Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
Was there ever a question as to how you got into the college you went to, as if perhaps you were only there because of Affirmative Action? I sure know what's that's like and I bet a lot of other non-white people have experienced something similar in their lifetime.
|
I'm kinda white, so affirmative action never applied to me. Also I went to college during the Bush administration, long after most places had dismissed AA as a bad idea. And it was a bad idea. People being accepted because of skin color is silly. People being accepted because they're gifted and capable but don't have the monetary means for higher education is friggin awesome (and it's why I was able to attend a private college).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
For a more general example, there's the whole social security disaster: to be plain, it's not a sustainable system. Do you think it is? Would you feel better leaving your elderly mother in the hands of a public healthcare system funded by your tax dollars (double or triple the taxes you pay now)? Do you see how you would be achieving the same goal and probably doing a better job of it by having that money to save and invest yourself?
For the elderly who do not have family members to help care for them, do you think there aren't people out there who are just like you who would like to see them cared for? That is why nonprofits and charities exist - because people care.
|
Actually, SS can be repaired and can continue on. So long as conservatives keep their hands off it. Look at SS (and the budget for that matter) under Clinton. He made it a priority and it was greatly improved. Had Bush continued on with Clinton's plans SS wouldn't be anywhere near where it is now.
As for health care, we have one of the worst systems of all the industrialized nations. It's great if you're upper middle class, but for everyone else it's either a gamble or a dream. Compare that to all of our socialized friends. As I've said, France pays less and gets better health care. It's real world proof, not economic theory.
As for donations... there's simply no way to replace SS with donations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
Do you think that the existence of kind and caring slaveowners made slavery a good system? It sure made those lucky slaves happier and helped them to live in better conditions unlike those poor free blacks up North who had that all pesky discrimination to deal with in trying to find work and places to live. I am not saying that not adopting Libertarian ideas will lead to slavery again; I guess I'm just confused why you're arguing that people should be less free and most especially because you're doing it in a way that makes it sound like "bad" and "happy" are not completely relative terms.
|
Slavery is the extreme opposite of freedom, but it's also not equality so I don't see how it applies here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
From reading your arguments, it seems like you are convinced that Libertarians are all out to fuck everybody else in their own self interest.
|
Not at all, however I doubt there's anyone who could argue that libertarianism is altruistic or selfless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
First of all, the amount of wealth and opportunity on this planet are not fixed the way our natural resources are. To act like they are is silly. Think of how many new jobs were created when computers were invented, and then the internet... I mean, a friend of mine is going off to grad school to study video game design--a master's degree in VIDEO GAMES. Just think that one over for a minute.
If someone can do that, I have a hard time seeing how one can believe that there is a limited supply of jobs for people, especially at the rate technology is being developed.
|
There are plenty of jobs... but more and more of them are low income. I could get any one of a million jobs if I only had a high school diploma and maybe some college, but could I get one that pays enough for me to not live paycheck to paycheck?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
Second, a lot of Libertarian ideas (for me anyway) are about using smarter tools (systems) for achieving the values I hold. You and I may not agree on everything, but I think we can both agree that fewer people going hungry or suffering without medical care is a good thing. I just happen to see a different and, I think, better way of getting there; I believe that liberty is a prerequisite for equality. By giving true liberty to every individual, we can stop robbing people of their victories (both a rich man's profits and a non-white student's accolades) and a more true equality would result than in a system where the majority of people are either being punished for their success or having their sense of agency and self-confidence taken from them, leaving them to be less and less equipped to survive in a competitive world.
|
Yes, but my way is supported by real world examples. Yours is supported by economic theory. Which is more viable evidence? Even the US medical system in the 70s and 80s, in the glory days before horrible government intervention, was a much poorer system than you can find in France today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
As it is now, the systems we have in place in our democratic republic encourage the bad behavior of the elite (not that I excuse them) and discourage poor, minority people from taking ownership of their good ideas and talents, setting them up for failure in the long term. Could you be where you are in your life if you believed that nothing you did was solely the fruit of your talents or that somehow deep inside, your ideas and anything you produced were somehow inferior because you had help in getting to where you are?
|
I'm not advocating a free ride for lazy people. I'm talking about providing opportunities for those who are trying to help themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
I think it's this last part that makes liberty ring so true for me. I don't have any statistics or studies to back it up, but I have a hard time imagining anyone ever convincing me that there is such a thing as a successful (by any measure) AND fulfilled person who made it through life without a sense of agency and self-confidence. The very nature of collectivist and authoritarian governance takes most precious thing away from the people who can withstand it the least - those who were dealt less comfort and security in this life than the Jenna Bushes.
|
I had nothing but scholarships and grants paying my way through school. I still earned the grades, though. Do you think that diminishes my sense of accomplishment? Not one bit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supple Cow
I also don't understand why you seem to think that 'competition' is such a dirty word. The root, competare, means 'to strive together'. Despite the popular connotation involving breaking down others in order to build yourself up, a more literal interpretation means that everybody strives together (as in at the same time) to be their personal best. Competition is how humans and all of life as we know it on this planet evolved and it is how we will continue to evolve, even as a society. Libertarians (the smart ones anyway) don't wish to live as islands. They just understand the conditions in which human life is best able to thrive.
|
In competition, someone has to lose. I prefer to think of us as one vast group, and that our group is all the better for working together for common goals and to help one another. I don't want
anyone to lose and I see no reason why they should.