An Irish Libertarian Party

Memnoch wrote: »

I don't want to get into a public vs private sector argument because that's another debate for another place. I do think in some instances, public sector workers are overpaid, but these are primarily those at the top, like consultant doctors etc. Again, our government has been horrible and rife with nepotism. It needs root and branch reform.

I want to add that those at the top of the private sector are very grossly overpaid.

I'd also be in favor of reducing the social welfare burden on the tax payer (which must be shocking coming from a leftie-pinko).

However, the vast majority of PS workers are not overpaid or have it that cushy. For example a specialist registrar(doctor at the final stages of training to be a consultant) with 7 years experience get's paid 2,300-2,400 euro a month after tax. That's not a lot to pay a mortage and support a family now is it?

As to your second point, that is a lie, and I'll tell you why. Libertarians are happy to force everyone to pay for the military, and also to pay for the police. What about things like roads for communities that can't afford to build them for themselves, should they just be cut off? Why run an unprofitable bus service for some village. Those people should abandon their heritage and move. etc.

I've made the following point several times. There is no such thing as the free market. It doesn't exist. When a company becomes big enough, the best way to make the most profit is not by following free market principles but by subverting them. This is done by creating a monopoly, by corruption, by employing slave labor, by suppressing competition, by marketing not by providing a quality product. The only way to stop this is regulation, otherwise the market will destroy itself. The banking collapse of only a handful of years ago, of which we are still feeling the repurcussions in this country is a PERFECT example of where a deregulated market will always end up. Because profit is short sighted and people are selfish.

Memnoch wrote: »

I'm not sure the deficit spending issue is as black or white as that. The UK and Ireland have gone down the fiscal responsibility route. Cutting spending and public services. Both economies are stagnating, Ireland worse than the UK.

Meanwhile, the US has used stimulus and their economy is back growing again and creating 200,000 jobs a month the last few months in a row. The automotive industry has been saved and is creating jobs and back on top of the world.

I understand that you don't see any value in public services. I, on the other, do and consider them to be essential. And I think the people working in these services deserve a fair wage and the ability to live in reasonable comfort and if they work hard even luxury. The same goes for people in the private sector.

However, I don't see any benefit to society from unadulterated, unchecked and unlimited greed.

Because there is a value to diversity. The rural life in Ireland is important. Having our own farming community is important. These things provide a lot more intangible benefits than simple profit margins. I'm glad libertarians will never be in a position of power to simply cut off transportation and broadband services to people just because the live in rural Ireland.

The examples are all around us. The banking lobby got the deregulation that they wanted, then went on to commit what by any other name should be fraud, packaging and selling things that were completely worthless while making obscene personal profit and in the end everyone has had to pay the price for their unadulterated and unchecked greed.

Companies don't necessarily stop making products or stop making good products, but once they have a monopoly they don't have to make the best product anymore, they can simply keep the competition down and its often cheaper to do so. The reason we don't see such total monopolies right now is because they are being kept in check by governments.

The banking crisis however is the perfect example of unchecked corporate greed that was ultimately self-cannibialising to the detriment of all, highlighting the argument that I was making.

There are other companies that are employing economic slavery in china and India.

Microsoft, if it hadn't been banned from doing so would insist you only use internet explorer and office on their OS's, which they could easily have done when they had a monopoly of the PC market. They were forced by the EU to include other browsers on their OS to encourage competition. They could easily have monopolised web browsers and office/productivity programs but as a result of competition regulations and enforcement of these we have a very competitive browser market resulting in products far superior to the previous market leader of Internet explorer.

Meanwhile Walmart are able to drive smaller local shops out of business by aggressively pricing their products to very low levels. Then, once those business are defunct they are free to raise prices if they want to do so. By holding a monopoly on selling they can lure suppliers in by promises of volume sales, then, once they have them hooked and cut off other avenues, they can force these suppliers to lower and lower and lower their costs to the point where these suppliers profits and earnings drop drastically and some even go out of business. There are numerous documentaries and articles about this.

And all this this happening DESPITE current regulation, I can only imagine how much worse it would be in libertarian anarcho-corporate land.