Self-identified liberals and Democrats do badly on questions of basic economics.

[av8torntn]

What's sad is that people like you refuse to think beyond the talking points to see the truth: people cannot (nor do they want to) handle freedom.

Your true colors finally come out. A very similar argument was used to justify slavery. You think people cannot handle freedom and I think the natural state of man is to be free. It is only the corrupt that try to seize authority over the actions of others and they tend to rise to positions of power within the government you think should determine my actions. This is the most valid argument for the limited government that our founders tried to give us. "What is good for one man may be evil for another." This is why freedom works and your over bearing governments alway fail in the end. You feel government is needed to pull man from his natural state yet this has always been temporary. That's all I remember from my philosophy classes twenty years ago. The fact is that no matter how well the intentions of your silly things like minimum wages, maximum wages, rent controls, and any other anti freedom scheme you come up with the bad always outweighs the good. We are getting a big dose of this right now in the gulf of mexico. We are getting a big dose of this in the nearly 25 percent unemployment rate among low skilled or entry level workers. We are getting a great big dose of this in the housing markets and health care markets. You guys alway think that you can force people to do what you feel is good, morale, or somehow correct with no consequences and time after time we have to pay for your mistakes. Over and over throughout history governments have failed as they grew to large and gained to much control over the lives of their citizens yet you somehow see this as proof that man cannot be free. You keep clinging to the notion that governments can make decisions for individuals from a distance.

 

[bbsam]

The simple fact is that when people find the true meaning of "freedom" they recoil. You know it yourself. They are afraid. No social programs, no safety nets, no EPA, no medicare, no medicaid. No pensions, no FDIC, no regulation, just have at it and only the strong survive. Now your job is to convince the American public that this is something they want and need. Hey, it's "freedom" they must naturally want it. Shouldn't be so tough. Good luck.

 

[klein]

The simple fact is that when people find the true meaning of "freedom" they recoil. You know it yourself. They are afraid. No social programs, no safety nets, no EPA, no medicare, no medicaid. No pensions, no FDIC, no regulation, just have at it and only the strong survive. Now your job is to convince the American public that this is something they want and need. Hey, it's "freedom" they must naturally want it. Shouldn't be so tough. Good luck.

I agree, you could start with closing the airports. Funny thing is.... Republicans scream there is too much government, and when disaters happen, like Katrina, or this Oil spill, there isn't enough government. Which is it ? Make up your minds !!!!

Really, if you guys (politicians), could just get along and work together, the US would be a much better place.

 

[av8torntn]

I agree, you could start with closing the airports. Funny thing is.... Republicans scream there is too much government, and when disaters happen, like Katrina, or this Oil spill, there isn't enough government. Which is it ? Make up your minds !!!!

Really, if you guys (politicians), could just get along and work together, the US would be a much better place.

Really shows how out of touch with reality you are. Everything I hear is people wanting the government to get out of the way. Anyhow what airports are owned by the federal government are you talking about?

 

[av8torntn]

The simple fact is that when people find the true meaning of "freedom" they recoil. You know it yourself. They are afraid. No social programs, no safety nets, no EPA, no medicare, no medicaid. No pensions, no FDIC, no regulation, just have at it and only the strong survive. Now your job is to convince the American public that this is something they want and need. Hey, it's "freedom" they must naturally want it. Shouldn't be so tough. Good luck.

Amazing we made it all those years without an FDIC, Medicare, Medicaid, and an EPA. They just don't seem to be doing all that great a job keeping banks from failing, protecting the environment or just by listening to your side providing quality health care to the poor and old.

 

[bbsam]

Amazing we made it all those years without an FDIC, Medicare, Medicaid, and an EPA. They just don't seem to be doing all that great a job keeping banks from failing, protecting the environment or just by listening to your side providing quality health care to the poor and old.

And you think people are ready to throw crappy social programs out for "freedom"? Really? That would be like going to war against "terror". I think people are a little smarter these days.

 

[av8torntn]

And you think people are ready to throw crappy social programs out for "freedom"? Really? That would be like going to war against "terror". I think people are a little smarter these days.

What is it when someone, let's just say you, oversimplifies an opponents argument and then attacks this oversimplification? You called me very ignorant and yet you bring this weak argument? Really? I can't be the only one laughing here. OK I'll give Klein a shot since he called me a simpleton maybe since you feel you are sophisticated you can tell me the term for this. I know the American term and also the British term. What do you guys call it up there in the frozen north?

 

[bbsam]

What is it when someone, let's just say you, oversimplifies an opponents argument and then attacks this oversimplification? You called me very ignorant and yet you bring this weak argument? Really? I can't be the only one laughing here. OK I'll give Klein a shot since he called me a simpleton maybe since you feel you are sophisticated you can tell me the term for this. I know the American term and also the British term. What do you guys call it up there in the frozen north?

In America its called a "straw man". Now that we have that out of the way, how does one convince all the liberals in the country (or even enough conservatives) to get on board and "free" ourselves from the horrors of America's social programs?

 

[av8torntn]

In America its called a "straw man". Now that we have that out of the way, how does one convince all the liberals in the country (or even enough conservatives) to get on board and "free" ourselves from the horrors of America's social programs?

Liberals do not seem to be very smart so I would just let them scream and not waste my energy trying to "convince all the liberals in this country" of anything. Just look at you as you call someone you do not even know very ignorant as you use a straw man argument which I guess can be taken as proof that you cannot refute the original argument. You guys only represent about 24% of the country anyhow. According to your logic if you have an opinion in the minorty no need to listen.

 

[bbsam]

Liberals do not seem to be very smart so I would just let them scream and not waste my energy trying to "convince all the liberals in this country" of anything. Just look at you as you call someone you do not even know very ignorant as you use a straw man argument which I guess can be taken as proof that you cannot refute the original argument. You guys only represent about 24% of the country anyhow. According to your logic if you have an opinion in the minorty no need to listen.

So your argument to persuade the country, get libertarians elected, and bring crystal clear freedom to people is what?

 

[bbsam]

I must say this is the genius of the Libertarian philosophy that I've been able to understand. It has such a pure, antiseptic, refreshing sound to it and yet in a practical sense I don't see a lot of support for it once people start peeling back the layers of government. People seem to like to hate politics, politicians, and programs, but I'm not sure they want to get rid of them. But if there is a practicality, a way to make it work, I'm all for hearing about it. Until then it seem like pot-shot sniping from the "high ground" by a half baked ideology that is almost so middle of the road it can't garner any real support from either side.

 

[Jones]

To get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security you have to be willing to take on the AARP, and any politician with a clue knows that doing that is a one way ticket out of office because old people vote. Probably the only practical solution is fixing those programs to keep them solvent, but I doubt there's any way to do that without raising taxes and voters don't like that much either. It would be refreshing to hear at least one of our elected officials stand up say to the American public "You want these programs? Fine. But you're going to have to pay for them". That won't happen of course, instead we'll just keep muddling along, half assing it with measures that are politically palatable and economically unsustainable until the whole system finally comes crashing down.
Then wkmac will finally have his day

 

[bbsam]

To get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security you have to be willing to take on the AARP, and any politician with a clue knows that doing that is a one way ticket out of office because old people vote. Probably the only practical solution is fixing those programs to keep them solvent, but I doubt there's any way to do that without raising taxes and voters don't like that much either. It would be refreshing to hear at least one of our elected officials stand up say to the American public "You want these programs? Fine. But you're going to have to pay for them". That won't happen of course, instead we'll just keep muddling along, half assing it with measures that are politically palatable and economically unsustainable until the whole system finally comes crashing down.
Then wkmac will finally have his day

+1

 

[wkmac]

That's the beauty of all of this Jones, both political sides refuse to work to make the system they desire not only sustainable but to make use of the best allocation of resources and most important make it transparent, a cornerstone requirement of both a democracy and governance of the public commons.

If it all continues as it goes now, it will implode. But then again, this is the historical course of all empires and I do believe we are in that collasping phase and as we go deeper in, the gov't and it's partner State Capitalism will resort to more authorterianism to not only protect itself but protect it's business partners and their wealth. They didn't spend all that money to get them elected just out of a desire for the public good!

As markets are freed, as govt's and centralized businesses and industy collaspe and lose control, some people fear a so-called unregulated market place. Wikileaks is a completely private entity and function and is not liked by both gov't and business interests alike. Even today, the ability of technology to watch various interests and expose them is becoming ever greater. Kevin Carson makes such a case with Wikileaks for example.

And here is Jesse Walker's Reason article too.

 

[av8torntn]

To get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security you have to be willing to take on the AARP, and any politician with a clue knows that doing that is a one way ticket out of office because old people vote. Probably the only practical solution is fixing those programs to keep them solvent, but I doubt there's any way to do that without raising taxes and voters don't like that much either. It would be refreshing to hear at least one of our elected officials stand up say to the American public "You want these programs? Fine. But you're going to have to pay for them". That won't happen of course, instead we'll just keep muddling along, half assing it with measures that are politically palatable and economically unsustainable until the whole system finally comes crashing down.
Then wkmac will finally have his day

There is a way to get rid of Social Security, and Medicade but we are probably stuck with Medicare for some time.

 

[bbsam]

There is a way to get rid of Social Security, and Medicade but we are probably stuck with Medicare for some time.

You have my complete attention, and I must admit to being intrigued.

 

[bbsam]

Really, Av, how do you get rid of Social Security and Medicaid?

 

[bbsam]

Av, I'm beginning to think that you've stumbled onto something you'd rather not have people think about, namely the desire of some on the right to do away with Social Security and Medicaid. If they aren't going to think about it, how will people of you persuasion supposed to persuade others to vote for them? Just by bad-mouthing Obama? By being against everything? Or is there something you are for that you would like to elaborate on?

 

[av8torntn]

Av, I'm beginning to think that you've stumbled onto something you'd rather not have people think about, namely the desire of some on the right to do away with Social Security and Medicaid. If they aren't going to think about it, how will people of you persuasion supposed to persuade others to vote for them? Just by bad-mouthing Obama? By being against everything? Or is there something you are for that you would like to elaborate on?

No, it's just that you claim slavery is justified so I see no reason in having a conversation with you about it. Or well since all you are really interested in is your silly straw man arguments not my views or any facts, It could be that you are just a ditto head for Obama and company incapable of any independent thought. Anyhow there is no point trying to explain to you how social security would be easy to get rid of and Medicaid while a little more difficult could be ended as well. If you wanted to have a grown up discussion on here there are many that would tell you that I do no shy away from voicing my opinions and trying to defend them. I look forward to it as my opinions constantly evolve based on my experiences in this world. I do not look to any party or leadership to form or voice an opinion for me. That being said, while entertaining in an elementary type of way ,your straw man arguments grew old and lost their entertainment value.

 

[bbsam]

Now Av, you've lost your touch. We were actually getting to what I've wanted to know all along and you ran away from your own position. To be honest with you I believe the whole social security fiasco is a generational battle waiting to happen. I'm 42 years old and have no belief whatsoever it will be there at age 70. I don't think it's left vs right on this one, it's old vs. young. For 30 years there's been a sacred cow called social security because of one thing: the older generations vote. What if when my generation comes into political power, say in the next 15 years, we just get rid of it. It's simply not "sustainable". Imagine how fast the national debt could be wiped out. I'm pragmatic about these things. My question was an honest one. How does the right run on the platform of getting rid of social security?