If you dont have the freedom to make bad decisions you don't really have freedom.

Deducing from your dismissive response in the other thread, you haven't quite come to terms yet with the fact that our excessive regulations are quite destructive and expensive in addition to restricting our freedom.

Skinned evidently wanted to turn it into a battle about the definition of freedom rather than talking about that disgusting and false portrayal of libertarians that implied that we should all be good little lapdogs who dont question our government instead of advocating freedom.

wow, no wonder the libertarians advocate child labour and similar vileness

how about this one
one's ability to pursue their life goals unhindered, free of coercion and control by others

libertarians, of course, don't believe in externalities - which effectively limit others' freedom, health and well being
and they presume that the Market fairy will solve all problems if we just pretend that the problems don't exist
+ there's the ones who believe in "praxeology" to reject empirical evidence

which rule their solutions out when it comes to the question of "how can we best attain liberty and well-being for people"


do the titans of the industry pet your fur?

Which thread are you talking about? Some regulations are excessive and some things need to be regulated more. It really depends on the issue at hand. Do I want the freedom to purchase a vehicle that is half the price but 10x more likely to kill me? Nope. Neither does anyone else except, you, Ron Paul, and a couple other like-minded folks. Do I want the freedom to have a car that is half the price but is 1.05 more likely to kill me? Sure, that's a bit more reasonable and we can have that debate.

Your definition of freedom is extremely overrated. You would have to worry about so many things that you wouldn't be able to enjoy life. Your EFFECTIVE freedom would be slim to none. Thankfully, our founding fathers figured this out when they said that the federal government can regulate interstate commerce.

It is because libertarians are philosophically unsound. The only free system by any real standard would be anarchism. Libertarians advocate having a state to protect possessions and rights and stuff. Having rights and being free are pretty much contrary notions.

Only an ignorant fool would ban child labor in destitute countries and think they are doing a good thing for them.
It might sound nice and heroic to say you are against it tho.
What libertarians advocate would eventually remove the need for child labor.
You are essentially for child prostitution, starvation and black market work in worse conditions instead. What a hero.


Sounds acceptable for the most part. (without getting too semantical about it)



You might joke about fairies and try to marginalize people who like freedom with false or silly portrayals and broad untrue generalizations, but it doesn't offset the evidence and logic that freedom and freer markets are great for increasing wealth creation and satisfying people's desires in an efficient manner.
They dont all "ofcourse deny externalities" or "pretend problems dont exist".



There are various types and degrees of libertarians. Just about all of them advocate more freedom and less government than we have now. Some make exceptions. some advocate limited government.
I find all of the above far more agreeable than extreme inefficiency, waste and oppression with a lack of freedom to do even the most basic of things without approval.

Its far far more philosophically consistent and principled than others who sway with the wind of their whims and what they think looks good to the mob.

No they are not "contrary notions". They are only contrary when you want to proclaim positive "rights" to take things from other people and force them to do things.



So you would advocate the banishment of old and used car sales? or did you not think that one through enough.
Should all small cars be banned because you would be extremely safer in a tank? They are 10000x times safer atleast.

The founders would be deeply disturbed to find out that the government has abused the commerce clause to prohibit and control interstate commerce to the degree that they have.
What they sought to do was "make it regular" and prevent states from imposing prohibitive protectionist taxes on merchants from other states.

You want to draw lines of what should be legally permissible according to what you personally want in your life.
I find it quite offensive that people want to control all sorts of aspects of my life and use force because think they know what is best for me more than I do.

I respect others freedom. If they want to smoke or drink or buy funny hats or get married to a homosexual I have no problem with it legally speaking.

If a car is a death trap even compared to the high danger that already exists, people would obviously shy away from it.
If its really a disaster waiting to happen that is likely to kill other people you wont find too much opposition to its restriction on public roads.
You will find plenty of wiggle room with a lot of libertarian minded people for some things that appear reasonable to us on things that cause harm to others.



You dont have to be a full fledged libertarian or anarchist to find plenty of common ground.
Most libertarians and conservatives can agree that government has often gone far beyond what we consider a necessary or beneficial evil and that questioning government control and advocating freedom is a good thing.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Apr 4 2014 08:18pm

lol @ cartoon thread

No true Scotsman what?

Do you view a public school with no uniform to be more free than a private school with a mandatory uniform, assuming all else is exactly identical?

I'm not sure how you came to those conclusions. I'm for sensible regulations. I don't think forcing car makers to require seat belts is a bad thing. I don't think having some smog regulations are a bad thing either. If we didn't, our air quality would be worse than Beijing's in quite a few areas.

Yes, sometimes you really don't know what's best for you. You're not an expert on everything. We have regulations so dickheads can't take advantage of us.