political question of the day
Are all libertarians jerks? Or just esr (and most of the other ones I've talked with)? Or am I possibly overreacting?
The short version is here, the slightly shortened but still rather long version of the prologue/context is here, and the full dialogue is here if you're really desperately trying to unload some spare time ( Read more... )
The short version is here, the slightly shortened but still rather long version of the prologue/context is here, and the full dialogue is here if you're really desperately trying to unload some spare time ( Read more... )
Reply
Is there, then, a libertarian answer to the problem of providing infrastructure?
If I was goading esr, it was accidental -- I have heard that attitude (poor people are just lazy) coming from self-proclaimed libertarian sympathizers, and I haven't heard any realistic libertarian solutions to that problem ( ... )
Reply
Reply
One of the main problems with libertarianism -- and the government-free varieties in particular -- is that it seems to depend far too much on "the marketplace" to magically create solutions that are better than any that we could deliberately design. This may work well in some areas (e.g. electronic gadgets) where individuals can choose among different solutions, but much less well in others -- many of which seem to fall under the general heading of "infrastructure" and "the common good".
A toll-based or co-op-based national highway system might work. (I'm not sure I understand how revenues are collected under the co-op system, but I'll concede that it's theoretically workable.) Same for arbitration. (I've actually used arbitration on two memorable occasions... I think I'd be happy to see more business sent their way, so there would be more options to choose from. The services I actually used seemed rather bound by convention, and were consequently quite ( ... )
Reply
My quick answer to that, is that the marketplace is made up of people. The quality of the solutions that people come up with is dependent upon the people living in that particular community. If the smartest and kindest people are allowed to have the freedom to do the most good, without governmental red tape getting in the way, then everybody benefits from it. I suspect that most of the people who would abuse the freedom in a libertarian society are already breaking governmental law - so that the main difference is that good people would be able to do more good. Also, there isn't just "one" libertarian/anarchist solution to solving a community's needs. Technically, even a hippie commune could function in a libertarian society as long as there's a consensus in the commune.
The problem ( ... )
Reply
This article addresses that issue - basically, it depends on the society you have. If you're in a society of generally good people, an absence of government won't suddenly turn them into power-hungry madmen.
Reply
(My response got too long, so I split off the largest chunk, which was a discussion of minimum wage, into a separate comment.)
Points we agree on, I think:
* Most people are good or (at worst) neutral.
* Society should not prioritize "protecting us from the bad guys" over "preserving the freedom for the good guys to act" -- or, in other words, we shouldn't sacrifice freedom for safety.
Continuing the dialogue by responding to particular points:
magical markets
W: Libertarianism seems to depend far too much on "the marketplace" to magically create solutions that are better than any that we could deliberately design.
M: "If the smartest and kindest people are allowed to have the freedom to do the most good, without governmental red tape getting in the way, then everybody benefits from it."How do you deal with the fact that approximately 3% of the ( ... )
Reply
W: "aren't mortgages and wage-slavery driven by free market forces? Isn't government regulation pretty much the main thing preventing them from being far worse?"
M: "if a company has $X amount of money to spend, they can either hire fewer workers and pay them more, or hire more workers and pay them less. When there's a minimum wage, companies are forced into the former option - and thus fewer people have jobs..."
1. This argument seems compelling on the face of it, but my understanding is that no link has been demonstrated between raised minimum wages and reduced employment. It seems obvious that there would have to be if it were raised high enough, but apparently we've never gone high enough to see this effect ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment