Turn on thread page Beta

D&D PT&P's "Ask A Libertarian" Thread watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    A thread to discuss libertarianism and ask brief questions with respect to it; Please take any longer discussions to a new thread, or any discussions which develop but are unrelated to the purposes of this thread.

    Get posting, and enjoy!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I'll introduce myself to anyone who wishes to ask anything. My name's Jake, funnily enough, and I'm an Objectivist Libertarian.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Do you genuinely believe that all taxation is theft? Is there no such thing as society?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JakePearson)
    I'll introduce myself to anyone who wishes to ask anything. My name's Jake, funnily enough, and I'm an Objectivist Libertarian.
    *scream*

    How can anyone take rand seriously
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    *scream*

    How can anyone take rand seriously
    I must say I'm not entirely Objectivist. The an-cap in me shines sometimes.

    Besides, Rand has some good ideas. :yep:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JakePearson)
    I'll introduce myself to anyone who wishes to ask anything. My name's Jake, funnily enough, and I'm an Objectivist Libertarian.
    And a zionist?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JakePearson)
    Besides, Rand has some good ideas. :yep:

    Like?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smalltownboy)
    Do you genuinely believe that all taxation is theft? Is there no such thing as society?
    Taxation first - yes, it's theft. What is the difference between a government taking your money and me taking your money. Well, one is regarded as theft and one is regarded as "for the benefit of all". Why? What is the difference between me and the tax man, other than his higher claim to authority? We are both human beings. Although many libertarians see taxation as a necessary evil, it should be used only to fund services that cannot survive on a market basis (i.e. the courts). Another idea is a tax on property, or Land Value Tax. Even though I'm a propertarian, I believe in LVT, as it is the "least worst tax" as someone put it.

    Society - no, there's no such thing as society. My main belief here is that everyone is different. When people say "this is detrimental to society", they don't realise that society is not one thing with one opinion. It is the opinions of every single person, which are bound to be different. Prostitution, drug legalisation and gay marriage are all things that conservatives say will be "detrimental to society", however I do not believe that, nor do a lot of other people, showing that society is not one thing with one opinion.

    I'll quote something that was posted here in PT&P a while back...

    "1. Nothing exists except people. There is no such thing as "the government," or a "country," or "society." All these terms for social aggregations are merely conceptual labels for individuals. "The government" never does anything – only people within the government act. Thus the "government" – since it is a concept – has no reality, ethical rights or moral standing. Moral rules apply to people, not concepts. If anyone argues with you about this, just ask them to show you their "family" without showing you any individual people. They’ll get the point."
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    Like?
    The idea of ethical egoism. To be honest, I'm more interested in her economic works than her social stuff.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomheppy)
    And a zionist?
    The original version of Zionism, yes. Although that's more of a personal thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What do think about immigration? Especially from the third world.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I can chip in here, being somewhat in-between Tory and Libertarian. I believe that if these people contribute to the economy, they can live here for as long as they like.

    The minute they TAKE from the taxpayer, and give nothing back, I have issue.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Libertarianism is a nice idea, but I can't see how it would work in reality without the rich getting even more obscenely wealthy and the poor living in poverty with no way of escaping it. Can charity really be relied on to provide the help that the state gives now? I agree that it's not fair to take money from people who have earned it and hand it out to others who aren't as well off, but you can't rely on people to willingly give up their own money to help others, and morally it seems wrong to let poverty slide while the rich are getting richer. Which, inevitably, is what would happen.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    What do think about immigration? Especially from the third world.
    This is a tricky one. Personally, I err on the side of limited open immigration. I don't believe in limits to the extent that some right-wingers would have it. I believe that immigration is vital to the economy, and certainly don't subscribe to all this "British jobs for British workers" nonsense.

    If the immigrant in question has experience in work, a degree, a family and can speak the language well, then they should be accepted. An idea of mine is to have a quota of immigrants per year - say 100,000 (or much more or much less). When applying for citizenship, you will be ranked based on your skills and qualities, and the top 100,000 will be accepted.

    Obviously, asylum seekers should be welcome, as they are fleeing oppression or death. Obviously the extent to which the government should help these people is up for debate.

    However I'm sure all libertarians agree that the government should not be enforcing multiculturalism on us, or indeed, ridiculous speech codes like political correctness.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JakePearson)
    This is a tricky one. Personally, I err on the side of limited open immigration. I don't believe in limits to the extent that some right-wingers would have it. I believe that immigration is vital to the economy, and certainly don't subscribe to all this "British jobs for British workers" nonsense.

    If the immigrant in question has experience in work, a degree, a family and can speak the language well, then they should be accepted. An idea of mine is to have a quota of immigrants per year - say 100,000 (or much more or much less). When applying for citizenship, you will be ranked based on your skills and qualities, and the top 100,000 will be accepted.

    Obviously, asylum seekers should be welcome, as they are fleeing oppression or death. Obviously the extent to which the government should help these people is up for debate.

    However I'm sure all libertarians agree that the government should not be enforcing multiculturalism on us, or indeed, ridiculous speech codes like political correctness.
    So much for freedom of movement, eh?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    So much for freedom of movement, eh?
    I do believe in freedom of movement, however I don't see how people with no skills and nothing to input to the economy should live here off the taxpayer.

    I should point out now that all my views on immigration are based on the current system - a system where we have a bloated welfare state. You cannot have unlimited immigration and a welfare state at the same time.

    Once the welfare state is destroyed, then I'll be more open to more unlimited immigration.

    What'd be your plan then?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smalltownboy)
    Do you genuinely believe that all taxation is theft? Is there no such thing as society?
    Yes, and yes. Although the latter is nothing personal against society - strictly speaking, there is no such thing as the market either.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moregano)
    Libertarianism is a nice idea, but I can't see how it would work in reality without the rich getting even more obscenely wealthy and the poor living in poverty with no way of escaping it. Can charity really be relied on to provide the help that the state gives now? I agree that it's not fair to take money from people who have earned it and hand it out to others who aren't as well off, but you can't rely on people to willingly give up their own money to help others, and morally it seems wrong to let poverty slide while the rich are getting richer. Which, inevitably, is what would happen.
    Obviously it doesn't prove a causal link between economic freedom and the bottom 10% being well off, but have a look at this graph:

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    If libertarian-haters want some good backup then I highly recommend chapter four of Kymlicka's Contemporary political philosophy.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Starting tomorrow I will answer some also
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 11, 2017
The home of Results and Clearing

1,085

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.