Government Successes?

[WiseOne]

Good one, Tom.

The Moon landing is a decent example. It was in fact on time, as I think Kennedy's "we go to the moon" speech said a decade. And the over budget thing can be forgiven because there had to be so many unknowns involved.

Maybe the decision to enter World War II? That was almost certainly the correct move.

Also, Islamic terrorism has stopped in recent years. Did that happen on its own, or was that the result of US government efforts? If so, count that as a major success.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that virtually every attempt at regulating or taxing businesses, limiting personal freedoms in the name of stopping the Scourge du Jour (e.g. the War on Drugs), and paying people not to work and/or to live beyond their means (i.e. welfare, public housing, rent control) has backfired spectacularly.

[vnatale]

For those on the camp of “we need more government” and “with more government, covid-1984 would have been gone already with fewer deaths”, I respectfully ask for a list of government programs that have been successful.

Imagine you were writing a resume for “government” to get the job for “entity whom governs” and you need to list past successes as bullet points.

Personally, I only count things as successes if:

They are on-time as promised.
They come in at or below budget.
There are no unfortunate side effects.

For example, if you worked as a software developer and wrote your resume, you wouldn’t include that time you finished a spectacular coding project in 18 months that was initially promised in 3 months and came in at 5x the budget and during the “go-live” of the software, one of the bugs caused the server farm to catch fire. You wouldn’t get the job.

But, I suspect if you excluded “successes” that took multiples of promised time, multiples of budget, and included significant unexpected undesired consequences, then your resume for the government will be blank, so feel free to include whatever you subjectively think is appropriate.

P.S. I would avoid including “would haves... if only” statements. For example, on a resume, you wouldn’t write, “would have saved the company $10M in spending by consolidating vendors if only my coworkers were competent and helped the project, but instead no cost savings were realized. Because of my idiot coworkers actively blocking me”

But, I’m not the government, and I won’t enforce your resume format, so do as you see fit with this task.

I respectfully request that pro-government people take the lead and this doesn’t turn into libertarians writing satirical bullet points about “landed on the moon with only 10x projected budget spend in triple the promised time” because that would be too obvious and I’m genuinely hoping to be convinced.

I don’t personally want zero government, because then warlord-esque governments pop up. I want smaller more local governments. So go ahead ladies and gents, apply for the job to control my life and plan society.

Is not the military a government program? How does it grade out by your criteria above?

Vinny

[I Shrugged]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

[vnatale]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

[Libertarian666]

Good one, Tom.

The Moon landing is a decent example. It was in fact on time, as I think Kennedy's "we go to the moon" speech said a decade. And the over budget thing can be forgiven because there had to be so many unknowns involved.

Maybe the decision to enter World War II? That was almost certainly the correct move.

Also, Islamic terrorism has stopped in recent years. Did that happen on its own, or was that the result of US government efforts? If so, count that as a major success.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that virtually every attempt at regulating or taxing businesses, limiting personal freedoms in the name of stopping the Scourge du Jour (e.g. the War on Drugs), and paying people not to work and/or to live beyond their means (i.e. welfare, public housing, rent control) has backfired spectacularly.

As big a fan as I am of space travel, I can't count the Apollo project as a success.
A proper approach would have taken longer but would have resulted in commercialization of space.
The right way was known at the time, too.
It involved a near earth space station to which you would take a short range rocket designed for that task only, then an Earth-orbit to Moon-orbit rocket designed for that task only, then a Moon-orbit to Moon rocket designed for that task only. All of these would have been reusable and would have made it feasible to develop industrial use of the Moon.

Doing it with one gigantic rocket of which 99.9% was thrown away during use is something only a government that is spending other people's money would or could do.
And after we left the moon at the end of the last Apollo mission, what did we have to show for it? Yes, some interesting science, but nothing applicable to commercializing space.

[I Shrugged]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

Yes, exactly. Harry’s quip was targeted at them, to make them think about the irony.

[glennds]

For those on the camp of “we need more government” and “with more government, covid-1984 would have been gone already with fewer deaths”, I respectfully ask for a list of government programs that have been successful.

Imagine you were writing a resume for “government” to get the job for “entity whom governs” and you need to list past successes as bullet points.

Personally, I only count things as successes if:

They are on-time as promised.
They come in at or below budget.
There are no unfortunate side effects.

For example, if you worked as a software developer and wrote your resume, you wouldn’t include that time you finished a spectacular coding project in 18 months that was initially promised in 3 months and came in at 5x the budget and during the “go-live” of the software, one of the bugs caused the server farm to catch fire. You wouldn’t get the job.

But, I suspect if you excluded “successes” that took multiples of promised time, multiples of budget, and included significant unexpected undesired consequences, then your resume for the government will be blank, so feel free to include whatever you subjectively think is appropriate.

