Isn't Somalia technically the most libertarian country on the planet?
At what point do you call a group of individuals agreeing to pool their resources for a greater good, the state? And individuals did orchestrate the holocaust. Hitler, a charismatic individual convinced other individuals to convince other individuals and so on and so forth, to carry out his will.
I understand your reasoning, but would you agree its harder for a rogue organiation to get nuclear weapons in the heavily regulated USA then it would be in a libertarian state?
I belong to several libertarian groups and think tanks, and no one is against marijuana decriminalization, or people being able to marry who they want. Abortion is sketchy though.
*Those polled could just be anarchist and opposed to any halfway legislation.
I know a few, myself included who oppose same sex marriage legislation, and the "gay rights" movement in general.
For jokes: I joined a black libertarians group on Facebook, and there were only 5 members .
Dont be sarcastic when speaking about the Savior friend. I dont even want to provoke you with a post to say something you might regret later. Lets just move on like breakups.Because Saudi Arabia is heaven on earth, huh?
Dont be sarcastic when speaking about the Savior friend. I dont even want to provoke you with a post to say something you might regret later. Lets just move on like breakups.
You showed wisdom here. Plus rep.Gotcha
Race rarely comes up. So no.Do they know you're black?
Isn't Somalia technically the most libertarian country on the planet?
1. Your think tanks might not be representative of the full spectrum of folks who identify as libertarians.I belong to several libertarian groups and think tanks, and no one is against marijuana decriminalization, or people being able to marry who they want. Abortion is sketchy though.
*Those polled could just be anarchist and opposed to any halfway legislation.
I know a few, myself included who oppose same sex marriage legislation, and the "gay rights" movement in general.
For jokes: I joined a black libertarians group on Facebook, and there were only 5 members .
Single payer makes sense economically. The bigger a risk pool the lower the costs for everybody in it. And because of things like the Hippocratic oath, it doesn't really make sense to try and compare medicine to voluntary non essential private products.Our answers to these issues show the direction we are headed, single payer, redistribution, free college education(proposed) etc.
Its not as out there as you think.
Why should a govt do that? People should protect their own property. If the govt does that they will only use it as an opportunity to grow their power and encroach on other rights.Somalia also does not protect property rights, which is what libertarians demand of a society to be considered liberty-oriented to begin with.
I'm not questioning the merits of those polices(though I do disagree with them), just pointing out the slide towards socialism/central planning. Preventing this slide requires constant vigilance. A vigilance I think is more prevalent among libertarians.Single payer makes sense economically. The bigger a risk pool the lower the costs for everybody in it. And because of things like the Hippocratic oath, it doesn't really make sense to try and compare medicine to voluntary non essential private products.
As long as there is a tax system there will always be some level of redistribution. Unless you can come up with a way for govts to operate without tax money. Also, contrary to your theory that any and all govt leads to communism (which begs the question of why you think a libertarian govt would be any different), taxes in the US recently rebounded from record low effective and marginal rates and are still way off of the ~90% marginal rates of the post WWII era.
Free college education is also not necessarily a bad idea. I don't think its unreasonable to say the K-12 public education system has been a net plus for the US and the western world, and is a big factor in our private prosperity. Think how many people would not have been able to participate in the economy if the only way for them to learn how to read was to go to a school their family couldn't afford to send them to. That is one of the defining differences between the first and third world.
The way forward is to leverage the best aspects of a wide range of ideologies.... not use lies, fabrications, fallacies and goofy emotional appeals to tout one ideology as best (while claiming to be impartial to any single ideology)
Look at the shyt going on with the Qatar world cup facility. No regulation there.... and people are being abused and dying left and right all in the name of profit. So what are you talking about homie?
First allow me to introduce myself. My name is Paul Hughes and I am Head of International Media Relations for the Supreme Committee of Delivery & Legacy - the organization overseeing the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.
As Editor-in-Chief of Deadpsin, I assume you have built up a respectable pedigree in your field and have the highest standards. If that is indeed the case, sadly the article by your writer Tom Ley falls way short of those standards.
Firstly the headline; Qatar's World Cup Expected To Take More Lives Than 9/11.
Is it because an Arab country is hosting the World Cup you thought this was a clever and shocking headline? For the sake of coming across as a decent open-minded person, I certainly hope not. However, I can't really think of any other reason to bring such a damaging image into people's minds. Perhaps you can enlighten me...
And that's before we actually address the factual inaccuracies in the headline, let alone the report.
It is one thing for the ITUC to claim 4000 people will die building World Cup stadiums without any justification. It is another thing completely for media outlets with giant followings such as Deadspin just to take their word for it. Have you actually ever sat down and questioned that claim, or are you just accepting it as fact instead of the sound-bite it is?
'The ITUC concludes that the principal cause of all of these deaths is the horrible working conditions that migrant workers suffer through every day,'
Tommy, have you looked into the facts of this issue? Have you even asked your reporter to get some context or find out the cause of deaths in Qatar? Has it never crossed your mind it may be because of something other than construction incidents? If you have then I'm amazed a paragraph like this was allowed to appear on your website.
There are 500,000 Indians living in Qatar. Since 2011 around 450-500 Indians have died due to any number of reasons. Without diminishing the value of human life, I would urge you to at least consider those numbers for some sort of context to the mortality rate of that particular demographic.
Here's another fact. In almost 50,000 man hours, the Supreme Committee has not had one single injury or fatality on World Cup projects. [Ed. note:Huh?] That, unlike the ITUC's "estimation" is a fact. Another fact is that before the ITUC released this report, we had to contact them and point out several inaccuracies in their report which related to our Worker Welfare Standards and the accusations leveled at the Supreme Committee. These inaccuracies were duly noted in private even if not in public.
There are problems to be addressed in Qatar, problems the government are trying to fix right now. Following a two day investigation, an independent delegation from the European Parliament held a press conference in Doha tonight, acknowledging the government for their work in taking steps to progress the situation.
No-one is denying that things are not perfect. What we are being denied is the chance to put both sides of the story across. I would urge you to maintain the standards that got you to the position you now hold. I think your 600,000 followers deserve it.
In the meantime, I suggest you re-visit the headline. It is currently being reviewed by our legal team - not least because of the direct comparison to the worst atrocity on US soil. And in the future, please give careful consideration to future reports on Qatar.
Best regards,
I'm not questioning the merits of those polices(though I do disagree with them), just pointing out the slide towards socialism/central planning. Preventing this slide requires constant vigilance. A vigilance I think is more prevalent among libertarians.
So in other words, to you, the idea of less government is superior to the idea of more govt. That's not a bad thing; your continual contradictions are... and I am die hard, but it stems more from a rejection of surrogate decision making and economic barriers than a 'this is superior to this' idea.
Any system, including a free market, works perfect in theory; you have a nagging habit of championing the theoretical benefits of ideologies you are "die hard" for (again even though you said absolute ideology is not a good thing) and pointing to the practical/real world failures of ideologies you don't like. The only thing consistent about you is your intellectual dishonesty and unwillingness to commit to anything.That said, I do believe a freer market to be superior to all other implemented models, that our govt. overreach is atrocious, and that our intervention policy will be the downfall of us.
huh?You showed wisdom here. Plus rep.
The major problems with claims that Somalia is a "libertarian country/utopia" is that it's actually a failed third-world state. Government or no, it's not going to magically acquire the resources, education, and technology to become a first-world nation; and those of us in first-world nations like the technology that even a semi-free market can produce. Nor will its citizens necessarily be ready for freedom and individual responsibility; much like the fizzled "Arab spring", they may instead cry for a new (religious) dictator.
Somalia also does not protect property rights, which is what libertarians demand of a society to be considered liberty-oriented to begin with.