Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  Libertarian Purity Test
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11   Go Down

Author Topic: Libertarian Purity Test  (Read 30561 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Paul-ish

  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
    • View Profile
    • Free Market
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #60 on: October 24, 2007, 07:25:27 PM »

i got 123. I don't think some of those questions were that great. Vouchers = bad. Privatize. Vigilante justice = bad (IMO). Judges making laws = bad also, too much power in one place.

Also

Quote
Should all of the Federal Reserve's discretionary powers be eliminated and the monetary base frozen?

What does it mean to freeze the monetary base?

plus the question
Quote
Are worker safety regulations too strict?

I said no, because most private businesses have stricter standards than the government and so they don't usually feel the effects of the government. Worker regulations I see as something the government does to pick on anyone that might challenge them. I guess their strict in that sense.

Also to be a good libertarian I don't think you need to believe the courts need to be privatized. I am not an anarchist partially that reason. I think we need government courts to protect the minority from the majority. Private courts would follow the demands of the masses.
Logged

Furbaby

  • Guest
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #61 on: October 24, 2007, 07:26:27 PM »

it said i'm medium core whatever the fuck that means
Logged

freeAgent

  • pwn*
  • FTL AMPlifier
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3660
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #62 on: October 24, 2007, 07:28:59 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.
Logged

wtfk

  • Guest
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #63 on: October 24, 2007, 07:30:44 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.

Correct, my ass.  He got it from the same Austrian types I did.  I know the Chicago types are in love with it, but that doesn't change anything.
Logged

Paul-ish

  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
    • View Profile
    • Free Market
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #64 on: October 24, 2007, 07:31:41 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.

Yea I'm sick libertarians having to make up funny sounding words because other words have had their meaning twisted. Lets take those meanings back. First privatization and then capitalism.
Logged

wtfk

  • Guest
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #65 on: October 24, 2007, 07:34:01 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.

Yea I'm sick libertarians having to make up funny sounding words because other words have had their meaning twisted. Lets take those meanings back. First privatization and then capitalism.

Good luck with that...

Logged

freeAgent

  • pwn*
  • FTL AMPlifier
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3660
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #66 on: October 24, 2007, 07:35:52 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.

Correct, my ass.  He got it from the same Austrian types I did.  I know the Chicago types are in love with it, but that doesn't change anything.

My point is that you're misusing the term "privatization".  It does not mean the same thing as fascism.  You can certainly make the argument that it's become more and more similar in colloquial usage to corporatism though.  However, I don't think you have many serious libertarians using this corporatist meaning of the term.  It's mainly just politicians who want to put a positive spin on cronyism/corporatism.
Logged

wtfk

  • Guest
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #67 on: October 24, 2007, 07:47:45 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.

Correct, my ass.  He got it from the same Austrian types I did.  I know the Chicago types are in love with it, but that doesn't change anything.

My point is that you're misusing the term "privatization".  It does not mean the same thing as fascism.  You can certainly make the argument that it's become more and more similar in colloquial usage to corporatism though.  However, I don't think you have many serious libertarians using this corporatist meaning of the term.  It's mainly just politicians who want to put a positive spin on cronyism/corporatism.

The word "privatization" is being used to denote fascism as described here.  Sure.  It is obvious that they want to spin it.

By the way, they usually aren't private companies anyway--they're usually "publicly owned."
« Last Edit: October 24, 2007, 07:50:48 PM by wtfk »
Logged

freeAgent

  • pwn*
  • FTL AMPlifier
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3660
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #68 on: October 24, 2007, 07:49:26 PM »

wtftk, did you notice that they call it "corporatism"?
Logged

bad_cab

  • Guest
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #69 on: October 24, 2007, 07:49:55 PM »

112
Logged

wtfk

  • Guest
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #70 on: October 24, 2007, 07:51:19 PM »

wtftk, did you notice that they call it "corporatism"?

I believe the terminology was along the lines as "referred to by some as corporatism."
Logged

freeAgent

  • pwn*
  • FTL AMPlifier
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3660
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #71 on: October 24, 2007, 07:55:53 PM »

No, it's referred to by pretty much everyone as corporatism.  They don't use the "some" qualifier.  Corporatism describes the economic system behind fascism.  Fascism entails more than corporatism.
Logged

voodoo

  • FTL AMPlifier Platinum
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3748
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #72 on: October 24, 2007, 07:58:08 PM »

That's the rub, I think.  We can imagine vouchers without strings, but will never get them.
The same can be said of privatization.

Libertarian "Privatize" = Ending state involvement
Statist "Privatize" = Sell it all at once for $1 to the buddy of a bureaucrat making the decision of who to sell it to.

Privatization is just another word for fascism, not a free market.

Do we have to take everything Ian says or thinks as the gospel?  Privatization is not fascism, but hiring "private" companies to work under the control of the government is not privatization, it's corporatism.

What does Ian have to do with this?  :roll:  The gubernaphiles on the "right" have long been infatuated with the concept of "enhancing" the effectiveness of government by giving away sweetheart government deals to their friends.  If you like it too, I'm sorry you're offended by what it is--fascism.  Any assertion that government "controls" them is a fantasy.  Both hands are washing each other.

I didn't say that it was privatization.  I said it was corporatism.  There's a difference between that and fascism.  I bring up Ian because he was talking about this a night or two ago and said he preferred the term "marketization" because "privatization" has been corrupted.  I think it's obvious that the term has been misused, but that doesn't mean we should abandon it (in my opinion).  I'd rather attempt to show its correct usage.

Correct, my ass.  He got it from the same Austrian types I did.  I know the Chicago types are in love with it, but that doesn't change anything.

My point is that you're misusing the term "privatization".  It does not mean the same thing as fascism.  You can certainly make the argument that it's become more and more similar in colloquial usage to corporatism though.  However, I don't think you have many serious libertarians using this corporatist meaning of the term.  It's mainly just politicians who want to put a positive spin on cronyism/corporatism.

This is funny from the man who insists that "inflation" is price inflation not monetary inflation.

My contribution on the "privatization" argument is the same as always - use the bureaucrat definition which can be either "contracting the function out" or "selling the assets of the function to a private concern with a contractual agreement that the function be a going concern".
Logged
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."  ~ Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVII, 1782. ME 2:222

dmgov

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210
  • Umm.. ohh snoochie boochies..
    • View Profile
    • TheSharkTank
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #73 on: October 24, 2007, 08:01:44 PM »

135..

Not sure if they ment the federal government to abolish the state.. some of the questions were unclear.
Logged
"A man who procrastinates in his choosing will inevitably have his choice made for him by circumstance."
Hunter S. Thompson

Laetitia

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3952
  • ...
    • View Profile
Re: Libertarian Purity Test
« Reply #74 on: October 24, 2007, 08:06:15 PM »

I found the levels of the questions interesting. For example, I answered "yes" to vouchers being better than govt. schools, and then further on that I didn't want ANY government involvement with education. Both are true, and reflect the progression of how many libertarians and minimalists think. Yes we want the lowest amount of government possible, BUT are generally glad to support steps that take us in that direction. Unfortunately, both sides of the aisle have figured out the  correct words to use to rope in independents at election time. The good news is that once you've been burned by a pretender politician, it's harder for them to pull you in next time around.



Logged
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of experience comes from bad judgment.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 11   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  Libertarian Purity Test

// ]]>

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 33 queries.