Civil Libertarians?

[WinterBorn]

So you allow your work to prevent you from doing what you say is a right no one should be able to tell people not to exercise? I thought you self proclaimed civil libertarians had such strong convictions. Why don't you do it then fight it instead of using work as an excuse for controlling you.

My work prohibits the use of any recreational drugs and many prescription medications while on the job. Since there is currently no way to test whether the marijuana is from today or last night, my employer rightfully restricts the jobs by drug testing.

I believe in the individual freedoms. I do not believe those freedoms come without responsibility.

 

[evince]

I'm in favor of most of that.... particularly the de-privatizing of what must be a government function. We allow the government to prosecute accused criminals on behalf of "the people." So why are we abdicating the responsibility of incarcerating them to civilian corporations?

If companies want to take advantage of the fact that we have a huge prison population, instead of letting them run the prisons (which gives them an incentive to keep more ppl in), instead let them run educational/rehab services inside the prisons and hire former inmates when they are released.

We also need to address the mental health issues of the incarcerated. Some should never be released, obviously -- molesters, sex predators, psychopaths who rape and/or murder. But some of those ppl are there because they have mental issues that led to criminal behavior.

never forget who privatized prisons


republicans


never forget what libertarians want


les and less government at every turn


that means they will be for private prisons once they have any control


rand paul is a perfect example of a libertarian

he votes how?

like a right wing fucking republican


libertarianism is s sham

 

[evince]

Can I ask a question without sounding like I'm attacking you?

Why does it seem like most active right-wing posters are on your ignore list? I could see a few like TDAK/God bless America, who are obvious trolls (possibly even socks). Yaya too. The rest might be annoying but not sure they warrant an ignore. I wouldn't even ignore CFM, though he can be a gigantic douche sometimes. And hell, a few like Bigdog and Sirthinksalot (despite disagreements I have with them) aren't really bad posters. They just have bad views sometimes. I also notice there are no left-wing posters on your ignore? Even though y'all have your fair share of trolls and less than adequate posters.

I feel like that's just creating an echo chamber and we are on a debate forum. Again, not going on the attack. But I have to point this out.

and I NEVER put anyone on ignore

I never ban anyone

hell I have never even neg repped one fucking person ever


that is how I know how fucked up the libertarians are and what a sham they back

 

[TrippyHippy]

rand paul is a bought and paid for clown

libertarianism is a sham


their economic ideas are based in the Austrian school of economics which is the short bus school of economics that doesn't use math because math proves them wrong

I knew I forgot something. I forgot to threadban the usual trolls and people who can't follow or have an intelligent discussion.

We aren't talking about austrian economics dumbass, we're talking about civil libertarianism. Keep up.

 

[TrippyHippy]

and I NEVER put anyone on ignore

I never ban anyone

hell I have never even neg repped one fucking person ever


that is how I know how fucked up the libertarians are and what a sham they back

I was talking to OwlWoman you fucking burnout.

 

[evince]

But they're subject to the same shitty conditions.



Um, yeah. There's alot of victimless crimes. Smoking cannabis doesn't create victims. Prostitution doesn't create victims. Gambling doesn't create victims. I could go on. Maybe you could argue these things hurt the people involved. But if they engaged in a consensual act, no real victim. The problem with these types of laws is the government is playing mommy and daddy and making sure we don't hurt ourselves. We're fucking adults, and we need to start acting like we are. Protecting us from others who seek to steal, rape, murder, and put our children in porn videos is one thing. But prohibition is absolute bullshit.



Ok? I don't see what that has to do with me.



Ha!



It's called grey area. People with libertarian-leaning beliefs tend to like to think for themselves, rather than following a hive-minded ideology. It exists on a spectrum.



And it's correct in that. Civil libertarianism only addresses matters of civil liberty. It does not involve budgets, business regulation, foreign policy and such.



No, the world is definitely far more gray. I know you have a simplistic worldview, and I will give you credit for at least admitting to that. Most don't.

What I meant specifically by you thinking in black & white terms is that you assumed, just because STY and I both identify with a sort of civil libertarian mindset, that we must believe all of the exact same things. I see you do the same thing to those that identify as liberals. That's frankly ignorant.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH


you are the hive idiot


your ideas are based on the Austrain school of economics


its the economic school that hate math


they don't think math belongs in economics


that economics should be a social study and not about numbers and math


WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!



yeah that is right


economic shouldn't use math


that is as HIVE as you can fucking get

 

[evince]

I knew I forgot something. I forgot to threadban the usual trolls and people who can't follow or have an intelligent discussion.

We aren't talking about austrian economics dumbass, we're talking about civil libertarianism. Keep up.

the libertarians use the Austrian school of economics as the base of their economic ideas.



do you like the Mises site?


do you realize all the other REAL schools of economics think the Austrian school is a joke

 

[TrippyHippy]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH


you are the hive idiot


your ideas are based on the Austrain school of economics


its the economic school that hate math


they don't think math belongs in economics


that economics should be a social study and not about numbers and math


WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!



yeah that is right


economic shouldn't use math


that is as HIVE as you can fucking get

When did I ever say my ideas are based on austrian economics? Are you mentally ill? Or just illiterate? I believe in a universal healthcare system, universal basic income, and progressive taxation to name a few of my actual economic positions you asshat. Again, civil libertarian. For the legally blind.

You're the perfect example of a hive mind. If you even smell the word libertarian you go retarded. Without getting any context on the discussion at hand at all. Keep smoking your ditch weed burnout.

