Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Gary Johnson - Libertarian for President

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Gary Johnson - Libertarian for President - 2012
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 ... 15, 16, 17 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:35 pm Post subject:

chellovek wrote:

visitorq wrote:

^ Oh, silly me for not realizing you speak for the "rest of the thinking world"...

I especially love the way you describe economic life as being "far too complex", basically confirming what I already knew: that you know precisely jack-shit about any of it. And yet you still offer your "conclusion" that none of it is applicable. Typical.

The rest is just an obvious straw man. I guess there's not much left to debate about.

I'm guessing you're just pulling more of that 'lol'bertarian crap on me

Nope, I'm really saying that people don't know anything about economics shouldn't pretend to know more about it than other people, nor should they be dismissive. Rather than trying to sound clever all the time, why not offer something of substance? And by substance, I mean evidence, not sophistry.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:45 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

chellovek wrote:

visitorq wrote:

I'm guessing you're just pulling more of that 'lol'bertarian crap on me

..but I can debate economics with you. I've laid out my position. I think Libertarianism is mistaken and misplaced in the modern world.

I also enjoy that you implicitly assume that because I'm not playing to your tune that I don't understand economics. Boy do I have a wee joker up my sleeve later on (at least based on your idea of 'understanding' stuff).

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 2:54 pm Post subject:

chellovek wrote:

You haven't laid out a position... You've merely made the baseless assertion that free market economics doesn't work; yet you haven't actually explained why or provided any examples. You did briefly mention that land prices were cheaper in the past, but didn't go into any detail about how that is relevant (no doubt because you don't actually have any clue whether it's really relevant or not, and aren't up to the task of explaining how).

Anyway, if you want to get into an economics debate, go ahead and state your position. Support it with facts and evidence. People like myself, ontheway, and a few others on here will be happy to set you straight. Very Happy

But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:17 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

chellovek wrote:

But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics.

Eh? You are the one laying out a position. Namely, Libertarianism is a viable way forward. I deny that it is so, based on what I've said. I've asserted that I think your political/economic model isn't up to the task. I think your model is simplistic and flawed. You can ad hominem me to death, but the onus is on you to show that your ideology is workable.

As I've stated at least 2 or 3 times now, I simply don't believe Libertarianism offers a way forward. I think it's hopelessly stuck in a pre-inudstrial past. That is my opinion. It is your ilk that seems eager to shut down discussion and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. From your end I've heard nothing yet but I'm stupid. If this is the Libertarian mode of debate, then come back corporatism, all is forgiven.

Titus

Joined: 19 May 2012

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:23 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

xyz

I sympathize with your position. I do. I do not believe libertarianism/classical liberalism is a cure. Our disease is not government but secularism. I'm agnostic some days and atheist on others so this is problematic for me, to say the least.

In the absence of God, or a nation centred around an idea of God, humans have come to worship the state as a God. All problems are fixed with "social programs". Who governs is reduced to a popularity contest with two or three groups spending hoards of money to convince the drooling masses that they've got the right mix of "social programs" that we need to "move forward". I do not believe this to be an improvement over an anti-democratic priestly aristocracy. This is the source of our decline. That said, I do not want to live in a Christian/Catholic/Orthodox society. So, here we are. Libertarians will never - ever - ever - ever make meaningful advances in a society that has replaced the worship of God with the worship of the state. You're fighting a battle you can not possibly win. God does not hand back power.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:31 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

chellovek wrote:

But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics.

If you're interested in knowing about land prices and progress, consult Adam Smith, proceeding roughly from page 750 in The Wealth of Nations. I'm drawing most of that extra from him. He seems pretty much in line with free market thinking. However, don't let that get in the way of some ad hominems if the opportunity comes up.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:45 pm Post subject:

chellovek wrote:

visitorq wrote:

chellovek wrote:

But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics.

I'm sorry I'm reduced to this, but I'm not sure you understand how things work. I can't sleep without at least trying.

YOU assert that Libertarianism is a workable model.

I deny this, because Libertarianism is clearly simplistic bollocks.

The onus is on YOU to lay out a coherent and logical position that satisfactorily answers the questions of outsiders like me.

Your position is that of proving a POSITIVE- Libertarianism works. I'm merely a skeptic. It is not my job to prove a NEGATIVE- i.e. I don't think Libertarianism is appropriate. (If you catch where this going now, along the lines of logical discussion..)

I don't need to lay out a position because I haven't tied myself to an ideology like you have. You have clearly pinned yourself to the idea that Libertarianism is good. I'm calling bullshit on you. Prove me wrong.

Prove. Me. Wrong.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:08 pm Post subject:

I see. You make the positive claim that free market economics is not workable or a solution to our problems, and the onus is on me to prove your assertion wrong? That sort of thing smacks of intellectual cowardice/laziness to me. Rather than making excuses, why don't you just admit you're not up to the task of backing your claim? Rather than "calling bullshit", why don't you step up to the plate and offer some alternatives? I frankly couldn't care less about "converting" you to libertarianism, and I'm certainly not here to indulge you. If you want to debate, then put something on the table.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:17 pm Post subject:

chellovek wrote:

I don't have a copy on me, and page numbers vary in different additions. Perhaps you could summarize and explain how it is relevant in your own words.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject:

Titus wrote:

In the absence of God, or a nation centred around an idea of God, humans have come to worship the state as a God. All problems are fixed with "social programs". Who governs is reduced to a popularity contest with two or three groups spending hoards of money to convince the drooling masses that they've got the right mix of "social programs" that we need to "move forward". I do not believe this to be an improvement over an anti-democratic priestly aristocracy. This is the source of our decline. That said, I do not want to live in a Christian/Catholic/Orthodox society. So, here we are. Libertarians will never - ever - ever - ever make meaningful advances in a society that has replaced the worship of God with the worship of the state. You're fighting a battle you can not possibly win. God does not hand back power.

While I don't really share your fatalistic view on the matter, I don't disagree with you either... When I see how people like ya-ta boy look at government, it reminds me very much of how religious fundamentalists view the world. They surrender their reason, and give in to the comfort of mass delusion. It's so much easier to buy into a giant lie than it is to face up to reality. Logic never enters into the equation.

I suppose one could accuse me of looking at the free market ideologically, but in fact I just look at it logically. I have yet to see any other system that even remotely comes close to being as logical as libertarianism. Yet we live in an absurd world, full of scared (often lazy) people, totally detached from reality, so it's not like I'm so naive as to think the average person is going to base their views on something as onerous as logic... Most people would rather follow their leaders off a cliff than take a look around and question the direction they're headed.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:26 am Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

I see. You make the positive claim that free market economics is not workable or a solution to our problems, and the onus is on me to prove your assertion wrong? That sort of thing smacks of intellectual cowardice/laziness to me. Rather than making excuses, why don't you just admit you're not up to the task of backing your claim?

Rather than "calling bullshit", why don't you step up to the plate and offer some alternatives? I frankly couldn't care less about "converting" you to libertarianism, and I'm certainly not here to indulge you. If you want to debate, then put something on the table.

Cor streuth! I have not made a positive claim, I've made a negative one. Libertarians say x. I deny x. This is a negative assertion, I've already vaguely said why- I don't think Libertarianism is fit for the modern world, it's just a yearning for simpler times that likes to blame all the complexities and injustice of this awful wicked world on one agent. You're right, I haven't made any assertions as to what might work because seemingly unlike ideologues like you I don't pretend to have all the answers ready-made.

Where haven't I backed my claim? My claim is a simple one- "Not Libertarianism". I've already said why, and will repeat.

I have put something on the table- namely this: I think Libertarians are mistaken in their outlook on the world and offer an overly simplistic analysis of our problems. Then it goes on to offer an overly simplistic and ill-thought out solution. Like I said, I think Libertarianism is just another utopian disaster in the making.

Following that you've basically baited me and called me an idiot, an intellectual coward and whatnot, offering no real defence of your positive assertion that we should be subscribing to your claptrap.

Re: Adam Smith- yeah in the most simple terms he points out that the rapid development of European colonies in the Americas is due to plentiful and cheap land in a place that is thinly inhabited combined with an insufficient labour supply, which thus drives up wages. He also points out how cheap the cost of the government in the British colonies are. Individuals can thus easily get land and improve it. I think Libertarianism harks back to these days of heroic individualism and small government, and for sure grand days they were, but they just aren't how things are now.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 2:17 am Post subject:

Quote:

Rather than "calling bullshit", why don't you step up to the plate and offer some alternatives?

I could believe the most outrageous nonesense, such as we have to beam gamma rays at Halley's Comet next time it passes the Earth in order to solve mankind's problems. Whatever trash I believe doesn't let you off the hook with regards to convincing the humble folk about Libertarianism. Just because I (hypothetically) believe nonesense doesn't make your ideology automatically right. The fact here is that I also have 1 vote, the same as every other person of voting age, moron and genius alike, so even if you don't care about convincing me, you're going to need to start convincing people outside internet forums that echo and support your own ideas. Just insulting people who disagree isn't going to gain support for your idea. If you want your daft idea to become real (heaven forfend), you're going to have to convince a lot of hostile, skeptical and apathetic people. I am right here waiting for you, convince me.

