Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Sssooooorta. Even disregarding that, a completely free market is going to have winners and losers, and the winners use their proceeds to win more and make the losers lose more.
I mean, those abusive monopolies came from somewhere, and at some point they had enough power to cause said red tape and self-written legislation.
edited 19th Jun '13 11:37:58 AM by Pykrete
What libertarianism is is basically a set of assumptions proffered first and checked second. Now such practice is common to other political ideologies as well, but since I'm talking libertarianism, I'll explain this case in particular.
The assumption is "let everyone do what they want, as much as possible". There are usually further assumptions that give caveats for very obvious public goods, such as national defense, law and order, and maybe infrastructure. But otherwise, the thinking is, "let people do whatever they want" first, and only if there are issues that crop up later, deal with them accordingly, perhaps using damages and tort law in a court system.
The problems with this approach are:
- Neglect of problems that are not obvious. Problems like racial discriminiation, or the poor geting shafted in educational and career advancement opportunities. This is closely related to...
- Neglect of problems that involve a time delay. This includes health risks that don't pop up immediately, or practically every case of environmental degradation.
- Using a tort system to assign blame is not necessarily reliable, and is necessarily after-the-fact. Some damages are irreversible, such as death. Some damages are hard to assign. There are also transaction costs involved in taking someone to court, but libertarians rarely talk about things like public defender provisions or pro bono legal work, which will be underprovided in a completely free market because there's little money to be made.
I agree with the idea of "let everyone do what they want, as much as reasonably possible". However, along with that idea must come an acknowledgement that such a "free-for-all" does NOT by itself result in "liberty and justice for all" or providing everyone a fair chance, but needs some tweaking.
Occasionally a lot of tweaking. Because economic externalities and underprovision of public goods are real things.
edited 19th Jun '13 11:40:34 AM by GlennMagusHarvey
Put more simply (no offense meant), maximum individual liberty does not result in maximum total liberty. Liberty itself is an illusion, because a poor person who is the victim of systematic injustice has "liberty" in the sense that he is free to starve to death, but telling him that he is "free from compulsion by the state" is not likely to result in an expression of gratitude.
edited 19th Jun '13 11:50:00 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Irish parliamentarians spar over 'war criminal' Obama's summit visit
Noam Chomsky: Obama Is ‘Running Biggest Terrorist Operation That Exists’
edited 19th Jun '13 12:03:11 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016FBI Director: NSA Leaks Educate Terrorists Who ‘Don’t Understand The Internet’
And they outrage politicians (and Fox News viewers) who don't understand the Internet. Who's worse?
edited 19th Jun '13 2:00:13 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Karl Rove: Unlike Obama, Cheney had 'the guts to defend' NSA programs
AP chief: DOJ acted as 'judge, jury and executioner' in probe
edited 19th Jun '13 2:58:19 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Senator Durbin questions whether F-35 project has become 'too big to fail'
Because conservatism is simultaneously a persecuted minority viewpoint and the view of all right minded people, who comprise the majority of Americans. While a logical contradiction, it makes perfect sense as a rhetorical device. You can know that everyone around you supports the True American Way, while also fighting valiantly to unseat the Evil Socialist Empire that dominates the country.
edited 19th Jun '13 5:45:00 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I don't think they've actually claimed minority status (which actually undermines your point, incidentally).
What U.S. ideological "conservatives" claim is the following:
- there's a silent majority of like-minded "conservatives" in the US
- in the US, "liberals" make up a vocal minority who have been good at tricking people into giving them policymaking power
- the way these "liberals" (allegedly) trick people is by promising the general public free (or cheap) goods and services from the government, making them lazy and dependent, while using their political clout to force the wealthy to foot the bill
- "conservatives" believe that no one should be given such "handouts", and each individual should either earn their share of good living (and they can earn as much as they want, so long as they work to get them) or else be left in poverty (if they choose to be lazy and not work)
- if only the silent majority that agrees with this principle would wake up and see what these "liberals" are (allegedly) doing, they would vote the them out of office, and this country would be much better off.
edited 19th Jun '13 6:06:26 PM by GlennMagusHarvey
NSA Head Caught In Open Mic Moment: ‘Tell Your Boss I Owe Him Another Friggin’ Beer’
Obama proposes cutting nukes by a third
edited 19th Jun '13 10:15:44 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

So soldiers are just animals in heat?
I'm reminded of something a friend once said. "You're telling me that my dog understands the word no but a human male is somehow too stupid to understand?"