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.
You libertarians that act like you want to wash your hands of Rand Paul because of his statement disgust me. From a libertarian viewpoint, what Rand Paul said is absolutely consistent with libertarian ideals.
If you actually listened to what Rand Paul said, he never wanted to repeal the Civil Rights act in full, but only Title II of the civil rights act. Which allows the federal government to regulate private businesses, by telling them who they must allow into their businesses. Does the government have authority to tell private businesses who they must allow to be their customers? Or who they must hire?
The constitution gives the federal government no such authority. The federal government can regulate public institutions, like the army. It can regulate public offices like the post office, libraries, public schools, etc. And it can regulate any business that is given public funding(Acorn?). But the government has no authority to tell any private business who they must allow to be their customers. Period. No more than it must tell individuals who they must allow in their homes, which plumber they must call to fix their drains, who should be their doctor, etc.
Just because you believe the federal government should have no authority to regulate behavior, doesn't mean you agree with a certain behavior. Libertarians tend to also believe there should be no war on drugs. Does that mean that libertarians think drugs are good? Does that mean that libertarians think that if you legalize drugs that no one will have drug problems? Don't be ridiculous.
They just don't believe the government should have the power to legislate morality. And you people who don't defend Rand Paul for what he actually said, you disgust me. And Rand Paul, you disgust me for not standing up for what everyone knows you believe. I realize the media is nothing but a bunch of attack dogs that use their position to further their own agenda's, but you have to have principles, and stand by them. I can't imagine your father withering like you do under pressure.
Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. I'm really not interested in what he said because he is a Republican. Take it up with him.
There is a simple and logical fix for the past transgression of enslavement of the Africans.
Every American descendant of slaves is offered this choice:
[1] Accept compensation - which requires them to renounce their American citizenship and to relocate back to their ancestor's country of origin, with no right of return, OR
[2] Pay compensation to the descendants of the former slave owners for their ancestors good fortune to be involuntarily transported here, if they wish to remain in the U.S.A.
You can't have it both ways - either you wish your ancestors were still in Africa or you're glad you're here... and will finally shut up about being "owed" something for nothing that the current generation is liable for.
Rand Paul says that the market left to itself would have fixed the problem of segregation and racial discrimination against blacks. Can any libertarians here explain how this was supposed to happen?
Pretend that we are back in 1963, the Civil Rights Act has not yet passed. You are a libertarian. What is your response to the spectacle of blacks being denied access to restaurants, doctor's offices, private schools, housing, etc. because white business owners were free to discriminate against them? Can you explain how the "free market" - left to its own devices - would have eventually resolved the situation?
This is a dumb question. Your asking about something that didn't happen. Anyone could come with any answer and you could just say you're wrong.
You might as well be asking what would have happened if monkeys started flying out your butt.
And the Free Market was never given a chance to fix the problem. Does the free market discriminate on the basis of race? No. So why would it have then?
All you can really do is look at areas of this country that didn't have Jim Crow laws and compare those to areas that did. If things were better without the law then you could probably come to the conclusion that the free market works better.
Basically, you are asking what would have happened. You're asking people to rewrite history so you can then say they are wrong. A trolling thread.
This is a dumb question. Your asking about something that didn't happen. Anyone could come with any answer and you could just say you're wrong.
Hahaha......are you having a hard time answering the question? If you believe the free market fixes everything, then explain how it would have fixed racial discrimination.
Quote:
And the Free Market was never given a chance to fix the problem. Does the free market discriminate on the basis of race? No. So why would it have then?
Well then explain how the free market would have fixed it if given the chance.
Quote:
All you can really do is look at areas of this country that didn't have Jim Crow laws and compare those to areas that did. If things were better without the law then you could probably come to the conclusion that the free market works better.
Here's a link of where the worst cases of racial oppression (i.e. lynchings) occurred in the US. Notice that the list includes many states that didn't have Jim Crow laws. A Partial List of African Americans Lynched in the United States Since 1859 (http://www.ccharity.com/lynched/index.htm - broken link)
Quote:
Basically, you are asking what would have happened. You're asking people to rewrite history so you can then say they are wrong. A trolling thread.