I said up-thread that I think the modern world is complex, which you duly mocked. Perhaps trying to look at facts and evidence before deciding what to do is not part of the Libertarian mindset. Personally, I think some element of state supervision will always be necessary, as a lesser evil, in a modern society. This isn't the world of homesteaders, small businessmen and hardy individuals conducting business as of yore, that can be left to it. It's a world of large and powerful trans-national organisations (public and private), astro-turfing, sophisticated PR campaigns, multi-billion dollar budgets, people trying to defend and rationalise away a lot of nasty stuff (and who have the means at their disposal to do so). Libertarians just seem to shrug their collective shoulders and say "let it rip!". The market will sort it out! It's such a naive idea believed either by the gullible or the misanthropic. I personally think how to deal with it requires careful thought, and will ultimately require some kind of public authority to keep these powerful forces in check. I agree for the most part with what Libertarians say about the vested interests and lobbyists, but then again, that isn't a uniquely Libertarian analysis. You can find the same stuff being said on the left. Pretty much everybody agrees on what the problem is, but Libertarianism just isn't the answer.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 6:13 am Post subject:

chellovek wrote:

I agree for the most part with what Libertarians say about the vested interests and lobbyists, but then again, that isn't a uniquely Libertarian analysis. You can find the same stuff being said on the left. Pretty much everybody agrees on what the problem is, but Libertarianism just isn't the answer.

Yes, I agree with this. Libertarianism isn't "the answer." Ideology is just an approach, and hopefully an advantageous starting point. Libertarianism can't be the answer because Libertarians disagree with each other. A lot. Just like social liberals disagree with each other and just like social conservatives disagree with each other. You need not be friendly to libertarianism to accept this:

Quote:

But the two major flavors are anarcho-capitalists (who want to eliminate political governments) and minarchists (who want to minimize government.) There are many more subtle flavorings, such as Austrian and Chicago economic schools, gold-bug, space cadets, Old-Right, paleo-libertarians, classical liberals, hard money, the Libertarian Party, influences from Ayn Rand, and others.

This diversity of libertarian viewpoints can make it quite difficult to have a coherent discussion with them, because an argument that is valid for or against one type of libertarianism may not apply to other types. This is a cause of much argument in alt.politics.libertarian: non-libertarians may feel that they have rebutted some libertarian point, but some other flavor libertarian may feel that his "one true libertarianism" doesn't have that flaw. These sorts of arguments can go on forever because both sides think they are winning. Thus, if you want to try to reduce the crosstalk, you're going to have to specify what flavor of libertarianism or which particular point of libertarianism you are arguing against.

We cannot dismiss an ideology in its entirety as ideological fappery for other reasons, as well. Beginning with a free market approach does not mean that we believe the free market will produce magical results. I don't ascribe to liberals the naive belief that the Federal gov't can solve most problems and will almost always benefit the community. Why talk down to each other like we are 12 years old? It serves little purpose.

chellovek wrote:

Libertarians just seem to shrug their collective shoulders and say "let it rip!". The market will sort it out! It's such a naive idea believed either by the gullible or the misanthropic.

Where did you acquire this impression? I realize that there are liberal hacks out there (read: hacks who happen to be liberal) that love to distort libertarianism.

I think you really must tackle this assumption, because if you believe this, it seems unlikely you'll be able to have a productive conversation with a Libertarian at any time.

comm

Joined: 22 Jun 2010

Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 7:00 am Post subject:

chellovek wrote:

I personally think how to deal with it requires careful thought, and will ultimately require some kind of public authority to keep these powerful forces in check. I agree for the most part with what Libertarians say about the vested interests and lobbyists, but then again, that isn't a uniquely Libertarian analysis. You can find the same stuff being said on the left. Pretty much everybody agrees on what the problem is, but Libertarianism just isn't the answer.

So, rather than each side firing off at strawmen, or accidentally misunderstanding each other's positions (as Kuros pointed out, "Libertarianism" is potentially a quite broad concept for you to condemn).

Allow me to go first:
I see the massive cashflow into politics from financial institutions and other major corporations as a direct result of regulatory capture. These businesses aren't throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at Obama and Romney because they feel strongly about abortion and gun control. They make an investment, they get a return.

That return should be quite clear at this point. "Quantitative Easing" does all of its easing at the top of the economy, rather than starting at the bottom. Mega-corporations aren't broken up by the government, as you might expect, but instead are given endless cash to stay afloat despite gambling in the marketplace.

In answer to this ever-increasing problem, I (and I believe Gary Johnson as well) would like to dismantle some Federal regulatory programs and decentralize others. The EPA, HHS, DoE and DoEd could be replaced by local institutions more accountable to taxpayers and public stakeholders. The Federal Reserve could be eliminated in favor of a monetary system actually run by a government agency (that's right, MORE government there).

Feel free to comment, denigrate, or post your own solution.

chellovek

Joined: 29 Feb 2008

Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:23 am Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

chellovek wrote:

Quote:

chellovek wrote:

Libertarians just seem to shrug their collective shoulders and say "let it rip!". The market will sort it out! It's such a naive idea believed either by the gullible or the misanthropic.

Yes I understand your points and I do actually think you have a point. As for what we both think the answer is I guess we're just going to have to disagree and leave it at that for now.

Indeed, we did get into talking down to each other like 12 year olds. For what it's worth I'm sorry for my part in it, things got a bit out of hand back there.

Anyway, have a good coming week.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 ... 15, 16, 17 Next
Page 10 of 17

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe