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.
It's a pipe dream, which is why it doesn't exist in reality.
It would not happen overnight.
The object is to increase the number of officials who adhere to Libertarian philosophies in Government.
End the Lobbying, End the notion that Corporations are people, End TBTF Bailouts, End Wars, End Monopolies and oligopolies (they are not products of a true free market).
How is that to start? You think our nation would fair better under those guidelines?
Easier way to understand libertarians (small "L", not the party):
In the story of the grasshopper and the ant, the libertarian fully accepts and acknowledges both characters and their respective outcomes, without passing a moral judgment on either. The ant worked all summer storing food for winter, the grasshopper fiddled and danced. Winter comes, the ant is warm and well fed having prepared, the grasshopper freezes and starves. The libertarian says "yep, okie doke. Sounds perfectly reasonable."
Acceptance of input and resulting output at face value, neither condemning nor condoning the outcome for either actor. That's libertarianism at its core. Each actor was solely responsible for their own actions and outcomes, and because nether directly harmed nor obligated the other through their actions, neither has an obligation or responsibility to the other going forward.
The grasshopper and ant story is a really easy way to simplify ideologies.
Easier way to understand libertarians (small "L", not the party):
In the story of the grasshopper and the ant, the libertarian fully accepts and acknowledges both characters and their respective outcomes, without passing a moral judgment on either. The ant worked all summer storing food for winter, the grasshopper fiddled and danced. Winter comes, the ant is warm and well fed having prepared, the grasshopper freezes and starves. The libertarian says "yep, okie doke. Sounds perfectly reasonable."
Acceptance of input and resulting output at face value, neither condemning nor condoning the outcome for either actor. That's libertarianism at its core. Each actor was solely responsible for their own actions and outcomes, and because nether directly harmed nor obligated the other through their actions, neither has an obligation or responsibility to the other going forward.
The grasshopper and ant story is a really easy way to simplify ideologies.
Did both make it to the finish line? Oh sorry wrong story
It would not happen overnight.
The object is to increase the number of officials who adhere to Libertarian philosophies in Government.
End the Lobbying, End the notion that Corporations are people, End TBTF Bailouts, End Wars, End Monopolies and oligopolies (they are not products of a true free market).
How is that to start? You think our nation would fair better under those guidelines?
If we could accomplish all that, sure, we'd be better off, but ending any of those things would be miraculous.
Like I said, it's great in theory, but the human condition prevents it from being reality, not unlike utopian communism. It simply can't be done.
So perhaps the most efficient way would be the best and would lead to less spending?
We could have a much more efficient government with our current budget, but it takes fundamental change. Step one: educating the populous, something that wouldn't happen too well in a libertarian nation.
We could have a much more efficient government with our current budget, but it takes fundamental change. Step one: educating the populous, something that wouldn't happen too well in a libertarian nation.
When you can't actually address the points made, try to demonize I guess.
We could have a much more efficient government with our current budget, but it takes fundamental change. Step one: educating the populous, something that wouldn't happen too well in a libertarian nation.
why would a nation of individuals free to pursue their own interests, with a small, limited government that exists to secure, protect and defend the natural individual rights of its citizens, be poorly educated? Can't individuals choose to read books? Can't groups of individuals pool resources of their own volition to teach their children things, without demanding you help pay for it? And if massive government is the only way to educate a populace, then why does our academic standing relative to other 1st World nations continue to get worse the more money we spend on education?
When you can't actually address the points made, try to demonize I guess.
I'm not trying to demonize anyone stop playing the victim.
The DOE is a bureaucracy that libertarians would love to erase from the federal budget. And those other things happening are all reasonable, but contingent upon an educated voterbase.
So how do we educate people? I'm not trying to snarky I'm sincerely asking. I saw a Ted talk a few weeks ago that suggested an internet-based learning system with no teachers. Plausible, yes. But it's one of those things you have to try out first, there's no beta testing.
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.