P.S. I would avoid including “would haves... if only” statements. For example, on a resume, you wouldn’t write, “would have saved the company $10M in spending by consolidating vendors if only my coworkers were competent and helped the project, but instead no cost savings were realized. Because of my idiot coworkers actively blocking me”

But, I’m not the government, and I won’t enforce your resume format, so do as you see fit with this task.

I respectfully request that pro-government people take the lead and this doesn’t turn into libertarians writing satirical bullet points about “landed on the moon with only 10x projected budget spend in triple the promised time” because that would be too obvious and I’m genuinely hoping to be convinced.

I don’t personally want zero government, because then warlord-esque governments pop up. I want smaller more local governments. So go ahead ladies and gents, apply for the job to control my life and plan society.

Have you spent much time traveling in other countries around the world?
I have, and some of my answers below are from the standpoint of using my travels in certain non-US countries as a point of comparison.
I don't think I can answer as to the budget part of the question. But in terms of program or project outcome, I can think of several examples of where the government has delivered effectively:

The highway and road system here is very good
Same might go for other public works like dams and bridges
Air traffic control and the air transportation system
Stable power grid, waterway and national/regional utility distribution
As much as the environment is an area of controversy, compared to many, our levels of pollution are low
Corruption, especially at low levels of government is comparatively low
Building and engineering standards are good. By way of example, in 2001 there was a massive earthquake I witnessed in Gujurat, India. This is a place where they do not have the building standards we have in the US. Basically anything goes, so buildings are built with watered down concrete, any and all shortcuts in the name of money savings are taken. When the earthquake hit, structures toppled like houses of cards.
I happen to think Medicare is a very well run program.
Similarly, public health standards are generally quite good, though the same might not be said about our US handling of Covid.
I think our national forests are great
The Federal and State court systems can have crowded dockets, but in general, they are available and move more quickly than many places.
National military defense
Trash management, cleanliness of streets and cities
Domestic law enforcement (not without its warts, but at least available and not as openly corrupt as some)


These are just a few examples. I don't know if I've understood your question properly, and if not, then disregard my answer. However if you travel through places that do not have the societal features like the ones above, their presence at home becomes more apparent and maybe more appreciated.

Don't get me wrong, I can find plenty of basis for criticism of all levels of US government, but I try to have a balanced view and recognize many of the things that government delivers or has delivered that contribute to quality of life.

[Libertarian666]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I'll make that sample size 2.
And will add that most liberals that I have tried to discuss politics with have ended up screaming at me that I'm a racist or the like.
So I don't do that any more.

[vnatale]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

You made a few false assumptions here.

A. I'm an independent and NOT a liberal.

B. When I stated: "conservatives / Republican", I was making a general statement, not directed at you personally.

Therefore, based upon your two false premises then your conclusions in your final paragraph, in this case, do not stand up. You've brought to the table your own preconceived biases and then, dare I say, created a "strawman" argument of your own?

Vinny

[glennds]

For those on the camp of “we need more government” and “with more government, covid-1984 would have been gone already with fewer deaths”, I respectfully ask for a list of government programs that have been successful.

Have you spent much time traveling in other countries around the world?
I have, and some of my answers below are from the standpoint of using my travels in certain non-US countries as a point of comparison.
I don't think I can answer as to the budget part of the question. But in terms of program or project outcome, I can think of several examples of where the government has delivered effectively:

• The highway and road system here is very good

• Same might go for other public works like dams and bridges

• Air traffic control and the air transportation system

• Stable power grid, waterway and national/regional utility distribution

• As much as the environment is an area of controversy, compared to many, our levels of pollution are low

• Corruption, especially at low levels of government is comparatively low

• Building and engineering standards are good. By way of example, in 2001 there was a massive earthquake I witnessed in Gujurat, India. This is a place where they do not have the building standards we have in the US. Basically anything goes, so buildings are built with watered down concrete, any and all shortcuts in the name of money savings are taken. When the earthquake hit, structures toppled like houses of cards.

• I happen to think Medicare is a very well run program

• Similarly, public health standards are generally quite good, though the same might not be said about our US handling of Covid

• I think our national forests are great

• The Federal and State court systems can have crowded dockets, but in general, they are available and move more quickly than many places

• National military defense

• Trash management, cleanliness of streets and cities

• Domestic law enforcement (not without its warts, but at least available and not as openly corrupt as some)

These are just a few examples. I don't know if I've understood your question properly, and if not, then disregard my answer. However if you travel through places that do not have the societal features like the ones above, their presence at home becomes more apparent and maybe more appreciated. If not for government, would private industry have delivered this infrastructure?

Don't get me wrong, I can find plenty of basis for criticism of all levels of US government, but I try to have a balanced view and recognize many of the things that government delivers or has delivered that contribute to quality of life.