No, I'm asking you to show how free market ideology would have solved racial discrimination. If you believe the market should never be regulated and the market can be trusted to do the right thing, then be a man and describe how this is supposed to happen. If you don't like "rewriting history", fine. Let's forget about the 1960s. Let's start with 2010. Explain how repealing the Civil Rights Act and letting the market be itself would prevent racial discrimination going forward.
What about you, though? You said you're a libertarian. Would you repeal the Civil Rights Act today, 2010, and give the market free reign?
Do you even know what the civil rights act did?
Most of the civil rights act made it where the "government" could not discriminate. All "government" institutions were not allowed to discriminate. There was absolutely nothing wrong with making it illegal for the government to discriminate. Minorities pay taxes to the government, so the government should not be allowed to basically bar them from government jobs/places. The government should never have a policy of forced segregation. No libertarian is arguing with the Civil Right act and its dealings with the government.
The only item in question is title two. This effectively regulated private businesses, which is just not constitutional. Nor should it be acceptable. This has paved the way for endless discrimination cases to be filed in our courts. And this has taken away peoples freedom of speech and choice on their own property. If you believe that the government can tell businesses what they can and can't do on private property, just because it thinks something is "bad". Then what else should the federal government be allowed to do? Many say cigarettes are bad, should the federal government make those illegal? Only 20% of Americans smoke, so I'm sure we could pull a majority on that one. What about alcohol? Prostitution? Stripping? Rap music? If we could deem these things as dangerous to society, should the federal government pass laws to criminalize them? Where does it end?
The free-market means, you have to have a product to sell to make profit. So you must conform to market pressures. If a company limits their business by only allowing 60% of the population to do business with them. Then do you believe their business will do as well as one that serves 100% of the population? The Jim Crow laws actually forced businesses to segregate. Without those laws things would have been much different. Would there still have been segregated businesses? Maybe, but probably not. Did you know the Civil rights law actually still allows many businesses to still segregate? But how many businesses do you know of that practice racial segregation?
But so what? Do you know anything about segregation in America? America is already extremely segregated even with laws trying to force desegregation. There have been studies that say that many areas of America are more segregated today than they were in the 60's, especially in the South.
Why do you believe it is your right to eat or sleep anywhere you want? I personally don't go where I am not welcome, or where I don't feel comfortable. I steer clear of entire sections of my city. There are many areas where there might as well be signs on the doors saying no white people, cause there just aren't any white people, ever.
It is no more your right to stay at Hotel X, as it is his right to not let you stay there. My friend was banned from going to this gas station near his house because he shoplifted from them and got caught. What if that gas station decided that it was tired of people stealing things, so it put up a sign saying no one under the age of 18 allowed inside. Is that discrimination? What if it said no one wearing coats allowed inside, is that discrimination? What if it said no one who doesn't speak english fluently allowed, is that discrimination?
If the gas station believes that their business is better off without the young, or foreigners, or people wearing coats in their store. Let them. If they believe their business is better off without blacks in it, then let them. Despite what you believe, they are not taking away your rights. You have no right to be on anyones property.
So, do you think McDonald's or Taco Bell or Wal-mart would be themselves if they were for whites only? Which businesses exactly do you think would exist in this country today that were for "whites only"? Get real.
The only item in question is title two. This effectively regulated private businesses, which is just not constitutional. Nor should it be acceptable.
So in your view, a private hospital - the only hospital in a county with a 95% white population - should be allowed to put up signs in its ER "No Blacks/Minorities Allowed"?
Quote:
This has paved the way for endless discrimination cases to be filed in our courts. And this has taken away peoples freedom of speech and choice on their own property.
Should private business owners be allowed to pay non-whites half the wage of whites for the same amount and type of work?
Quote:
If you believe that the government can tell businesses what they can and can't do on private property, just because it thinks something is "bad".
Should parents be allowed to torture their children inside their homes and the government should just stand back and watch?
Quote:
The free-market means, you have to have a product to sell to make profit. So you must conform to market pressures. If a company limits their business by only allowing 60% of the population to do business with them.
