Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 06:01:08 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: How libertarianism helps the poor  (Read 6073 times)
hugolp
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
June 11, 2011, 09:09:09 PM
 #1

http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/09/how-libertarianism-helps-the-poor/

Quote
How libertarianism helps the poor

Everybody knows that libertarians are greedy capitalists who favor the maximization of profit above all else. “Taxation is theft!” they cry, but the exploitation of the working classes fails to elicit any similar moral outrage. Libertarians, everybody knows, care about the rich to the utter neglect of the poor and vulnerable.

But everybody is wrong.

.......
1481263268
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263268

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263268
Reply with quote  #2

1481263268
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481263268
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263268

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263268
Reply with quote  #2

1481263268
Report to moderator
1481263268
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263268

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263268
Reply with quote  #2

1481263268
Report to moderator
Basiley
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
June 12, 2011, 12:04:35 AM
 #2

but it TRUE !!
taxation is way to steal from poor and give to rich.
in most cases/countries - literally !!
epi 1:10,000
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
June 12, 2011, 12:05:01 PM
 #3

"The single most effective way that we can help the vulnerable is to stop hurting them."

I like this idea.  There are may philosophical models for maximization of liberty and the understanding of reality has advanced since the days of Ayn Rand thereby evolving libertarian philosophy.  Other philosophies and knowledge of the human psyche have advanced as well.
Anonymous
Guest

June 12, 2011, 03:23:38 PM
 #4

Other philosophies and knowledge of the human psyche have advanced as well.
Hardly. They have practically failed to acknowledge any history of wu wei and Lao Tzu.
epi 1:10,000
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 154


View Profile
June 12, 2011, 03:31:39 PM
 #5

No I pretty sure modern psych has recognized the contribution of Taoism.
Distribution
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 713


Fight fire with photos.


View Profile WWW
June 13, 2011, 02:24:54 AM
 #6

If you don't think the state is good for the poor, well, your overseers would like to have a talk with you.

Gun accessories - www.shamblindistribution.com

My list of sites giving away btc - http://davidshamblin.com/bitcoin/free-bitcoins/
freespirit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 161


View Profile
June 13, 2011, 05:22:31 AM
 #7

Why anyone MUST care about the poor? Only those who want to care about the poor, should care. Otherwise where is freedom of choice here? Smiley
hugolp
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
June 13, 2011, 06:04:35 AM
 #8

Why anyone MUST care about the poor? Only those who want to care about the poor, should care. Otherwise where is freedom of choice here? Smiley

Right, but two things:

1. I dont know why, but I just dont like seeing people suffering, specially if its by some random shit out of their control. So helping the less fortunate is something that comes out naturally. I know we like to joke around, act tought and stuff, but usually 99.9% of the people is this way.

2. Humans are social animals. And the rules of society are social contructs, social conventions. We can agree that respecting individual rights is the best way to organize society because it creates maximum wellfare and progress. But if some part of society suffers big poverty, they are not going to accept the social conventions, they wont see the reason why they should. So helping the less fortunate get their shit together again and become self-reliable is in your own interest.

PS: I hate welfare that just makes people addicted to more welfare. Help should always be directed at getting people out of the whole.
freespirit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 161


View Profile
June 13, 2011, 06:12:09 AM
 #9

Why anyone MUST care about the poor? Only those who want to care about the poor, should care. Otherwise where is freedom of choice here? Smiley

Right, but two things:

1. I dont know why, but I just dont like seeing people suffering, specially if its by some random shit out of their control. So helping the less fortunate is something that comes out naturally. I know we like to joke around, act tought and stuff, but usually 99.9% of the people is this way.
There is no contradiction to what I said. If you or I feel that we should care in a specific case than we should. But we are not obliged to.
Quote
2. Humans are social animals. And the rules of society are social contructs, social conventions. We can agree that respecting individual rights is the best way to organize society because it creates maximum wellfare and progress. But if some part of society suffers big poverty, they are not going to accept the social conventions, they wont see the reason why they should. So helping the less fortunate get their shit together again and become self-reliable is in your own interest.
Right, but currently not only those who agree are obliged to pay up, everyone forced to (via taxes) and in every case [govt. deems to be worth caring about].
hugolp
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
June 13, 2011, 06:23:44 AM
 #10

Right, but currently not only those who agree are obliged to pay up, everyone forced to (via taxes) and in every case [govt. deems to be worth caring about].

