[quote]dhickey wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Compromise is for politics. In a world without politics, which is what he is ultimately arguing for, evil pragmatism gets left by the wayside.
I am not sure how much Rothbard you have read but he talks extensively about such things. He lived the mantra of Mises:
Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito
Do not give into evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.
My point is not that he is wrong. My point is that we need to make progression. An all or nothing solution is great for books but would never be acceptable in the real world. Guys like Rothbard and Von Mises are very important, but you also need people to present ideas or compromises that have a chance at being implemented. Look at how long it has taken us to regress as far as we have. Liberty has been taken away from us a little at time and, unfortunately, we will have to take it back a little at time. That is unless you are up for a revolutoin.[/quote]
I would argue that a lot of Americas problems are the result of compromise, especially on the concept of natural law and inherent rights.
The original natural rights were all property rights, including the right to your own body and a liberal nation of laws was there the protect them. That was the whole raison d´être of the modern state.
The whole idea of the welfare state is a direct attack on this concept and there is no alternative to it which is why the proponents of wealth redistribution still use the language of human rights, i.e natural rights, even though their ideas destroy the very concept.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
My point is not that he is wrong. My point is that we need to make progression.[/quote]
Who is we? What is progression?
[quote]
An all or nothing solution is great for books but would never be acceptable in the real world.[/quote]
Unfortunately, socialism, according to the Austrians, is a disease that will always grow and spread due to the nature of compromise in politics. There cannot be just a little socialism because humans want stuff and once one group gets a privilege others will come knocking on government’s door for their piece of the pie.
[quote]
Guys like Rothbard and Von Mises are very important, but you also need people to present ideas or compromises that have a chance at being implemented. Look at how long it has taken us to regress as far as we have. Liberty has been taken away from us a little at time and, unfortunately, we will have to take it back a little at time. That is unless you are up for a revolutoin.[/quote]
Agreed. Though, I am doubtful it would be so bad if we were to wake up and government was suddenly gone from our lives completely. The realistic approach would be to work from the inside to shrink it down through non-enforcement. Though, how realistic is it to expect politicians to give away their power once they get it?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
The problem in the real world is that without a little bit of socialism the havenots revolt and the system breaks down.[/quote]
But what right does government have to take my labor and give it to someone else.
[quote]
Plus people want roads.[/quote]
Roads could be supplied much more efficiently by the market.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The problem in the real world is that without a little bit of socialism the havenots revolt and the system breaks down.
But what right does government have to take my labor and give it to someone else.
[/quote]
What right do the poor have to riot, steal, rape your wife and kill you?
[quote]
Plus people want roads.
Roads could be supplied much more efficiently by the market.[/quote]
I don’t think you understand how roads are build. They are built by private companies that compete in the marketplace.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
What right do the poor have to riot, steal, rape your wife and kill you?[/quote]
You cannot argue this would happen without government. It was never an issue in this country before the notion of Socialism came along.
Yes I do. Government steals our money and property and gives a job to the lowest bidder (usually only to have the lowest bidder default on the contract with no repercussion).
And this says nothing of the ridiculous traffic laws that come into play after the roads are completed.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Did you use a road this week?[/quote]
Yes, and I break as many traffic laws that I can get away with. I love to get liquored up before going on a drive – especially during morning rush hour when all the parents are ferrying their children to school.
[/quote]I wish they would do away with those pesky red lights.[/quote]
As a customer of the roads I wish they were more efficient but government doesn’t care what I wish.
[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Murder, kidnapping and rape by bands of thugs was standard practice in North America until recently.
???
[/quote]These crimes[quote] will never go away. People act independently [/quote]with[quote]their own free will. Socialism won’t change that.
Hahahahahahahah[/quote]
yeah…no kidding huh? Probably should not talk on the phone when I am typing.
As far as moving where there are jobs, I hear Viet Nam has a booming shoe industry. I guess you have to be careful with definitions like voluntary unemployment.
I used to think I liked the Ideals of a Libertarian society, but after talking to you and lift maxiimus I am now reconsidering my likes.
I have yet to hear of anyone come up with a definative list of libertarian values that every Libertarian agrees with. You need to decide for yourself. gov’t certainly has it’s place but it can not be all thing to all people and our gov’t in it’s current form is causing more harm than good.
None of us will live to see a Libertarian paradise anywhere on this planet. What is frustrating is the fact that we are moving in the wrong direction. Why do I think we are moving in the wrong direction?
Because people will always justify more gov’t theft becuase it appears on the surface to help some small group. Nobody asks or really thinks about at what cost. No body has the right to the fruits of my labor unless I choose.
No corporation, no industry, no individual. Nobody has the right to tell me what I can sell my labor for.
Minimum wage = bad
Tarrifs = bad
Subsidies = bad
Regulation = bad
Unbalanced budget = bad
Unfunded liabilities = bad
These may be generalizations but if these things do more harm than good the generalizations are justified in my mind. If a gov’t is unable to use these tools without abuse and causing harm, then they should not be given the power to use them.[/quote]
So I am thinking infrastructure is out , I do not use the bride on I 70 coming out of Denver I do not want my money to benefit those lazy people in Denver that won�??t fix their own bridge .Let them buy planes or why don�??t we privatize roads ? Let the market take care of that.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
I would say it is just the opposite, I think Business is controlling wages as opposed to the free market. They are using illegal immigration along with an organized market to artificially suppress wages.
And the intervention is an attempt to keep business from manipulating the labor market, which they are doing very unsuccessfully
I still don’t understand why you seperate business from the free market. businesses are consumers of labor and products. businesses are made up of individuals who are themselves consumers and producers. Labor is driven by the same laws of supply and demand as any other product or service. Why do you think that it is not?[/quote]
I am not separating labor from the free market I am pointing out the influence that the illegal immigration issue and the organized employers are having over an unorganized labor force. If Management were fair, there would be no reason to want a Union.
I find the Austrians and Rothbard a little less compromising but still brilliant.
The problem for von Mises was that he did not think that you could have just a little bit of socialism.
He though that it grows like a cancer and does not stop until the system breaks down.
Therefore there was very little room for compromise.
[/quote]
The problem now is that the cancer has already spread. We are not starting from scratch. We (Americans) need people to find solutions that will be acceptable to the voting masses as much as we need the revolutionary thinkers.
We can’t cut the cancer out. we can only hope to stop it from spreading and then slowly rid ourselves of it one cancerous cell at a time.