Libertarians - What do they beleive?

[nanook 1]

Quote

In an ideally Libertarian society, there would be no tax credits for charitable donations, because there would be no taxes to take credit for. Simply abolishing the income tax would obviate the need for tax credits of any kind, for anything.

That seems contradictary to what the Libertarian website says. according to lb.org, they would like to match contributions dollar for dollar to charitable organizations.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

In an ideally Libertarian society, there would be no tax credits for charitable donations, because there would be no taxes to take credit for. Simply abolishing the income tax would obviate the need for tax credits of any kind, for anything.

That seems contradictary to what the Libertarian website says. according to lb.org, they would like to match contributions dollar for dollar to charitable organizations.

Please note the usage of the phrase "Ideally Libertarian".....

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Quote

In an ideally Libertarian society, there would be no tax credits for charitable donations, because there would be no taxes to take credit for. Simply abolishing the income tax would obviate the need for tax credits of any kind, for anything.

That seems contradictary to what the Libertarian website says. according to lb.org, they would like to match contributions dollar for dollar to charitable organizations.

Do not confuse libertarianism with the American Libertarian Party.
There are political parties in many countries who have different slants on what it is to be libertarian. Although American political thought may well claim the fountainhead of libertarian philosophy(Jefferson is surely the father of libertarian thought), that does not mean that the policies of the American Libertarian Party are "pure."

[nanook 1]

sounds reasonable . .

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[Zenister 0]

Quote

IMO the libertarian view wouldn't be bad except for "You own yourself".

THis opens the door for anyone and everyone to do WHAT EVER THEY WANT. And, IMO this is very bad for society and it inturn creates a group of people who feel that they do not need to take resposability for their actions.

***

Like it or not it is the truth. Those things work to destabilize society.

you are missing the point and blaming both Substance and Sexuality in place of the individual being held accountable for their Actions..

let me fix it for you..

What YOU do with Your sex life affects people!
What YOU do while on The drugs you do affects people!

you should be held accountable for your actions as they DIRECTLY affect other people.

However anything you do in the privacy of your own domain (or on publicly held' land) with other consenting individuals affects NO ONE but the participating, consenting individuals and the government should not be involved for any reason.

its less PC, but simply, a "libertarian view" is leave me the fuck alone, and leave everyone else the fuck alone unless they directly interfere with another's freedom (liberty). So yes, "anyone and everyone" SHOULD be able to do "WHAT EVER THEY WANT" as long as it doesn't interfere with that same fundamental right in others.`

Life is never more important than liberty.. Life without Liberty is merely awaiting death.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[nanook 1]

Quote

you are missing the point and blaming both Substance and Sexuality in place of the individual being held accountable for their Actions..

let me fix it for you..

What YOU do with Your sex life affects people!
What YOU do while on The drugs you do affects people!

you should be held accountable for your actions as they DIRECTLY affect other people.

However anything you do in the privacy of your own domain (or on publicly held' land) with other consenting individuals affects NO ONE but the participating, consenting individuals and the government should not be involved for any reason.

its less PC, but simply, a "libertarian view" is leave me the fuck alone, and leave everyone else the fuck alone unless they directly interfere with another's freedom (liberty). So yes, "anyone and everyone" SHOULD be able to do "WHAT EVER THEY WANT" as long as it doesn't interfere with that same fundamental right in others.`

Life is never more important than liberty.. Life without Liberty is merely awaiting death.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with what you have just said. I agree wholly with it. It makes for a perfect U.S.A. . .

But, this is very impractical. This is a Utopia you are describing. This is a John Lennon's "lets Give Peace A chance" cry adjusted for political/idealogical beliefs of today. This begs the question that everyone ascribes to this one unitary dicipline and psychology.
There is just too many variables out there dealing with peoples'/groups' wants and needs that say this will only work with small island of law abiding libertarian citizens. There is enough psychologies out there where these extra found freedoms will impinge too much on other peoples' domains and become enough of an annoyance to just pass those old repealed laws again. This is a macrocosism of different (and may have been tried and failed but forgotten before the newbies came) ideas put in place of decades of experience in a company or organization that's been around for years.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

That pretty much applies to recreational substances.

That is so easy to type. But think about it. What are recreational substances? Do you limit that at all? How about prescription drugs, some of them can be fun as a recreational substance. Many have very serious consequences when mixed with other drugs. Pharmacists go to school for years to figure all that out. Do you think your average american will be able to figure all that out?

How about companies? Will hey be free to do whatever they want, just as long as they don't directly hurt some one else?

Giving away meth laces cigarettes for free doens't hurt anybody directly. It wouldn't be their fault that people are stupid enough to smoke them. It doesn't hurt the company when they start charging for those 6 months later. And it isn't their fault people were too stupid to realize they would get addicted.

Sounds like a great way to purge the population though.....

[rehmwa 2]

Nightingale '08

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Nightingale 0]

Libertarians' primary concern is the FEDERAL government. Libertarians say that the federal government does not have the right to regulate drugs. As late as the first half of the 20th century, our government acknowledged that it had no right to regulate intoxicating substances, and had to pass a constitutional amendment to do so.

