Where is the Libertarian explosion coming from?

Anonymous1987 · 13-05-2010 12:53PM

Yes and it was a very poor decision because they trusted back officials because they couldn't understand the technical jargon and complex financial instruments. So if adults on mass made poor decisions that just reinforces my argument that something needs to be done to fix the flaw in the market.

Re-read my last comment, I don't think the state should intervene unless someone is negatively impacted on.

Akrasia · 13-05-2010 12:56PM

Why is everything you say a straw man false dichotomy?

Akrasia · 13-05-2010 01:05PM

yeah, but DF also recognises the 'right' for an employer to summarily dismiss an employee for any reason at all, including attempts by employees to form a union. So the right of freedom of association is meaningless as any attempt to exercise that right would result in a strong likelyhood of you losing your job (and you can't be in a workers union if you're unemployed)

BluePlanet · 13-05-2010 01:11PM

Wow, just think of all the sexual harrassment that would no longer be illegal.
Wouldn't want to be woman in the workplace!

13-05-2010 01:12PM

Indeed, and this is getting to where i have issues with Libertarianism..It needs a complete rethink of the role of the corporation in society(or the world, if you're of the view that society doesn't exist), abolishing the concept of corperate personhood, as well as keeping certain means of production open to all..then, maybe you're getting somewhere, but that can start sounding quite socialist very quickly..Libertarianism was all well and good when Ron Paul first took up the torch, but it's not gonna work now..

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:13PM

This post has been deleted.

Laminations · 13-05-2010 01:18PM

So knowingly, given all the information and fully aware of the consequences, people made very bad financial decisions. How does this show that people are capable rational beings?

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:24PM

This post has been deleted.

BluePlanet · 13-05-2010 01:25PM

Yeah isn't that the "free market" at work?

The government wasn't interferring and banning 100% mortages and wasn't putting the brakes on all this economic activity.

Exile 1798 · 13-05-2010 01:26PM

And why didn't Lenders care that their customers realisticly couldn't pay back the loans? Because they were simply selling them on, and had no interest in their outcomes. In fact they started designing mortages to target these very people. It was these brokers that were driving the Housing bubble.

Yet, as usual, you heap all your scorn and contempt on the least powerful and least culpable in the situation.

BluePlanet · 13-05-2010 01:28PM

Does it?

How so exactly?

Let's say i'm a pervy manager whom can't score.
But there are is a hottie or 2 working on the production floor for minium wage.
What's to stop me from trying to get some sexual favour from them?
Wouldn't that be contractural sex between 2 consenting adults?
What exactly is your problem with that?

Sure, i might let her go if she refuses but so what?
If she doesn't like it she can always go elsewhere for a job right?

Anonymous1987 · 13-05-2010 01:29PM

You mightn't be in favour but you're libertarian principlbes would allow others. One of the reasons why the US/UK model of democracy is charitably better than others is because of the checks and balances of power. Extreme libertarianism would remove the checks and balances of the market place allowing market power to become concentrated in the few.

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:33PM

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:36PM

This post has been deleted.

Anonymous1987 · 13-05-2010 01:37PM

Maybe, although the risks are more transparent than Collaterised Debt Obligation.

Governments make mistakes too.

So both were wrong but why can't you admit the private sector was equally to blame.

Again, are they rational then?

Anonymous1987 · 13-05-2010 01:38PM

There is an inherent conflict between what is best for the company and what is best for the 60 year old executive nearing retirement and trying to meet profit targets, so he buys into the bubble and lands a tidy golden parachute before the shìt hits the fan. At least that would party explain it.

BluePlanet · 13-05-2010 01:39PM

Well let me tell you, it's not exactly rare in today's "Big Government" society.
Remove the protections Big Government tries to provide and you'll open the door wide open to all manner of abuse.

Can you explain how we should expect less sexual harrassment in the workplace in a Libertarian society?
Are there no pervy Libertarians?

Akrasia · 13-05-2010 01:40PM

Not in favour of sexual harrassment, but opposed to measures aimed at protecting employees from sexual harrassment.

Exile 1798 · 13-05-2010 01:40PM

It's obviously not true that they all knew exactly what they were doing.