[Libertarian666]

You made a few false assumptions here.

A. I'm an independent and NOT a liberal.

Vinny

I seem to remember you saying in another thread a while back that you have not ever voted for a Republican. If you did say that (I could be mistaken), you are not an independent.

I seem to remember the same thing, but he may have clarified that he doesn't always vote for Democrats but sometimes for third parties.
Even if that is right (and I'm not going to go back and look), it's still an odd definition of "independent".

[vnatale]

You made a few false assumptions here.

A. I'm an independent and NOT a liberal.

Vinny

I seem to remember you saying in another thread a while back that you have not ever voted for a Republican. If you did say that (I could be mistaken), you are not an independent.

You are not remembering correctly. Never voted for a Republican presidential candidate.

This is included in the political signature for emails: "Another independent moderate who voted for a Republican, a Green/Rainbow, an Independent, and two Democrats in the November 2004 elections."

I have several times voted for the Republican governor candidate in Massachusetts and until 2006 refused to vote for the Democratic Senator Kennedy.

Vinny

[Kbg]

Now here we are talking some SERIOUS IRONY...the fact you could make this post...thank you ARPAnet...US government by the way tomfoolery.

[Hal]

Have you spent much time traveling in other countries around the world?
I have, and some of my answers below are from the standpoint of using my travels in certain non-US countries as a point of comparison.
I don't think I can answer as to the budget part of the question. But in terms of program or project outcome, I can think of several examples of where the government has delivered effectively:

The highway and road system here is very good
Same might go for other public works like dams and bridges
Air traffic control and the air transportation system
Stable power grid, waterway and national/regional utility distribution
As much as the environment is an area of controversy, compared to many, our levels of pollution are low
Corruption, especially at low levels of government is comparatively low
Building and engineering standards are good. By way of example, in 2001 there was a massive earthquake I witnessed in Gujurat, India. This is a place where they do not have the building standards we have in the US. Basically anything goes, so buildings are built with watered down concrete, any and all shortcuts in the name of money savings are taken. When the earthquake hit, structures toppled like houses of cards.
I happen to think Medicare is a very well run program.
Similarly, public health standards are generally quite good, though the same might not be said about our US handling of Covid.
I think our national forests are great
The Federal and State court systems can have crowded dockets, but in general, they are available and move more quickly than many places.
National military defense
Trash management, cleanliness of streets and cities
Domestic law enforcement (not without its warts, but at least available and not as openly corrupt as some)

These are just a few examples. I don't know if I've understood your question properly, and if not, then disregard my answer. However if you travel through places that do not have the societal features like the ones above, their presence at home becomes more apparent and maybe more appreciated.

Don't get me wrong, I can find plenty of basis for criticism of all levels of US government, but I try to have a balanced view and recognize many of the things that government delivers or has delivered that contribute to quality of life.

I would say the Government, at least in Australia, has successfully implemented most of the items on your list.
However, to say it was done EFFICIENTLY, would be impossible.

[glennds]

I would say the Government, at least in Australia, has successfully implemented most of the items on your list.
However, to say it was done EFFICIENTLY, would be impossible.

I never said the US was alone in this regard.

However, I will always hold in the highest esteem the country Down Under that gave INXS to the world.

[vnatale]

I would say the Government, at least in Australia, has successfully implemented most of the items on your list.
However, to say it was done EFFICIENTLY, would be impossible.

I never said the US was alone in this regard.

However, I will always hold in the highest esteem the country down under that gave the world INXS.

And, Men at Work!

Men At Work - Who Can It Be Now? (Video Version)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SECVGN4Bsgg

Vinny

[Hal]

+1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfR9iY5 ... gg&index=2

[jalanlong]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

[doodle]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

What form of libertarian? Noam Chomsky would probably argue that you aren't even a libertarian at all...

Noam Chomsky has described libertarianism, as it is understood in the United States, as, "extreme advocation of total tyranny" and "the extreme opposite of what's been called libertarian in every other part of the world since the Enlightenment."

[glennds]

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

Try telling them that the US is not a democracy and was never intended to be one. When they respond by asking, "then what is it?", tell them it's a Constitutional Republic. Guaranteed fireworks.

And for footnote reference you can send them to the recent tweet storm from Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) on the same subject. He basically said Democracy is the enemy of liberty.
Or just watch him today live in-person at at the Barrett hearings, in all his Covid positive glory. What a colossal moron.
Covid positive, TDS negative.

[jalanlong]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

What form of libertarian? Noam Chomsky would probably argue that you aren't even a libertarian at all...

Noam Chomsky has described libertarianism, as it is understood in the United States, as, "extreme advocation of total tyranny" and "the extreme opposite of what's been called libertarian in every other part of the world since the Enlightenment."

