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.
amen to that spunky. the university is riddled with lefto pinkos trying to indoctrinate because they know they are influential to the weak and frightened students, its only the strong who know the BS peddled by these smelly beard, sandal wear toe fetished, feminized men and angry, women
amen to that spunky. the university is riddled with lefto pinkos trying to indoctrinate because they know they are influential to the weak and frightened students, its only the strong who know the BS peddled by these smelly beard, sandal wear toe fetished, feminized men and angry, women
Offtopic! This thread is about your state of mind when you are born. Take it to another thread.
Offtopic! This thread is about your state of mind when you are born. Take it to another thread.
I disagree, it is a natural progression of the topic. OP inquired if one was "born libertarian" and the debate progressed to how ones views might be shaped through experience including the college experience.
oops, you are the OP, you should appreciate the flow of the debate!
Last edited by spunky1; 05-01-2007 at 09:19 AM..
Reason: add
Maybe Leavingflorida's right then... anarchists (or at least the individualist ones) are sort of the ultimate libertarians in my mind.
Yes, I do believe that anarchists are the ultimate libertarians, or better yet libertarians in the purist sense. There are those in the LP who have this view, synonymous with the extreme sects of the Rep. and Dem. parties. These individuals, IMO, have an honorable goal, but without any pragmatic sense.
For those who consider Libertarians selfish, certainly Libertarians support individual liberties and freedoms, but that includes ALL individuals as well as oneself. We feel that individuals can best reach their potential when government interference is minimized and government doesn't limit their resources. We feel that those who can't help themselves are best served by private charities, civic organizations, family, and friends, without the bureaucratic red tape of federal and local governments.
To advocate allowing individuals to keep more of what they earn, IMO, is not being selfish. Selfishness and greed is advocating using the government to forcefully take resources from others. I've read posts from some on here who support increased taxes to "help the poor", yet are unwilling to contribute until the government mandates it, IMO, the epitome of hypocrisy and selfishness.
Concerning the thread topic, I don't necessarily feel that we are born libertarians because we learn at an early age to depend upon others. Most children must be taught to treat others' property with respect and to not expect everything to be given to them.
AmaznJohn, I'd like to add corporations as another entity some libertarians do not want in their lives. This is a relatively recent development and somewhat unique to the US, but in some cases, the government and corporations have become synonymous. A balance is needed to reduce corruption on both sides. I suppose this is shifted me somewhat to the left, though, I am still firmly in the libertarian camp.
AmaznJohn, I'd like to add corporations as another entity some libertarians do not want in their lives. This is a relatively recent development and somewhat unique to the US, but in some cases, the government and corporations have become synonymous. A balance is needed to reduce corruption on both sides. I suppose this is shifted me somewhat to the left, though, I am still firmly in the libertarian camp.
From reading your previous posts, I would agree with your self-assessment. However, it is the government regulations which have caused such corruption in the corporations you are referring to. Corporations are composed of individuals, typically acting as a single entity, yet having the motivations and asperations of most of the rest of us individuals. They desire fiscal independents, monetary and psychological achievement, respect, and gratitude. Certainly many of the individuals who comprise corporate leadership are under-handed and corrupt, however, these are the dangers of economic freedom. We know the ramifications of socialism, with its economic imprisonment and fascism. Unfortunately, those who call for additional corporate regulations in an attempt to limit these corrupt activities are only creating the need for more such doings.
From reading your previous posts, I would agree with your self-assessment. However, it is the government regulations which have caused such corruption in the corporations you are referring to. Corporations are composed of individuals, typically acting as a single entity, yet having the motivations and asperations of most of the rest of us individuals. They desire fiscal independents, monetary and psychological achievement, respect, and gratitude. Certainly many of the individuals who comprise corporate leadership are under-handed and corrupt, however, these are the dangers of economic freedom. We know the ramifications of socialism, with its economic imprisonment and fascism. Unfortunately, those who call for additional corporate regulations in an attempt to limit these corrupt activities are only creating the need for more such doings.
I have no problem with corporations making money. They are what they are. Calling them greedy is not an insult, it's speaking the truth. It's their nature. The problem is when they influence government, circumventing democracy. Corporations have too many rights. We don't need more socialism, we need corporations to be in their proper place. Right now, they simply have too much power. The choice isn't socialism or capitalism.
Edit: I do think government control is needed in certain segments of our society. Corporations cannot be expected to be fair when they have a monopoly. When they have a monopoly, there is no free market, which means they are free to do whatever they like. Unlike government, corporations do not answer to the people. I don't advocate pure socialism for things like healthcare, but a hybrid system may be what works best. And yes, healthcare is a monopoly.
I have no problem with corporations making money. They are what they are. Calling them greedy is not an insult, it's speaking the truth. It's their nature. The problem is when they influence government, circumventing democracy. Corporations have too many rights. We don't need more socialism, we need corporations to be in their proper place. Right now, they simply have too much power. The choice isn't socialism or capitalism.
Removing rights from corporations IS a form of socialism/fascism. Only because the government has so much power do the corporations need to influence lawmakers. Without the power of lawmakers to regulate corporations, corporations/businesses would be more able to participate in the free market AND be subject to the demands of the free market.
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.
