Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-04-2012, 12:44 PM #1
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Libertarians: Why So Unhappy?

Hello all,

An economics professor once said to my class a very intriguing thought that has come to fruition in since 2010 that I think many of you should hear. This man was a classic liberal economist, advocated for limited government, free market principles, and a non-interventionist foreign policy.

His statement was this: in a perfect world, we'd have completely free trade, self-market regulation, and a government that only builds and uses its military in self defense when it is justified and declaration of war is passed through congress. In the real world, Libertarians simply will never win elections, so he suggested a next-best alternative....

His next best alternative was a 1995 style of government: A split congress and a democratic whitehouse. His rationale: republicans do not like to spend money, a split congress will be unable to pass meaningful (activist) legislation, and a democratic president tend to not start wars. Essentially, this is a quasi-libertarian government through pure gridlock and passivism in foreign policy.

Since 2010, we've had exactly this scenario. The 112th congress has passed a record low amount of bills (sub 70, IIRC), and Obama has scaled back our involvement in the two incumbant wars we've been in. While many hawkish conservatives complain of Obama's dealings in the middle east, he's taken a hands off approach: let the countries themselves decide who is best-fit to lead them, and he has been an advocate of diplomacy-first when dealing with Iran (to the ire of republicans, again). Obama has also advocated for cuts to defense spending, where republicans consistantly draw a hard-line and say such action is unthinkable.

So my question is this, to all the libertarians on this board: why are you so unhappy with this administration? A perfect world of libertarianism simply will never exist, so why not settle for a 2nd best scenario that is realistic and acheivable? We've had a VERY LIMITED government since 2010, struggling to pass even the most mundane and essential laws. Our foreign policy has been drastically reduced in its activism since the Bush/Cheney years of shoot first, ask questions later (if anyone cares to recall 2003-2007).

You all should basically vote for the current incumbants, Obama and Congress included, if you truly wish for a limited government, because that's exactly what we've got right now.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011

Last edited by Matt.is.back2011 : 10-04-2012 at 01:03 PM.
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 10-04-2012, 12:50 PM #2
quakcer
 
 
quakcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011 View Post

You all should basically vote for the current incumbants, Obama and Congress included, if you truly wish for a limited government, because that's exactly what we've got right now.
Lol, no it isn't.
quakcer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 12:51 PM #3
licence2kill
POOP
 
licence2kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Orange County
maybe its because they're mostly proxy soldiers for the right?
licence2kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 12:52 PM #4
barrel roll
secedere
 
barrel roll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL/GA border
barrel roll is one of the top 500 posters on PbNation
barrel roll is Legendary
Quote:
Originally Posted by licence2kill View Post
maybe its because they're mostly proxy soldiers for the right?
A proxy soldier for Neo-Cons? Don't be such a hack.
__________________
--- UNDRPRVLGD Goggle Straps n stuff ---
If this be treason, make the most of it.-Patrick Henry
I'm a damn veteran, I've got more rights and privileges than you do.
MQ2 rebuild kits, MP4 ram rebuilds, general 'cocker teching
Will soon be making super slick mid/half block bolts
barrel roll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 12:54 PM #5
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by quakcer View Post
Lol, no it isn't.
Care to elaborate? Again, I don't want your wishful-libertarian thinking, because that's not the point of this thread. I want you to provide an example of a government that can be realistically more limited in its ability to act and perform than the one that we have right now.

Do you think a Republican takeover of the WH and Congress will provide a more limited government? Because 2001-2006 tell a much different story, if you care to look back so far.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 12:56 PM #6
licence2kill
POOP
 
licence2kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Orange County
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel roll View Post
A proxy soldier for Neo-Cons? Don't be such a hack.
http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2...nd-do-you.html
licence2kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 12:57 PM #7
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
L2k, don't hijack the thread with ad-homs to libertarians; they have a right to their opinions, just like you have a right to live in the liberal fairyland that is California. If you care to post your opinions about the thread topic, I'd love to hear them.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:03 PM #8
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
The problem with the direction taken in the middle east is that supporting the Arab Spring inadvertently pushed out leadership which was friendly to us. Arguably putting the US in a weaker position for that region. Take Libya as a shining example of that.

The inability to act is not indicative of the size/scope of government. Though I could argue that it is depending on your point of view. A government bogged down by committee is most likely far too large to act.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:10 PM #9
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
The problem with the direction taken in the middle east is that supporting the Arab Spring inadvertently pushed out leadership which was friendly to us. Arguably putting the US in a weaker position for that region. Take Libya as a shining example of that.

The inability to act is not indicative of the size/scope of government. Though I could argue that it is depending on your point of view. A government bogged down by committee is most likely far too large to act.
If you are a libertarian, what does it matter that countries are pro or anti American? Libertarians believe that hand-picking puppet governments abroad is a root-cause of foreign aggression towards our country. So again, by taken an approach that Obama did, isn't that exactly what Libertarians have wanted?

Isn't the definition of 'limited government' an inability to act? Libertarians should desire a government that does nothing, in good times and bad, and allow for the market and world affairs to take care of themselves. Is this not what we see happening around us?