I would be described as a minarchist or in favor of the night-watchman state.

[doodle]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

What form of libertarian? Noam Chomsky would probably argue that you aren't even a libertarian at all...

Noam Chomsky has described libertarianism, as it is understood in the United States, as, "extreme advocation of total tyranny" and "the extreme opposite of what's been called libertarian in every other part of the world since the Enlightenment."

I would be described as a minarchist or in favor of the night-watchman state.

So you would advocate for the abolishment of state protections afforded to corporate structures and their establishment by the state with their own 'personhood'?

[jalanlong]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

What form of libertarian? Noam Chomsky would probably argue that you aren't even a libertarian at all...

Noam Chomsky has described libertarianism, as it is understood in the United States, as, "extreme advocation of total tyranny" and "the extreme opposite of what's been called libertarian in every other part of the world since the Enlightenment."

I would be described as a minarchist or in favor of the night-watchman state.

So you would advocate for the abolishment of state protections afforded to corporate structures and their establishment by the state with their own 'personhood'?

I would say corporations would be economic persons: able to sign agreements, free from being stolen from and free to associate or advertise without government restrictions.

[doodle]

Another HB quote: War is the biggest government program.

Somehow, though, when conservatives / Republicans are repeating their "smaller government" mantra the military seems to be exempt from this. Same with the government seems to never be able to do anything right or ever accomplish anything good while the military is always all good.

Vinny

I always found it odd that when discussing my libertarian viewpoints to liberals, they accuse me of being, and lump me into the republican bandwagon in a weird straw man argument like this. Where I say I want less government and then I get “well you conservative people always seem to want more military spending!”

I find it odd, because when I, as a libertarian, discuss my views that are aligned with the left, such as freedom of choice for abortion, or not teaching religion in schools, I never get strawmanned by the Republicans I’m chatting with of being liberal by setting up follow ups assuming I must also support affirmative action, for example.

Like, if I told a republican, that I support gay marriage, they don’t follow up with, “oh so every baker in the country has to bake gay dildo wedding cakes then?’

Because as a libertarian I don’t believe in force to demand businesses provide services to people they choose not to.

I’m a sample size of one, so perhaps other libertarians here have experienced conservatives inappropriately straw manning you in the extreme left. But I’ve never had a discussion on politics with a liberal where they didn’t also accuse me of being a hypocrite because I must also support (insert right-wing view that I don’t support)

I am afraid I get it from both sides. Neither my Blue California in-laws or Red Texas relatives understand Libertarianism at all. And they sure dont understand how it is logically consistent when they are not. The California ones think I am a militant Trump supporter and the Texas ones think I am a crazy liberal.

What form of libertarian? Noam Chomsky would probably argue that you aren't even a libertarian at all...

Noam Chomsky has described libertarianism, as it is understood in the United States, as, "extreme advocation of total tyranny" and "the extreme opposite of what's been called libertarian in every other part of the world since the Enlightenment."

I would be described as a minarchist or in favor of the night-watchman state.

So you would advocate for the abolishment of state protections afforded to corporate structures and their establishment by the state with their own 'personhood'?

I would say corporations would be economic persons: able to sign agreements, free from being stolen from and free to associate or advertise without government restrictions.

But the corporation is a creation of the state to begin with and it relies on the state to exist. The protections of legal immunity that it affords members, patent and copyright, yet also immortal 'personhood' are quite radical and do get critiqued by libertarians. The dangers of the corporate structure to libertarian principles was even apparent to Adam Smith.

"Corporations, which previously had been considered artificial entities with no rights, were accorded all the rights of persons, and far more, since they are "immortal persons", and "persons" of extraordinary wealth and power. Furthermore, they were no longer bound to the specific purposes designated by State charter, but could act as they choose, with few constraints."

When the corporatization of the state capitalist societies took place a century ago, in part in reaction to massive market failures, conservatives – a breed that now scarcely exists– objected to this attack on the fundamental principles of classical liberalism. And rightly so. One may recall Adam Smith's critique of the "joint stock companies" of his day, particularly if management is granted a degree of independence; and his attitude toward the inherent corruption of private power, probably a "conspiracy against the public" when businessmen meet for lunch, in his acid view, let alone when they form collectivist legal entities and alliances among them, with extraordinary rights granted, backed, and enhanced by state power.

Maybe this libertarian written article will persuade you somewhat as to why libertarians need to be wary of corporations.

https://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/11/ ... der-words

[doodle]

Here is a another libertarian article that I think points out some important points regarding why libertarians should be as concerned with concentrated corporate power as they are obsessed with concentrated governmental power. I don't have an issue with libertarians, just with the strange variety that appears here that wants to turn everything over to corporations. That is a terrifying propositions and not a well thought through position from my perspective.


https://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/11/1 ... tion-now