Tweet
Re: Big blow for buju
"There is the role of the individual and the role of government. I am not against providing safety nets for "some" who are indeed poor. However it's the responsibility of the individual and his family to assist him/her in their time of need. In a worst case scenario if there is no safety net from the state. Individual citizens through the means of charity will step in. "
TonyRoyal,
In the world today every year over ten million poor people die from the effects of poverty.A billion or so barely survive on $1-2 dollars a day.
Individuals, whether through their churches or through NGOs, do not meet the needs of the poor that are a natural outfall of a world capitalist economic system. In fact I would argue that that rough individualist way of life that is so dear to Libertarians
engenders the "I've got mine, screw you" attitude that results in those tens of millions of needless deaths of the most helpless.
This is just one example of why libertarianism is OFTEN no better than the conservatism that supports so-called free enterprise.
There are a great many societal needs that individuals and small groups cannot handle
and while I agree with you that the government is involved in many things that should be a matter of personal choice, it is imperative that human needs are met before we start thinking of cutting out large programs put in place to alleviate the inherent and growing shortcomings of capitalism.
" 6) Why do we need all these unnecessary government agencies? The FDA has caused more harm than good."
Tonyroyal,
Look at the cases of botulism and other diseases that are in the papers on a regular basis. Were it not for the FDA we'd be poisoned by the big corporate megafarm industries far more often. And I would rather not be taking medicine that hasn't been tested and regulated by an oversight body, thank you.
7) If you run a business in the USA you would realize how the government is a hindrance to the free markets. Why should government implement minimum wage? Why not allow the free market to provide a better outcome. Instead it has barred many from economic freedom.
Tonyroyal,
In fact the the minimum wage is so low that many who work at that pay level have to work two jobs and even then are still below the poverty line. The minimum wage is about $8.00. Working 40 hours gives you $320.00. After about 25% taxes it nets out to
$240.00. Can you live on that or work 80 hours a week and have any sort of decent life? AND that is with government intervention. If it were up to business, they'd pay far less because people are so desperate they would have to take it. . This is no way to run a society.
Were some government intervention not used, there would be Egyptian style rioting in the streets of the United States where better than 20% already live in poverty.
Businesses do not care and large corporations BY LAW have to maximize the benefits to their investors by minimizing the payout to employees (Stockholders vs Ford 1929)
As for prostitution, all well and good except that poor women are often forced into it and are working in brutal conditions at great risk to their mental and physical health.
Girls in their teens are often the victims as in the case of Thailand and the Philippines noted for their child prostitutes.
Lastly, the government of the United States subsidizes big business and always has.
THe last time I checked the GOUSA subsidies to big business were $80 billion per year, twice the welfare budget for the poor. The government financed the development of the internet and the computer industry and several others for military use and then turned it over to private corporations. Were it not for massive government intervention in the U.S., its capitalist/free-enterprise system would have collapsed after the Depression of the 30s.
In many ways we will agree. Noam Chomsky who is one of my favorite writers and philosophers has been described at times as a libertarian socialist which I guess fits how I would describe myself.
Government only where government is needed to serve the needs of humanity and only until humanity evolves to the more civilized state in the future where government is not needed.
(This is called anarcho-syndicalism- sorry to introduce this term -too involved to explain here- if interested Google "Chomsky on anarcho syndicalism" )
"There is the role of the individual and the role of government. I am not against providing safety nets for "some" who are indeed poor. However it's the responsibility of the individual and his family to assist him/her in their time of need. In a worst case scenario if there is no safety net from the state. Individual citizens through the means of charity will step in. "
TonyRoyal,
In the world today every year over ten million poor people die from the effects of poverty.A billion or so barely survive on $1-2 dollars a day.
Individuals, whether through their churches or through NGOs, do not meet the needs of the poor that are a natural outfall of a world capitalist economic system. In fact I would argue that that rough individualist way of life that is so dear to Libertarians
engenders the "I've got mine, screw you" attitude that results in those tens of millions of needless deaths of the most helpless.
This is just one example of why libertarianism is OFTEN no better than the conservatism that supports so-called free enterprise.
There are a great many societal needs that individuals and small groups cannot handle
and while I agree with you that the government is involved in many things that should be a matter of personal choice, it is imperative that human needs are met before we start thinking of cutting out large programs put in place to alleviate the inherent and growing shortcomings of capitalism.
" 6) Why do we need all these unnecessary government agencies? The FDA has caused more harm than good."
Tonyroyal,
Look at the cases of botulism and other diseases that are in the papers on a regular basis. Were it not for the FDA we'd be poisoned by the big corporate megafarm industries far more often. And I would rather not be taking medicine that hasn't been tested and regulated by an oversight body, thank you.
7) If you run a business in the USA you would realize how the government is a hindrance to the free markets. Why should government implement minimum wage? Why not allow the free market to provide a better outcome. Instead it has barred many from economic freedom.
Tonyroyal,
In fact the the minimum wage is so low that many who work at that pay level have to work two jobs and even then are still below the poverty line. The minimum wage is about $8.00. Working 40 hours gives you $320.00. After about 25% taxes it nets out to
$240.00. Can you live on that or work 80 hours a week and have any sort of decent life? AND that is with government intervention. If it were up to business, they'd pay far less because people are so desperate they would have to take it. . This is no way to run a society.
Were some government intervention not used, there would be Egyptian style rioting in the streets of the United States where better than 20% already live in poverty.
Businesses do not care and large corporations BY LAW have to maximize the benefits to their investors by minimizing the payout to employees (Stockholders vs Ford 1929)
As for prostitution, all well and good except that poor women are often forced into it and are working in brutal conditions at great risk to their mental and physical health.
Girls in their teens are often the victims as in the case of Thailand and the Philippines noted for their child prostitutes.
Lastly, the government of the United States subsidizes big business and always has.
THe last time I checked the GOUSA subsidies to big business were $80 billion per year, twice the welfare budget for the poor. The government financed the development of the internet and the computer industry and several others for military use and then turned it over to private corporations. Were it not for massive government intervention in the U.S., its capitalist/free-enterprise system would have collapsed after the Depression of the 30s.
In many ways we will agree. Noam Chomsky who is one of my favorite writers and philosophers has been described at times as a libertarian socialist which I guess fits how I would describe myself.
Government only where government is needed to serve the needs of humanity and only until humanity evolves to the more civilized state in the future where government is not needed.
(This is called anarcho-syndicalism- sorry to introduce this term -too involved to explain here- if interested Google "Chomsky on anarcho syndicalism" )
Get di grammy Gargamel. Interesting way to enter a trial. 
Comment