2008-2010 was a liberal wet-dream in America (with the exception of the recession, that pre-occupied and hampered a lot of the goals of Obama and Co.) Since 2010, we've seen a 180 degree turn to gridlock, that has been extremely limited in its ability to function as an activist governing body.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:10 PM #10
quakcer
 
 
quakcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011 View Post
Care to elaborate?
If we had a limited government we wouldn't have a $16 trillion debt.
quakcer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:12 PM #11
licence2kill
POOP
 
licence2kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Orange County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011 View Post
L2k, don't hijack the thread with ad-homs to libertarians; they have a right to their opinions, just like you have a right to live in the liberal fairyland that is California. If you care to post your opinions about the thread topic, I'd love to hear them.
huh? that is my opinion, they're a proxy army for the right which is why they're so unhappy.
licence2kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:18 PM #12
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by quakcer View Post
If we had a limited government we wouldn't have a $16 trillion debt.

Ahh, but can you dig a little deeper for me? How much of the 16 trillion of that debt is Obama's?

How much is from 2009-2011?

How much is from 2011-2012?

And last, how much is due to a net negative in government receipts in relation to revenues, vs. NEW government spending from this administration.

If you dig down deep enough, you'll find that the 112th congress has been very conservative with NEW spending since 2010. Isn't this what you want?

__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011

Last edited by Matt.is.back2011 : 10-04-2012 at 01:21 PM.
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:22 PM #13
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011 View Post
If you are a libertarian, what does it matter that countries are pro or anti American? Libertarians believe that hand-picking puppet governments abroad is a root-cause of foreign aggression towards our country. So again, by taken an approach that Obama did, isn't that exactly what Libertarians have wanted?

Isn't the definition of 'limited government' an inability to act? Libertarians should desire a government that does nothing, in good times and bad, and allow for the market and world affairs to take care of themselves. Is this not what we see happening around us?

2008-2010 was a liberal wet-dream in America (with the exception of the recession, that pre-occupied and hampered a lot of the goals of Obama and Co.) Since 2010, we've seen a 180 degree turn to gridlock, that has been extremely limited in its ability to function as an activist governing body.
Sorry I forgot that this is geared towards libertarians. The problem is that any reduction in our Empire means a deflation of our economy at home. Cutting back the influence is all fine and well, but we currently have nothing to fall back on without the revenue stream generated by Empire. I guess my point was to explain the reasons the hawks are hawking.

Struggling to pass laws, an operation well within the confines of our government, is more indicative of an impedence. If that makes sense. As for the second portion of the paragraph I have no comment because Im not sympathetic to libertarianism.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:24 PM #14
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by licence2kill View Post
huh? that is my opinion, they're a proxy army for the right which is why they're so unhappy.
I'll read your link, but on the surface I want to disagree. Republicans use Libertarians to help rile up the base, and Libertarians cling to the GOP because in their opinion it's the closest thing to their 'ideal state.'

What I'm proposing in this thread is that such a paradigm is wrong, and in fact, what we have now should be their ideal state.
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:24 PM #15
licence2kill
POOP
 
licence2kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Orange County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
Sorry I forgot that this is geared towards libertarians. The problem is that any reduction in our Empire means a deflation of our economy at home. Cutting back the influence is all fine and well, but we currently have nothing to fall back on without the revenue stream generated by Empire. I guess my point was to explain the reasons the hawks are hawking.

Struggling to pass laws, an operation well within the confines of our government, is more indicative of an impedence. If that makes sense. As for the second portion of the paragraph I have no comment because Im not sympathetic to libertarianism.
wut
licence2kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:26 PM #16
quakcer
 
 
quakcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011 View Post
At that rate, it'll only take a century to get back where we should be.
quakcer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:27 PM #17
sucka T.
 
 
sucka T.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: GA
 has been a member for 10 years
nobody is ever happy these days
__________________
1st Annual ST Friendship BBQ

ThreadSavers®

http://www.ohnoes.org/

http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...hreadid=891102
sucka T. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:31 PM #18
Matt.is.back2011
 
 
Matt.is.back2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by quakcer View Post
At that rate, it'll only take a century to get back where we should be.
But you do agree that we are heading in the right direction, no? So what i'm saying, then, is correct: a democratic president with a split congress is ideal for you.

I can expand that graph to show the Bush years, and the explosion of new government spending that went with it.

My point being, why are so many libertarians so eager, so fervent, to go back to the days of Bush/Cheney, when that was nothing more than a war-hawk version of 2008-2010?
__________________
THE OHIO STATE
Class of 2011
Matt.is.back2011 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:32 PM #19
drgonzo
Half-cocked
 
drgonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
The answer to the question is two words: intellectual dishonesty.
__________________
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos | Droidtiles.com - NFC Tags for Android and mobile devices
drgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:32 PM #20
licence2kill
POOP
 
licence2kill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Orange County
Quote:
Originally Posted by quakcer View Post
At that rate, it'll only take a century to get back where we should be.
so?
licence2kill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 01:33 PM #21
quakcer
 
 
quakcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt.is.back2011 View Post

My point being, why are so many libertarians so eager, so fervent, to go back to the days of Bush/Cheney
Except they aren't eager to go back to that, I've never seen a libertarian that ever said that. I don't think you even know what libertarians want. You're confusing libertarians with establishment republicans.
quakcer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump