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.
Red herrings and strawmen throughout this diatribe. I have no idea what you're blathering on about here.
I didn't say you called yourself an anarchist. I clearly stated that at least ONE OTHER POSTER did.
My point is that you guys claim to believe in being responsible and independent, but the truth is, you're not even close to being as independent as you'd like to believe you are. And many of you have enjoyed lots of government assistance.
Most of you have health insurance subsidized by your employers. If y'all are so strongly believe in everyone taking care of their own healthcare, why don't you pay for your OWN insurance? It's a simple question, tied directly to your "ideology."
I've met lots of "libertarians" and the like, and many tend to have similar traits. From what I've seen, lots of you tend to be pretty unhealthy. You wouldn't be able to pay for your own health insurance outright, because not only is it expensive for anyone, but also because you have PLENTY of pre-existing and/or chronic conditions (obesity, smoking and other addicitons, diabetes, heart disease, etc) that would make your individual health insurance costs sky high. And you know it.
Again, I'd be willing to buy your philosophy if you all practiced what you preached; if you all were more responsible with your own health so that you wouldn't need all the care you do tend to need, thereby driving up the costs of everyone else's health insurance. But, collectively, you don't practice what you preach.
Rhetoric, insult, and name-calling are standard tactics in your posts. See your post above. I have never resorted to name calling. Don't have to. You do. You're also far more emotional in your posts, and you CHOOSE to become offended. I believe your camp would refer to you as a "snowflake"). And then you lash out.
I really don't want to but in but... What you're saying is complete nonsense. Being a Libertarian (which I am) or an anarchist does not mean not working with others, capitalizing on the efficiencies of another person's specialized labor while offering that same person the benefit of their own specialized labor. Adam Smith wrote about this when he described the "Invisible Hand" theory where an individual in the pursuit of their own best interests actually benefits society by doing so. That person isn't meaning to benefit society, yet through free trade, where one buys, sells or trades their goods and services for the goods and services of others, society benefits regardless of the fact that the person wasn't working toward a societal goal, rather toward a goal of improving their own lot in life.
Libertarians are for extremely limited government. Anarchist see no need for any rulers. Neither of these groups are promoting living as hermits, withdrawn from societal interaction. They merely believe that the best, most efficient means of benefiting the society as a whole comes from VOLUNTARY cooperation, not forced compliance.
How you manage to equate this to some "rugged individualism" where a person or family does everything they need for survival themselves, i.e. growing their own vegetables and livestock, building their own homes, etc., is beyond me as it is hardly what Libertarians or anarchists typically advocate.
Please go read a book or two, and not from some socialist, Marxist or communist perspective, on what Libertarians and anarchists advocate because it's abundantly clear you haven't got a clue.
Like most normal people, I would share what I had with the other person rather than letting them die. Why were they not helping? Are they injured, or in shock? Some people are better in a crisis situation and some freeze or give up quickly. I would give them a chance and if they were useless I still would share with them. At that point since survival depends on me I would get the best of the food, etc. If the other guy tried stealing from me we would have a problem.
With welfare, food stamps, disability, social security, etc. in US we decided we would not just let poor people die. There was a gap when it came to health insurance, we patched it up a little and now we are ripping it open again and people will die.
no people wont be dying buddy. Have you ever worked in a hospital? People from all ages, races, incomes die every day. people from every walk of life get treated.
False, anyone who isn't stupid, who has the power of basic literacy can show your response is an absolute lie.
Go ahead people, test me, and see this poster as nothing more than passing political rhetoric. You are a click away from showing them invalid!
Why don't you prove a single thing I said wrong? Prove means provide factual information backed by proof. You haven't done that ONCE on this thread.
As I just said, your posts haven't been substantive enough for me to even attempt to rebut them. Its all foaming at the mouth spewing nonsensical little catchphrases that have no gravity.
My "silly little path" as you so politely refer to it left you grasping with bartering. Is bartering not a form of payment? What if one had nothing with which to barter?
No one ever has a "right" which first requires taking from another in order for them to have that right. To suggest this means one must approve of and support servitude and slavery.
I have no "right" to demand a portion of what you have or what you earn in order to pay for my food or my water. If humans had such a "right" then how do some die of starvation or of dehydration?
WHOOSH over your head.
Everyone paying taxes into a plan that covers everyone is paying for services. Also, they often pooled their resources to the benefit of all in the group.
I really don't want to but in but... What you're saying is complete nonsense. Being a Libertarian (which I am) or an anarchist does not mean not working with others, capitalizing on the efficiencies of another person's specialized labor while offering that same person the benefit of their own specialized labor. Adam Smith wrote about this when he described the "Invisible Hand" theory where an individual in the pursuit of their own best interests actually benefits society by doing so. That person isn't meaning to benefit society, yet through free trade, where one buys, sells or trades their goods and services for the goods and services of others, society benefits regardless of the fact that the person wasn't working toward a societal goal, rather toward a goal of improving their own lot in life.
Libertarians are for extremely limited government. Anarchist see no need for any rulers. Neither of these groups are promoting living as hermits, withdrawn from societal interaction. They merely believe that the best, most efficient means of benefiting the society as a whole comes from VOLUNTARY cooperation, not forced compliance.
How you manage to equate this to some "rugged individualism" where a person or family does everything they need for survival themselves, i.e. growing their own vegetables and livestock, building their own homes, etc., is beyond me as it is hardly what Libertarians or anarchists typically advocate.
Please go read a book or two, and not from some socialist, Marxist or communist perspective, on what Libertarians and anarchists advocate because it's abundantly clear you haven't got a clue.
Re: bold: Mr. Smith is likely turning over in his final resting place. Personally, I like Adam Smith, however many of his (fanatical) followers are so unlike him. For one thing, he understood the ever-present 'externalities' in each equation:
Quote:
Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, is often cited as arguing for the "invisible hand" and free markets: firms, in the pursuit of profits, are led, as if by an invisible hand, to do what is best for the world. But unlike his followers, Adam Smith was aware of some of the limitations of free markets, and research since then has further clarified why free markets, by themselves, often do not lead to what is best. As I put it in my new book, Making Globalization Work, the reason that the invisible hand often seems invisible is that it is often not there. Whenever there are "externalities"—where the actions of an individual have impacts on others for which they do not pay, or for which they are not compensated—markets will not work well. Some of the important instances have long understood environmental externalities. Markets, by themselves, produce too much pollution. Markets, by themselves, also produce too little basic research. (The government was responsible for financing most of the important scientific breakthroughs, including the internet and the first telegraph line, and many bio-tech advances.) But recent research has shown that these externalities are pervasive, whenever there is imperfect information or imperfect risk markets—that is always. Government plays an important role in banking and securities regulation, and a host of other areas: some regulation is required to make markets work. Government is needed, almost all would agree, at a minimum to enforce contracts and property rights. The real debate today is about finding the right balance between the market and government (and the third "sector" – governmental non-profit organizations.) Both are needed. They can each complement each other. This balance differs from time to time and place to place.[22]
Would you walk the walk, meaning, if Healthcare services were extended to folks not having it now, would you work extra hours for free to serve them? Your income would neither increase or decrease from the present.
What I would like to do is get a second job to earn more money so I can give it to someone that doesn't work, preferably someone that sits home in Momma's basement playing video games, so they to can have equal healthcare to mine!
Not a basic human right.. I wouldn't expect 3rd world countries to offer Healthcare to its citizens............Or even have longer life expectancies for its citizens than a country like the US....... Uhh never mind.
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.
Also, they often pooled their resources to the benefit of all in the group.