What if the business caters to the 95% of the population which is one racial group? Can it not afford to ignore the 5% belonging to another racial group and still make profits? Of course it can. Especially if that 5% is historically economically disadvantaged and has very limited purchasing power. The business loses nothing by snubbing this group.
Quote:
Then do you believe their business will do as well as one that serves 100% of the population? The Jim Crow laws actually forced businesses to segregate. Without those laws things would have been much different.
Really? Then how come the opposition to the civil rights act came from the white business owners themselves? If they thought Jim Crow laws prevented their businesses from maximizing profit, they would have gotten rid of these laws long ago and they would have embraced the civil rights act from the get go.
Quote:
Why do you believe it is your right to eat or sleep anywhere you want? I personally don't go where I am not welcome, or where I don't feel comfortable. I steer clear of entire sections of my city. There are many areas where there might as well be signs on the doors saying no white people, cause there just aren't any white people, ever.
But there are no signs saying "White People Not Welcome". And which places are these where you don't feel welcome? Name the actual place so we know we are not talking about hypothetical things.
Quote:
It is no more your right to stay at Hotel X, as it is his right to not let you stay there. My friend was banned from going to this gas station near his house because he shoplifted from them and got caught. What if that gas station decided that it was tired of people stealing things, so it put up a sign saying no one under the age of 18 allowed inside. Is that discrimination?
Yes it is discrimination because the shop owner made the sweeping generalization that everyone under 18 shoplifts when in fact it is really only your friend who shoplifts. He should ban your friend, not everyone under 18.
Quote:
What if it said no one wearing coats allowed inside, is that discrimination? What if it said no one who doesn't speak english fluently allowed, is that discrimination?
What about a private hospital not treating people in the ER who don't wear coats? Is that discrimination?
Quote:
So, do you think McDonald's or Taco Bell or Wal-mart would be themselves if they were for whites only? Which businesses exactly do you think would exist in this country today that were for "whites only"? Get real
.
Since whites comprise 75% of the US population and since whites have higher incomes than others (except Asians), then yeah, these companies can do very well catering to a white only clientele. The reason minorities have made inroads in income and wealth is precisely because of the civil rights act, which protected them from employment and housing discrimination to a better degree than before the CRA was passed. The CRA enabled minorities to grow in population and build wealth so that now, companies will have to cater to them to remain competitive.
Pretend that we are back in 1963, the Civil Rights Act has not yet passed. You are a libertarian. What is your response to the spectacle of blacks being denied access to restaurants, doctor's offices, private schools, housing, etc. because white business owners were free to discriminate against them? Can you explain how the "free market" - left to its own devices - would have eventually resolved the situation?
If they knew then, what they know now, I wonder if the bill would have ever passed?
Seems like segregation makes everyone else safer from crime, gangs, violence, etc.
If the civil rights act was repealed, I wonder how many businesses would put up signs such as "No Blacks or Hispanics allowed", etc (while allowing Whites, Asians, etc) simply based on theft, robbery, etc?
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
There is a simple and logical fix for the past transgression of enslavement of the Africans.
Every American descendant of slaves is offered this choice:
[1] Accept compensation - which requires them to renounce their American citizenship and to relocate back to their ancestor's country of origin, with no right of return, OR
[2] Pay compensation to the descendants of the former slave owners for their ancestors good fortune to be involuntarily transported here, if they wish to remain in the U.S.A.
You can't have it both ways - either you wish your ancestors were still in Africa or you're glad you're here... and will finally shut up about being "owed" something for nothing that the current generation is liable for.
....Just kidding....
Maybe after you've been forcibly yanked out of your home, shackled alongside a bunch of other bigots, and had your sorry butt packed onto a ship, with all of you headed for say, forced labor in a Chinese manufacturing plant... who knows, perhaps then you might sound a little less "glib" and willfully ignorant when you're talking about slavery.
People (black and white) would be upset if your business segregated, and not spend money in your establishment.
Eventually it would become a wise business decision not to segregate.
That is their main point. It is really not difficult to understand.
All the libertarians and others who look at the free market through rose colored glasses are looking at the issue through the values of today. In the 50s/60s, it would have not upset very many people if a business discriminated against blacks. I was just a kid then, but I saw this in my hometown, and I'm not from the south.
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.