They were the least powerful and least culpable in the sense that it wasn't Frank who took out an individual loan he could not afford that was creating a huge housing bubble - but the systematic lax lending which mortgage brokers were responsible for that created and powered that dangerous bubble.

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:41PM

This post has been deleted.

generalmiaow · 13-05-2010 01:42PM

Maybe I went a bit far. But certainly we are seeing a lot more libertarians on the internet than in real life (and definitely on polling cards!). When I came across communities of people, and this may sound corny, like e-cigarette users, drug users, airsoft players, gay and lesbian forums and hunting enthusiasts, dissidents in repressive countries etc. who are all affected by the march of morality into policy worldwide, it caused me to form the view that people should be masters of their own destiny and order can arise regardless of interference.

You can look in any of the niche forums on boards.ie and find people who are upset about legislation made by politicians who are not experts in their brief that harms their hobby or lifestyle. This is not intended as a strong argument in favour of libertarianism but a partial explanation as to how these views are formed. Before the internet I had no idea just how incredible the ability to speak freely was. I remember how upset people were when they weren't allowed to mention the name of a certain company because of libel/slander laws. That sort of thing.

I like the analogy with the printing press though, even if it was intended as a criticism. I think if there is a big ideological change now historians will say the same thing.

Anonymous1987 · 13-05-2010 01:46PM

Thats a valid observation but Libertarianism is not a solution to this, in fact it would place the power firmly in the hands of corporations.

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:48PM

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 13-05-2010 01:51PM

This post has been deleted.

BluePlanet · 13-05-2010 01:55PM

So what are you saying exactly?
Should there be government mandates outlawing such practice?
And methods to bring transgressors to book?

That doesn't sound like Libertariansim, it sounds rather Statish.

Scofflaw · 13-05-2010 01:57PM

So, were it not for "tax breaks, protectionism, government contracts, and the like" companies like Microsoft wouldn't be a problem. I see.

amused,
Scofflaw

silverharp · 13-05-2010 01:57PM

And power is not concentrated in the hands of a few now? To me it looks like all the taxpayers of the western world have been signed up to bail out a "cartel" of banks ( in our interests of course:rolleyes:)

I would dispute that market power would concentrate in the hands of a few whatever that actually means? care to quantify? Its pretty much an axiom that companies have a life cycle. Innovative companies become large eg Microsoft, smaller companies setup to compete and chip away at whoever the local 200 lb gorilla happens to be. Its a statist framework that allows regulation capture, grants monopoly power to organisations and enforces what can be an onerous patent or IPR system. All the local grantee has to do is throw enough money at whoever is in power and bingo! we have the corporatism we are seeing now.
The only checks and balances required is the ability to vote with ones feet, I am being denied that right on a daily basis, and to be honest I am fed up of being forced to support farmers, hoteliers, RTE and the numerous quangos that all get a slice of the action because they have ear of the government.

13-05-2010 02:04PM

Yeah, Monsanto, Haliburton and the like just await the removal of regulation so they can usher in a new era of philantropy and shelter the needy, taking drug addicts in off the streets, curing those without Health insurance..If only they didn't have to pay tax, then they could start using their profits for the good of humanity..Charitable donations for all..

Laminations · 13-05-2010 02:05PM

And of course libertarianism is the only solution to this

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0501/breaking11.html

I'll pull yo7u up on this point again. What you are describing above 'knew exactly what they were doing', 'no arm twisting' seems to me to be an example of the freedom endorsed by libertarianism, and what now is the consequences of that freedom? what would it be if governments around the world were not stepping in to mop up after individual mistakes (and YES I admit there was HUGE government failing too that brough about the bust but you just demonstrated a failing of individuals, acting by your estimation without coercion. You've demonstrated a failing of libertarianism. And you've yet to admit the culpability of private instituions, although we all can recognise the failings of government.

Seriously?? YOU want to blame the government for his mistake. Because without government this would still be Franks (an individuals) mistake and libertarianism would do nothing to solve or prevent these mistakes!

Laminations · 13-05-2010 02:11PM

Tax breaks? they'd pay no tax?
Protectiuonism? From who? the corporations could undercut any competitor and you'd quickly get monopolies.
Government contracts? Under libertarianism there'd be little government left?

Where is the Libertarian explosion coming from?

Comments