 

[evince]

even the Chicago school of economics is being tainted by the Austrian school of economics due to you lying right wing cons who try to pass off libertarianism as something new

 

[evince]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School


here is why you wish you banned me


because I prove how stupid libertarianism is

 

[evince]

The Austrian School is a school of economic thought that is based on methodological individualism – the concept that social phenomena result from the motivations and actions of individuals.[1][2][3] It originated in late-19th and early-20th century Vienna with the work of Carl Menger, Eugen Böhm von Bawerk, Friedrich von Wieser, and others.[4] It was methodologically opposed to the Prussian Historical School (in a dispute known as Methodenstreit). Current-day economists working in this tradition are located in many different countries, but their work is still referred to as Austrian economics.
Among the theoretical contributions of the early years of the Austrian School are the subjective theory of value, marginalism in price theory, and the formulation of the economic calculation problem, each of which has become an accepted part of mainstream economics.[5]
Since the mid-20th century, mainstream economists have been critical of the modern day Austrian School and consider its rejection of mathematical modelling, econometrics and macroeconomic analysis to be outside mainstream economic theory, or "heterodox".[6][7][8] Austrians are likewise critical of mainstream economics.[9] Although the Austrian School has been considered heterodox since the late 1930s, it attracted renewed interest in the 1970s, after Friedrich Hayek shared the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.[10]

 

[TrippyHippy]

the libertarians use the Austrian school of economics as the base of their economic ideas.



do you like the Mises site?


do you realize all the other REAL schools of economics think the Austrian school is a joke

Ok, I don't know why I even dignified your post with a response. Or allowed you to post in this thread at all. Call it a lapse in judgement.

Either you're trolling, you have serious mental issues, or you're illiterate. I don't really care. Last time I forget to threadban you though, your other illiterate troll friends also, or your right-wing counterparts for that matter. I'm done. You clearly can't follow even the simplest of discussions.

Good day. Have fun smoking your ditch weed.

 

[evince]

Mainstream economists have argued that Austrians are excessively averse to the use of mathematics and statistics in economics.[70]
Economist Paul Krugman has stated that because Austrians do not use "explicit models" they are unaware of holes in their own thinking.[71]

 

[evince]

Ok, I don't know why I even dignified your post with a response. Or allowed you to post in this thread at all. Call it a lapse in judgement.

Either you're trolling, you have serious mental issues, or you're illiterate. I don't really care. Last time I forget to threadban you, your other illiterate troll friends, or your right-wing counterparts for that matter. I'm done.

you don't like facts that prove libertarians are fools or cons

 

[evince]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Economics

 

[evince]

Economics[edit]
Left-libertarians (social and individualist anarchists, libertarian Marxists and left-wing market anarchists) argue in favor of socialist theories such as communism, syndicalism and mutualism (anarchist economics). Daniel Guérin writes that "anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man. Anarchism is only one of the streams of socialist thought, that stream whose main components are concern for liberty and haste to abolish the State".[68]
Right-libertarians are economic liberals of either the Austrian School or Chicago school and support laissez-faire capitalism.[69]

 

[evince]

why is it libertarians don't want to tell you about their economic ideas that suck ASS

 

[evince]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_school_of_economics

 

[evince]

The Chicago school of economics is a neoclassical school of economic thought associated with the work of the faculty at the University of Chicago, some of whom have constructed and popularized its principles.
In the context of macroeconomics, it is connected to the "freshwater school" of macroeconomics, in contrast to the saltwater school based in coastal universities (notably Harvard University, MIT, and UC Berkeley). Chicago macroeconomic theory rejected Keynesianism in favor of monetarism until the mid-1970s, when it turned to new classical macroeconomics heavily based on the concept of rational expectations. The freshwater-saltwater distinction is largely antiquated today, as the two traditions have heavily incorporated ideas from each other. Specifically, New Keynesian economics was developed as a response to new classical economics, electing to incorporate the insight of rational expectations without giving up the traditional Keynesian focus on imperfect competition and sticky wages.
Chicago economists have also left their intellectual influence in other fields, notably in pioneering public choice theory and law and economics, which have led to revolutionary changes in the study of political science and law. Other economists affiliated with Chicago have made their impact in fields as diverse as social economics and economic history. Thus, there is not a clear delineation of the Chicago school of economics, a term that is more commonly used in the popular media than in academic circles.[citation needed] Nonetheless, Kaufman (2010) says that the School can be generally characterized by:[1]
A deep commitment to rigorous scholarship and open academic debate, an uncompromising belief in the usefulness and insight of neoclassical price theory, and a normative position that favors and promotes economic liberalism and free markets.
The University of Chicago Economics department, considered one of the world's foremost economics departments, has fielded 12 Nobel Prizes laureates in economics—more than any other university (as of January 2016, MIT is second at 6); and has also fielded more John Bates Clark medalists in economics than any other university.

 

[evince]

Milton Friedman[edit]


The Nobel laureate Milton Friedman was affiliated with the University of Chicago for three decades; his ideas and his students made significant contributions to the development of Chicago School theory.
Main articles: Milton Friedman and Monetarism
Milton Friedman (1912–2006) stands as one of the most influential economists of the late twentieth century. A student of Frank Knight, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1976 for, among other things, A Monetary History of the United States (1963). Friedman argued that the Great Depression had been caused by the Federal Reserve's policies through the 1920s, and worsened in the 1930s. Friedman argued that laissez-faire government policy is more desirable than government intervention in the economy.
One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.
— Milton Friedman Interview with Richard Heffner on The Open Mind (7 December 1975)