But paying taxes is not about welfare. Government is about power, not welfare. Welfare is just the excuse the government uses to get your money.

Thats actually one of the points of the article.
freespirit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 161


View Profile
June 13, 2011, 06:28:14 AM
 #11

Right, but currently not only those who agree are obliged to pay up, everyone forced to (via taxes) and in every case [govt. deems to be worth caring about].
But paying taxes is not about welfare. Government is about power, not welfare. Welfare is just the excuse the government uses to get your money.
What's your point? I'd say welfare system is about power to redistribute money.
So welfare is about power too. For the government.
For the taxpayer it is about government taking money from them.
eturnerx
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile WWW
June 13, 2011, 07:47:22 AM
 #12

So just how much %age of your tax dollars goes on welfare? In my country it's about a quarter. The largest segment of social welfare spending is in paying government guaranteed superannuation. They paid tax all their lives so I guess they deserve it. The next largest sector is students: for loans and allowances combined. Following that is a benefit paid to solo parents....
How does your country compare?

WatchMine - get Bitcoin prices and pool stats on your Mobile
hugolp
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
June 13, 2011, 08:27:11 AM
 #13

Right, but currently not only those who agree are obliged to pay up, everyone forced to (via taxes) and in every case [govt. deems to be worth caring about].
But paying taxes is not about welfare. Government is about power, not welfare. Welfare is just the excuse the government uses to get your money.
What's your point? I'd say welfare system is about power to redistribute money.
So welfare is about power too. For the government.
For the taxpayer it is about government taking money from them.

I think we agree, just using somehow different language.
rainingbitcoins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
June 14, 2011, 06:44:27 AM
 #14

We've already seen the results of unregulated capitalism in this country at the beginning of the 20th century - with workers earning just barely enough to survive, paid in company scrip that could only be redeemed on overpriced items at the company store.

I don't see how anyone could argue in good conscience that we should go back to that unless the only things they've ever read on the subject were highly-biased works by stuffy economists with a vested interest in ignoring or discounting the suffering of regular people. You owe it to yourself to read books from more diverse points of view. I'd recommend you check out The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. It's old enough to be in the public domain, so you can read it for free: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/140
hugolp
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
June 14, 2011, 08:20:49 AM
 #15

We've already seen the results of unregulated capitalism in this country at the beginning of the 20th century - with workers earning just barely enough to survive, paid in company scrip that could only be redeemed on overpriced items at the company store.

I don't see how anyone could argue in good conscience that we should go back to that unless the only things they've ever read on the subject were highly-biased works by stuffy economists with a vested interest in ignoring or discounting the suffering of regular people. You owe it to yourself to read books from more diverse points of view. I'd recommend you check out The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. It's old enough to be in the public domain, so you can read it for free: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/140

How do you explain that in the same period you are criticizing the wages of the workers went up more than in any ohter society, including Europe that was already implementing social-democracy?

And the system back then was not perfect, but comparing this period with the technological advances to that period is not honest. Compare that system with systems in the same period when they all had the same technology (or access to it) and you will see that the aproximation to a free market that was the USA increased the wages of the workers a lot more than the european socialdemocracies and any other system in the world. If you dont believe me please check the data and see by yourself.
GideonGono
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 398


Long Live The FED


View Profile WWW
June 14, 2011, 08:45:49 AM
 #16

We've already seen the results of unregulated capitalism in this country at the beginning of the 20th century - with workers earning just barely enough to survive, paid in company scrip that could only be redeemed on overpriced items at the company store.

I don't see how anyone could argue in good conscience that we should go back to that unless the only things they've ever read on the subject were highly-biased works by stuffy economists with a vested interest in ignoring or discounting the suffering of regular people. You owe it to yourself to read books from more diverse points of view. I'd recommend you check out The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. It's old enough to be in the public domain, so you can read it for free: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/140

MAJOR FAIL!

Research what you are arguing against next time so you don't look like a fool with your nonsense strawman argument.

How was there "unregulated capitalism in this country at the beginning of the 20th century" when the govt ran schools, collected numerous taxes and tarrifs, monopolized justice, police, military all paid for by unwilling tax-victims.


FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
June 14, 2011, 11:45:46 AM
 #17

As long as the rule you apply to me in the name of helping the poor can be applied back on you it's cool with me.

Oh, you need to choose some amount of my money to take? Fine, now I choose some amount of yours. Almost any rule system will work. Just apply it to everyone in the same way and the bizarre parts will cancel.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
June 14, 2011, 12:11:46 PM
 #18

You cut the cake, and I choose which slice is mine, eh?

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
rainingbitcoins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
June 14, 2011, 12:31:38 PM
 #19

We've already seen the results of unregulated capitalism in this country at the beginning of the 20th century - with workers earning just barely enough to survive, paid in company scrip that could only be redeemed on overpriced items at the company store.

I don't see how anyone could argue in good conscience that we should go back to that unless the only things they've ever read on the subject were highly-biased works by stuffy economists with a vested interest in ignoring or discounting the suffering of regular people. You owe it to yourself to read books from more diverse points of view. I'd recommend you check out The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. It's old enough to be in the public domain, so you can read it for free: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/140

MAJOR FAIL!

Research what you are arguing against next time so you don't look like a fool with your nonsense strawman argument.

How was there "unregulated capitalism in this country at the beginning of the 20th century" when the govt ran schools, collected numerous taxes and tarrifs, monopolized justice, police, military all paid for by unwilling tax-victims.



I'm talking about corporate regulation. In fact, the conditions described in the book I mentioned horrified people so much that it inspired the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. Because when profit was their only motive, corporations obviously couldn't be trusted to regulate themselves. And they still can't, if the actions of international corporations in less regulated modern countries are examined.

Arguing that corporations couldn't plainly see that they were working their people to death because "it was a different time!" is just silly. Seriously, read "The Jungle" and other books written around that time. People were being horribly exploited and they were angry as hell.

Quote from: hugolp
How do you explain that in the same period you are criticizing the wages of the workers went up more than in any ohter society, including Europe that was already implementing social-democracy?

And the system back then was not perfect, but comparing this period with the technological advances to that period is not honest. Compare that system with systems in the same period when they all had the same technology (or access to it) and you will see that the aproximation to a free market that was the USA increased the wages of the workers a lot more than the european socialdemocracies and any other system in the world. If you dont believe me please check the data and see by yourself.

There was no social democracy in Europe in 1900, and social democracy as we know it didn't really start to take hold over there until after WWII. Now, if we compare the situation of the lower classes in modern Europe with modern America, things start to look pretty bad for the U.S. The poor here have no health care, lower social mobility, lower life expectancy, fewer educational opportunities, far less paid vacation (most European countries require 4-6 weeks paid vacation, U.S. requires zero), etc, etc.

There was a great article in Inc. Magazine (of all places) earlier this year called "In Norway, Start-ups Say Ja to Socialism"
http://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-say-ja-to-socialism.html

It's several pages long, but here's just one of the points it raises:
Quote
Bear strikes, darkness, and whale meat notwithstanding, Norway is also an exceedingly pleasant place to make a home. It ranked third in Gallup's latest global happiness survey. The unemployment rate, just 3.5 percent, is the lowest in Europe and one of the lowest in the world. Thanks to a generous social welfare system, poverty is almost nonexistent.

Norway is also full of entrepreneurs like Wiggo Dalmo. Rates of start-up creation here are among the highest in the developed world, and Norway has more entrepreneurs per capita than the United States, according to the latest report by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a Boston-based research consortium. A 2010 study released by the U.S. Small Business Administration reported a similar result: Although America remains near the top of the world in terms of entrepreneurial aspirations -- that is, the percentage of people who want to start new things—in terms of actual start-up activity, our country has fallen behind not just Norway but also Canada, Denmark, and Switzerland.
rainingbitcoins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
June 14, 2011, 12:34:20 PM
 #20

As long as the rule you apply to me in the name of helping the poor can be applied back on you it's cool with me.

Oh, you need to choose some amount of my money to take? Fine, now I choose some amount of yours. Almost any rule system will work. Just apply it to everyone in the same way and the bizarre parts will cancel.

I have literally no idea what any of this is supposed to mean.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!