrats is what exactly?
Liberal democrats have no problem rigging the market, prohibiting self defense, using state force, infringing on the personal right to choose. It isn't possible to be a liberal democrat and support libertarian freedom. Socially, libertarians and democrats have common ground, but I think that is the extent of their similarities.
And the difference between this and the views of most liberal Democrats is what exactly?
I think it's the part of Government should not rig or manipulate the market.
Many libertarians I speak with think that it's rigging the market to do things like certify that doctors can practice medicine, medications actually work, medical procedures work, cars don't randomly catch fire and food is safe to eat. They think that the free market will determine it, by people getting hurt or killed enough that those that do it will no longer get business.
No system can do it perfectly, but the argument is usually made that if regulation is not perfect...then completely deregulate it. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 28 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,585 posts, read 16,564,108 times
Reputation: 6046
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679
Liberal democrats have no problem rigging the market, prohibiting self defense, using state force, infringing on the personal right to choose. It isn't possible to be a liberal democrat and support libertarian freedom. Socially, libertarians and democrats have common ground, but I think that is the extent of their similarities.
I think it's the part of Government should not rig or manipulate the market.
Many libertarians I speak with think that it's rigging the market to do things like certify that doctors can practice medicine, medications actually work, medical procedures work, cars don't randomly catch fire and food is safe to eat. They think that the free market will determine it, by people getting hurt or killed enough that those that do it will no longer get business.
No system can do it perfectly, but the argument is usually made that if regulation is not perfect...then completely deregulate it. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good.
The idea that all regulations are bad is actually a Republican talking point. I'm pretty sure you knew that though.
Liberal democrats have no problem rigging the market, prohibiting self defense, using state force, infringing on the personal right to choose. It isn't possible to be a liberal democrat and support libertarian freedom. Socially, libertarians and democrats have common ground, but I think that is the extent of their similarities.
Quote:
I think it's the part of Government should not rig or manipulate the market.
Many libertarians I speak with think that it's rigging the market to do things like certify that doctors can practice medicine, medications actually work, medical procedures work, cars don't randomly catch fire and food is safe to eat. They think that the free market will determine it, by people getting hurt or killed enough that those that do it will no longer get business.
No system can do it perfectly, but the argument is usually made that if regulation is not perfect...then completely deregulate it. It makes the perfect the enemy of the good.
The impression I get from friends that have begun to describe themselves as libertarians is that they are either social liberals who live in areas where describing yourself as such is frowned upon; young people ashamed to call themselves Republican even though they vote R every time; social liberals with zero grasp of how national economies function; nihilists; or pot-heads.
This only strengthens my opinion that there is no such thing as an actual libertarian. At best it's an ethos that means something different to every person who proclamations themselves as such.
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.
