| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 1:05 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| tzechuk wrote: |
Why shouldn't neighbours or friends help each other out?
I am a single mother, I NEED my friends.
[and]
Why shouldn't neighbours or friends help each other out?
I am a single mother, I NEED my friends.
|
Neighbors helping neighbors is the Libertarian way. It's the way of the free market. The greedy socialists don't like it. They want power and money from control by the state.
| Fox wrote: |
| If we trust totally random people to have children and raise them without demanding any sort of certification, I don't see why we can't trust people chosen by those random people to take care of them during the day without demanding any sort of certification. |
Exactly. You'll be a libertarian yet. Now you're supporting the free market and opposing the state. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DIsbell
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
neighbors helping neighbors is a collectivist idea.
this is a law that was written to stop unlicensed daycare that unfortunately was not written in a fashion that excludes friends doing each other favors. I would expect that the law will be revised and everyone will go on their happy way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
the longstanding law is patently protectionistic of the daycare industry, a typical SOCIALISTIC move to protect the profits of businesses, to reduce all social relations to an economic exchange of the almighty dollar
| kikomom wrote: |
| So then you agree with Hillary because 'it takes a village' and neighbors should be allowed to look after the safety of each others kids? Sounds right to me. |
exactly... but ontheway won't agree |
I fixed your error.
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
As for the statement 'to reduce all social relations to an economic exchange', that's a very Marxist viewpoint. |
Exactly.
(There are differences between Statist and Socialist. In this case, both would apply.)
Neighbors helping neighbors is the Libertarian way. People free to exchange goods and services whether for free or for a price. Charity and philanthropy are the free market in action.
It is the socialists who have reduced everything to being about money. This is not the Libertarian way. It is not what liberty and free markets are about.
"It takes a village," when the village is free from rules by the nation state, or the province or US style State or local factotums or tribal chief ... then, yes, people engaged in voluntary exchange whether for free or for profit ... that is the libertarian way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DIsbell
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Marxism "reduces everything to an economic exchange" in the sense that Marxism critiques the existing system (in which everything is boiled down to economic exchange). A Marxist or socialist utopia does not have an economy in the traditional sense; there are no markets. What's left is democratically guided production and cooperation among people/communities based on needs and mutual benefits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DIsbell wrote: |
| Marxism "reduces everything to an economic exchange" in the sense that Marxism critiques the existing SOCIALIST system (in which everything is boiled down to economic exchange). A Marxist or socialist utopia does not have an economy in the traditional sense; there are no markets. What's left is democratically guided production and cooperation among people/communities based on needs and mutual benefits. |
The existing system is already a socialist system. The marxist utopian system was proven to be impossible by the Soviet Union after decades of analysis by their own Economists whose task it was to prove that socialism could work. They proved that socialism can never work and that the marxist utopian dream was impossible nonsense.
Actually, all marxist "econo-nonsense" (for it never was economics, just ranting) was proven to be fallacious in the 1870s. It was proven absolutely that marxist ideology was mathematically impossible and just babbling drivel. You have to be essentially illiterate in terms of math, economics, finance and history to believe in the marxist, socialist nonsense. You have to be deluded and living in a fantasy world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DIsbell wrote: |
neighbors helping neighbors is a collectivist idea.
|
Individuals may come together for exchange, barter, sharing resources etc in a Libertarian world as long as they do so voluntarily. The right to establish a voluntary collective for a temporary or long term purpose is an essential component of Liberty and of a Free Market System.
The involuntary collectivization of society is the hallmark of all types of socialism, from the totalitarian fascist-Marxist systems of Cuba or the USSR, to the less-repressive, gentle fascism of the Socialist people's republics of Western Europe today, such as Britian and France. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lithium
Joined: 18 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
the op's 'blame socialism' spin on this is nonsense
the longstanding law is patently protectionistic of the daycare industry, a typical CAPITALISTIC move to protect the profits of businesses, to reduce all social relations to an economic exchange of the almighty dollar
| kikomom wrote: |
| So then you agree with Hillary because 'it takes a village' and neighbors should be allowed to look after the safety of each others kids? Sounds right to me. |
exactly... but ontheway won't agree |
Nazi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kikomom
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: them thar hills--Penna, USA--Zippy is my kid, the teacher in ROK. You can call me Kiko
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| benji wrote: |
| Kikomom wrote: |
| So then you agree with Hillary because 'it takes a village' and neighbors should be allowed to look after the safety of each others kids? Sounds right to me. |
That wasnt Hilary's idea. And then she had a ghost writer write the book and refused to give credit to the woman who actually wrote it. |
That's beyond the point. Hillary may have had uncredited collaboration (who was paid for her work) and the idea may be eons old, but she made it the title and basis of HER book.
| DIsbell wrote: |
| What's left is democratically guided production and cooperation among people/communities based on needs and mutual benefits. |
Kinda like the co-ops Republicans would like to sell as a viable national health care system? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kloofy
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It has nothing to do with the kids or the neighbors, or daycare centers... they feelin' left out, "Where's our cut... we set up the system, and laws need reviews and updates" Tough times calls for make-work projects!!!
Poor souls... and they make sure there's no way you can opt out. and if there is, they explain it in lawyer's terminology = billy, molly and sally dont understand too much so we have to guide them... perpetually |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
