Political Orientation

[SgtSpike]

If you want more crap like that, read:
http://governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=1

Sorry, I should have specified.  I am all for a smaller government, and do think the current government system is bloated and, well, crappy.  I just thought that post was a particular example of awesome, considering the subject matter.

[1714775862]

1714775862

[1714775862]

1714775862

[1714775862]

1714775862

[1714775862]

1714775862

[1714775862]

1714775862

[1714775862]

1714775862

[JohnDoe]

Sorry, I should have specified.  I am all for a smaller government, and do think the current government system is bloated and, well, crappy.  I just thought that post was a particular example of awesome, considering the subject matter.

Don't give Sawzall any credit for it though, it's an old copy/paste.

[Basiley]

Orientation: Gamma Centauri

p.s.
tired/sick covert indoctrination/brainfuck attempts, such as this topic in real-life.

[error]

Sorry, I should have specified.  I am all for a smaller government, and do think the current government system is bloated and, well, crappy.  I just thought that post was a particular example of awesome, considering the subject matter.

Don't give Sawzall any credit for it though, it's an old copy/paste.

Yeah, I know. There's a rebuttal to it, which I can't seem to find right now.

[SgtSpike]

Sorry, I should have specified.  I am all for a smaller government, and do think the current government system is bloated and, well, crappy.  I just thought that post was a particular example of awesome, considering the subject matter.

Don't give Sawzall any credit for it though, it's an old copy/paste.

Awww, that just took away 98% of the awesome factor.

[nickwit]

I am left-wing / socialist / liberal.

Also 46 years old, and director of two companies, in NZ and the UK.

15 years ago I was working in the City in London... have had every job from meat-packing-factory-labourer to chauffeur to Head of IT... and the older I get, the more I learn, the more perspective I get, the more socialist I become. I would be honoured if the taxes I pay went towards giving younger generations the freedoms that I had... provided by strong socialist  forbears.

This weirdly American idea of "freedom" being everyone out for themselves... "small government"... basically means that "essentials" are privatised - forcing the majority of people into a lifetime of debt, where "time-out" is a life-threatening condition. Corporations pay for this propaganda, and they've now got the American People over a barrel - and "Libertarians" who are basically in love with an abstracted theory, play directly into the hands of these corporations.

"Government" is how we organise ourselves at a national level - and it needs to be big to stand up to corporate power. That's what it's for. To tame the baronial classes. The fact that govt has become corrupted by corporate power doesn't mean it should be made weaker... basically handing the house-keys to (you guessed it) corporate power. Corporations don't (massively) fund think-tanks like Cato or The American Enterprise Institute or any of the massive plethora of others because they're nice guys. It's a massive excercise in social-engineering, and libertarians are one of the results.

People that a generation ago would have been union guys, are now campaigning... "fighting", to disadvantage themselves... and more importantly, their kids.


so that's my 2btc.

[JohnDoe]

Yeah, I know. There's a rebuttal to it, which I can't seem to find right now.

That's easy.

1) Anyone can do stuff with infinite money.
2) There is no reason to think the free market can't provide those same products and services with the same quality and for the same price.
3) All regulations mentioned wouldn't even be required in a society where the average person has more than half a brain.

[MemoryDealers]

nickwit,

Corporations are creations of the government.
If there was no government,  there would be no corporations.

Memory Dealers provides safe, working products to customers all over the world,   not because of government regulations,  but because it is what our customers want.

I'm sure we will still have clean water,  safe food, and the internet without government involvment.

People do not walk barefoot because there are no government shoe factories.
- Murray Rothbard

[caveden]

I don't get it why there's Libertarian and Anarchist as different options. Libertarians are anarchists.... or by anarchist you mean the communist type?

[LMGTFY]

I don't get it why there's Libertarian and Anarchist as different options. Libertarians are anarchists.... or by anarchist you mean the communist type?

Isn't it the other way round - anarchists are libertarians, but libertarians are not necessarily anarchists? (Libertarianism, as I understand it, includes anarchists and minarchists - those who want to abolish the state, and those who want to see a vastly reduced state).

[caveden]

Libertarianism, as I understand, is about the non-agression principle. And that's incompatible with any form of state. The difference between minarchists and social-democrats is quantitative, not qualitative, as is the difference between libertarians and statists... but well, just words anyway.

[BitterTea]

Logically, I agree with your analysis.

Practically, I think you will find that most who label themselves as libertarian are in fact minarchists.

This is why using labels as a tool to understand the beliefs of others often fails.

[caveden]

Yeah, pretty much like the term liberal, which now means leftist in the US, and if you want to talk about original liberals, you have to say classical-liberal to avoid confusion.

[MysteryMiner]

Other> National Socialist.

[washort]

Also "other". Put me down as "royalist".

[willygest11]

are left and right still having orientation?

[compro01]

I'm sure we will still have clean water,  safe food, and the internet without government involvment.

i have considerably less faith in the free market. 

free markets only work within certain bounds.  it relies on several key assumptions, many of which are interdependent.

1. large numbers of buyers and sellers in the market
2. negligible barriers to entry.
3. all market participants have complete, or at least equal, information.
4. minimal friction in transactions.
5. all sellers seek to maximize their profit at all times.
6. all sellers are theoretically capable of selling the same quality of product.
7. all sellers are theoretically capable of selling the same quantity of product at proportional input costs.
8. no buyer or seller is large enough to distort the market to a relevant degree.
9. lack of externalities

as long as these assumptions are sufficiently true, a free market works well.  the less true these become (especially 2, 3, 5, and 8 ), the less well a free market works, eventually breaking down completely in various manners.

i consider the proper role of government is to work to ensure that these assumptions are kept as true as possible (e.g. regulations on advertizing to help ensure #3) to create functional free markets, to provide services in sectors where a free market cannot function properly (e.g. healthcare, basic food, etc.), and ensure the safety, security, and social freedom of its citizens.

this apparently places me as a leftist economically (i voted NDP in the last election.  sadly, my riding is a conservative stronghold.) and centrist socially.

[SgtSpike]

compro, I agree that government regulation is necessary to a degree for a properly functioning free market (can anyone imagine the sorts of trickery that would happen if we didn't have a court system, or how many people would die from food-borne illness without the FDA?).  I just don't agree with the current bloated form of government we have, that rewards people for sitting on their rears all day or eating so much they can hardly walk anymore.

[Anonymous]

If you want more crap like that, read:
http://governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=1

That whole site nearly gave me an aneurysm. It's too painful.

Make it stop -- make it stop!

[Anonymous]

or how many people would die from food-borne illness without the FDA?

A lot less. The FDA fails at regulating food. I would prefer a private regulating body that actually has incentive and CAN actually FAIL and be replaced by a competent agency.

...or I could prefer to buy foods regulated by other alternatives.

Just because we completely depend on government monopolys now, doesn't mean we can't live without them.

"Oh, no. Without government we wouldn't have indoor plumbing!"

It's such a crock-of-shit. We will still have these things because people want them. Not because big daddy government says so.