The Libertarian Thread

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Libertarian Thread

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

SedanChair posted:

What homesteaders were not supported by society? They didn't get to where they were without tools and division of labor. You don't get to just check out of society once you have looted enough from it to flee and pretend like you were born out of your mother's vagina with those tools.

You owe a debt to society. This debt is levied in the form of taxation, which is a very reasonable burden compared to past obligations like military service or serfdom. You don't get to get out of it. If you find some land and make use of it we will be coming for our share because we gave you the ability to gain value from that land.

This is not even getting into the issues of what constitutes land that is "unused" which is a whole other can of worms.

You don't really owe a debt to anyone though if you don't feel like it to be honest

# ¿ Aug 9, 2014 08:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 12:15

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

I'm a social libertarian.

# ¿ Aug 14, 2014 17:04

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

VitalSigns posted:

The 2008 crash did it for me too. Being gay, I rejected my conservative Christian upbringing early on because it was pretty obvious how bigotry and repression was destructive and horrible. Unfortunately, I naively concluded that the problem was religious people forcing their beliefs on others, but gosh here's Ayn Rand telling me that I don't have to listen to the mystics or deny who I am out of some sense of duty, and gosh there wouldn't be all these problems in the world if there weren't an oppressive state enforcing the whims of the mob on minorities. And all her no-taxes, no-welfare stuff meant I didn't have to challenge any of the other beliefs I grew up with, and anyway I'm a hard worker (no, the GI Bill isn't a social program: I earned that!) and I deserve to keep the fruits of my labor!

Then 2008 happened, and all the wealthy Supermen Who Run the World ran crying to the government for taxpayer bailouts, because it turned out all their bullshit about freedom and ability just meant that they didn't want to pay taxes and they didn't want the government interfering with their swindles, but they did want endless taxpayer money because the whole philosophy is a cheap cover for redistributing wealth from the 99% to the top 1%.

Seeing the people who got their massive debts paid off and their bonuses covered by taxpayer dollars turn around and blame everything on the poor and fight tooth and nail against any kind of mortgage adjustment for "losers" was the final straw.

If you rejected the private sector because they were bailed out by the government, why not reject the government?

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 17:48

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

VitalSigns posted:

Because a banking system that collapses under fraud, greed, incompetence, and bad decisions every 20 years is not in my rational self-interest.

On the other hand, proper banking regulation put in place after the great depression prevented meltowns for more than 50 years, until the elites succeeded in pushing a free-market fundamentalist religion and gutting regulation because "well of course it's not in a bank's self-interest to buy toxic loan products it doesn't understand, nor is it in an insurance company's interest to take on trillions in risk by insuring debt without setting any money aside to cover payouts, and obviously a major bank would never sell products designed to fail so it can secretly bet against them because that'd be bad for its reputation, so if we just get the government out of the way then fraud and incompetence will disappear from banking forever "

Edit: There's also that I agree with Libertarians in their complaint that the weath disparity that arises under capitalism allows those with the most weath to co�pt the power of the state and extract rents from the rest of us with the police power backing them up, but I don't share their conclusion that if we renounce all democratic checks on the use of force and allow the superrich to buy private armies directly this problem of extortion by the elite will go away.

The banking system hasn't collapsed though. I put the blame more on the government for not enforcing proper regulations than the banks for doing whatever they were allowed.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 19:38

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

Rhjamiz posted:

Uh. Something's wrong with your reasoning there. You blame the Government for Letting the Banks Do Whatever They Wanted, and not the Banks, for Doing Whatever They Wanted.

And your answer is to de-regulate? i.e., Let the Banks Do Whatever They Want, which by your own admission, is what caused the problem in the first place.

No that's not my answer I don't know how you came to that conclusion

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 19:44

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

Travic posted:

You're arguing the Libertarian side. Your default position is deregulation unless otherwise specified.

Are you seriously a Libertarian in favor of greater government regulations?

I think you're getting yourself worked up about something that isn't there.

For that particular crisis, I think that the government is more to blame for the poor handling and prevention than the banks themselves as legal entities.

RuanGacho posted:

tbp is Just asking questions�

I'm glad you could respond with a meme when that is quite literally what I was doing in the first place lol

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 19:55

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

RuanGacho posted:

Because the government, being a sentient entity is getting on in years now and just conveniently forgot those regulations that it should have enforced against the banks. Stupid Government! Take your pills!

I think there should have been stricter policies in place and more active efforts to both prevent and punish transgressions of the laws, before during and after the crises of the late 2000s period.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 19:59

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

Rhjamiz posted:

Do you also blame the Police for crime?

Considering how much they commit, yes quite often I do.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 19:59

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

RuanGacho posted:

Where did the laws go tbp?! Who scurried them away into the night? Some filthy statist probably put them in the shredder and cackled as they did it.

I think a big part of the problem is the disproportionate influence institutions such as "the banks" and wealthy individuals have on our governmental process, which helps neuter punishment where it is due and enforcement of regulations in times where all seems peachy.

As well, I think the complicated nature of the Financial Crisis is a bit over the head of many who like to talk about it often, leading to confusion and misplaced anger.

Well perhaps misplaced isn't the right word, but it seems often skewed by a poor understanding of what occurred.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 20:05

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

VitalSigns posted:

You are quite correct that the government is to blame for accepting idiot libertarian free market ideology and refusing to regulate the derivatives market and the CDS market, and for gutting the regulations that prevented investment banks from gambling with depositors' money or turning the insurance market into a casino.

Of course, it was bankers who are entirely to blame for the crimes they committed, and they bear a healthy share of blame for lobbying to roll back the aforementioned regulations too.

So yes sure, I blame the government for the crisis in the same way that I blame the dikes that failed in New Orleans for the Katrina disaster. We should strengthen those protections so they don't fail next time, not say (as the Libertarians do) "welp, Katrina just shows dikes are completely useless so let's tear down every dike in the land to keep us safe from the next hurricane!"

I think this is a much more on point response. The failure to properly regulate the derivatives market was a huge flaw - products which are, ideally, win-win for all parties involved with them turned into such a double-edged sword used the way they were.

CDSs in particular are brilliant instruments but their fragrant abuse at the time is almost laughable.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 20:08

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

I didn't misunderstand anything, though.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 20:18

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

Grand Theft Autobot posted:

It is a complicated story, but there aren't many people here who don't understand what happened.

I think there are from previous discussions.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 20:24

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

QuarkJets posted:

That's like drinking a gallon of bleach and then getting mad at the government for not stopping you

So if you believe that the government is responsible in this case, then you would agree that the government should enact better controls on the banks and do a better job of enforcing them, yes? I'm on board with that.

That's not like that, because ultimately there was relatively small amounts of harm for the people in the institutions and those institutions themselves.

And yes, I do.

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 20:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 12:15

tbp: Mar 1, 2008; DU WIRST NIEMALS ALLEINE MARSCHIEREN

Cercadelmar posted:

tbp is saying some confusing stuff. "The government failed to properly regulate and enforce the private sector, therefore we should reject the government." Correct me if I read you wrong, tbp, but I feel like the better answer would be to strengthen regulatory bodies and make efforts to detach politics from wealth.

Yes I agree

# ¿ Aug 15, 2014 21:15

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The Libertarian Thread