There's nothing saying that these substances can't be sold in a pharmacy. Nothing saying we can't impose certain restrictions like we do for alcohol and cigarettes. There's also nothing saying that we can't make an effort to educate people. Example: Teen smoking is illegal. Has been for a long time. Doesn't stop teens from smoking, though, does it? In Florida (1999), the Tobacco Pilot Program began showing commercials and billboards educating people not only on the dangers of smoking and potential health consequences, but also on the marketing tools used by tobacco companies. Schools addressed the biological health problems of smoking and drug use in science and health classes. After four years, smoking rates among middle school students had dropped by 47%, and there was a 30% decline among high school students. It's been proven time and again that prohibition, whether it is prohibiting smoking, alcohol, or drugs, doesn't work. The most effective strategy has always been education. Don' t want people using drugs? Educate them on why not, truthfully.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

ahh okay, so in stead of paying the taxes to the federal program to run these programs, you pay the taxes to the state government to run the same programs.

Secondly, this is different from what some of the other libertarions have been stating. They state it should all just be available. Recreational drugs (whatever that is) should just be available OTC.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

As for the prostitution thing, it should be legal for an adult woman to sell her body for money - who are we to tell her what she should do with her own body? A 12-year-old or a 14-year-old? Now we're getting into questions of when a person should be able to make important decisions for themselves...

I agree for an adult, the question of when one becomes an adult is really secondary. it just indicates that there will always be an illegal form of prostitution, with a criminal element attached to it.

There should be no laws against prostitution. There should be laws against harming others. Such harm is instrinsic to sex with someone who isn't capable of giving consent, including children, animals, and the mentally disabled. Having or arranging such sex should carry harsh penalties, regardless of whether there was any payment.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Nightingale 0]

We're already paying taxes to the state to educate kids. Adults can educate themselves if they want to; that's part of being an adult. I do think that most issues other than the environment and national security should be dealt with by the states, and with regards to most personal choices, by the individual.

And, I didn't say that the drugs would be available only by prescription, just that I have no objection to them being sold in a pharmacy. You can buy cough syrup in a pharmacy too, can't you? And the pharmacist is there for you to talk to, even if what you're buying is OTC?

I'm not saying we should force the information down the throat of any adult, as adults are perfectly capable of making their own decisions. I'm just saying the information should be available IF the person desires it.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

cough syrup and MAOI are not the same. How about other medication with severe interactions/complications with other substances? Should it just be available...buyer beware? Or if there is a system of checks and balances, what substances do you regulate and which ones don't you?

if you feel that there are regulations required, than your "system" is no different than the current one, just drawing the line somewhere else.

The concept of, just make it all legal and the problem goes away is a nice utopia, unfortunately we live in the real world.

[Nightingale 0]

I didn't say anything about regulations beyond that I don't have a problem with regulating narcotics the same way we regulate alcohol and cigarettes. Not for minors and don't drive while under the influence.

Making narcotics available to adults who want them will go a long way towards combating drug related crime.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Making narcotics available to adults who want them will go a long way towards combating drug related crime.

and you base this on what evidence?

[billvon 3,006]

>and you base this on what evidence?

Well, there's not much organized crime in the beer business (at least compared to the marijuana business.)

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>and you base this on what evidence?

Well, there's not much organized crime in the beer business (at least compared to the marijuana business.)

Precisely, most drug-related crime occurs in the act of obtaining drugs, as opposed to after being watsed. Beer, well, that's a different story.

[hairyjuan 0]

Quote

When it comes to the size and position of the government and its various offices, the Libertarian party believes in the ideas of Thomas Jefferson:

1. That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves

2. Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government...

3. The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.

4. The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.

5. If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.

6. I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

7. We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.

That is why I am voting Libertarian this year, even if it may seem like a wasted vote.

if more people would support the liberterian party we might stand a chance. Just a thought here, Have you ever noticed that no matter what the two major parties promise nothing ever really changes, it should be obvious, no matter what federal power just keeps on growing

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Well, there's not much organized crime in the beer business (at least compared to the marijuana business.)

and therefor you believe it holds true that if currently severely restricted or banned substances are governed like beer, this would be identical.

I would have figured both of you to be smarter than that. Even in Holland, where marijuana is condoned, the coffee shops are generally run by criminal organizations.

But, it is a nice utopia based on feelings and assumptions. No wonder the party can't get any real support.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Have you ever noticed that no matter what the two major parties promise nothing ever really changes, it should be obvious, no matter what federal power just keeps on growing

stop that, it's no fun if we can't blame it ALL on one side or the other

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[hairyjuan 0]

Quote

IMO the libertarian view wouldn't be bad except for "You own yourself".

THis opens the door for anyone and everyone to do WHAT EVER THEY WANT. And, IMO this is very bad for society and it inturn creates a group of people who feel that they do not need to take resposability for their actions.

You sex life affects people!
The drugs you do affect people!

Like it or not it is the truth. Those things work to destabilize society.

Chris

my third grade teacher explained it this way, "The Constitution gives everyone the right to do what they want as long as they hurt no one or their property".[url]

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[billvon 3,006]

>and therefor you believe it holds true that if currently severely restricted
>or banned substances are governed like beer, this would be identical.

Nope; but there would be some similarities. Crime would go down. It would not, of course, go away completely.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

>and therefor you believe it holds true that if currently severely restricted
>or banned substances are governed like beer, this would be identical.

Nope; but there would be some similarities. Crime would go down. It would not, of course, go away completely.

So it may go down in some unmeasured way and on the other side many more people will be exposed to very unhealthy substances. Sounds like a pretty dangerous social experiment to me.

[livendive 8]

Quote

So it may go down in some unmeasured way and on the other side many more people will be exposed to very unhealthy substances. Sounds like a pretty dangerous social experiment to me.

People being free to do what they want with their own bodies would be a dangerous social experiment?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

People being free to do what they want with their own bodies would be a dangerous social experiment?

If you take 100 21 year olds and shoot them up with meth....do you really think the problem will only be related to their own bodies?