When will American's embrace Libertarian views? (Page 3)

So there's a couple ways to look at this, yes you are correct that there is an increasingly larger concentration of wealth at the top, but I think it's more a result of less and less people on the bottom trying to get to the top vs. the people at the top "hoarding it" or anything like that.

I have this whole philosophy about the entitlement programs, which are meant to help people, actually harming them because it kills the one thing that will result in personal financial growth.  DRIVE.

I won't bore you guys again with my growing up as a dirt poor kid sob story again, but I've experience first hand the entitlement world and it has a powerful hold on most of my family.  They will always be poor and have nothing as long as it's easier for them to get free money from the government than to go get an education or job.

Even from a first hand standpoint, about 15 years ago I turned down a new job offer that would have given me a $10k pay raise because with my current salary we qualified for WIC and several other government benefits that were far more valuable than the additional $6k or $7k take home I would have gotten from the new job.  I purposefully chose to make less money due to entitlements and once those entitlements were no longer available/needed I immediately took a better job and continued my climb up the corporate ladder.

Don't read me wrong, I am a proponent of entitlement programs, but they have to be programs for the truly needy and IMHO they have to be programs that have a path to employment for those that are physically/mentally able.  However, what we have today are unending entitlements with no strings attached that permanently incentivise people to never get a job and make more money.  Then you throw in the economic collapse of 2008 and a push by certain politicians to create even more "assistance" the problem continues to spiral out of control.

If you tax the rich and give even more entitlements/benefits to the poor then the gap just gets wider, not narrower.

Back to the libertarian discussion, I'm a strong proponent of personal responsibility and feel that when you de-incentivise that personal responsibility by giving too many entitlements, it has an overall negative impact on society as a whole.

Hummm... perhaps "wrong" made you think I was balistic. I'm not. And I don't get angry. I don't know what you picture me as on the other side of the keyboard... but that isn't it. I'm dry, and quite mellow.

And I never said I was for "ZERO" regulation either. I didn't. We need anti-trust regulation. We need worker's rights regulation. Because if not... we would be back to 1800's and that wasn't so great.

Government should ensure protections. They should provide even playing fields. They should help stabilize markets to dampen volitility to the economy. All that is regulation, and yes we have it and it is needed. But after that, it goes much much further. Both sides rig the game to benefit them. Both sides are controlled by outside money, and both sides are beholdent to it. Green energy has nothing to do with CO2 anymore than big oil has to do with jobs. It is about money, and how they can tap into more revenue streams.

And Wall Street... I know liberals like to think they have the little guy in mind... but they elect Democrats that don't. And when Obama appoints half his cabinet from Wall Street... do you really think he had any intention at all in reforming it? No different than the conservatives electing Republicans thinking they are going to get "free markets"... no, they are going to get "deregulation" to make their friends rich. Rs and Ds both were responsible for the housing bubble... and both responsible for concentrating wealth... and the small buisness owners and those trying to own the "dream" get shafted.

As with any political spectrum, there are extremes... so if you want to stereotype Libertarians as anti-government anarchists... well they do exist, but those are the extremes. The moderates... just like any political party, wants more reasonable things. I want less military. I want less military interventions around the world. I WANT a social security so old people are not starving... not retirment... "security" from starving. That is achievable, but it is also expensive, and it needs to be funded. Same with medicare. But healthcare is not expensive because evil insurance companies... it's expensive because government intervention. Government intervention created HMOs... which then became the problem they needed more intervention to fix. It's silly, and it is bankrupting us.

There is a lot of government intervention that makes thing worse, and it would be great to reverse that.

You are correct. And I agree with you whether it be stupid, lazy, set in their ways, etc. too many people just pick the R or the D and don't really examine who or what they are voting on. 

But that is the point of the thread, what will it take for people to either wake up or to get fed up enough to stop choosing the R in Idaho or choosing the D in California. 

I know my vote for Johnson was not going to win him anything, but at that point in time it was the best I could do to let the R's and D's know that I am not happy with them or the current setup. This last time I think it was 3% of the vote went L, perhaps 30 years from now it will be up to 15-20% who knows. It is worth at least sending the message.

But like another poster mentioned we have to get the money out of the game or the L will just get swallowed up by the R just like the tea party did. If it didn't take $1bil to run we could have had 4-5 choices for President and more people would be able to find a person who aligns better with them liek JMk said. I don't know that a 3 party system would be any better than a 2 as inevitably the 3rd would end up just as power and money hungry as the other 2. Only when we get the money out will we be able to really have a choice at the ballot box and maybe have the chance to vote for someone who really does want to limit their own power. Lofty wishes I know.

So for know I will do what I can to vote for the person I want to represent me regardless of the outcome. Other than that all I can do is hope things get much, much worse, because that is what it will take before things get any better.  

Don't you guys think that "the poor" are just growing, as a class, in sheer numbers, faster than "the rich"?  From my vantage point you can't consider that a small point.  Poor people tend to have a lot of kids......really poor people tend to have even more kids.  Yes, "good people" of BT, I realize that's a generalization.....but I work a lot in poor neighborhoods, so I tend to take my opinions firsthand.

But it isn't free. Where exactly should the floor be set?

If you want to mandate a wage so everyone can "make a living" that's fine. But it has to come from somewhere. So the cost of living has to increase. Because all the retailers have to raise the price to accomodate their labor burdens. So we all pay more. I don't actually disagree with providing a livable wage, but again, at the end of the day... it all comes out of my pocket. Wages, taxes, subsidies... at the end of the road, there is only people, and we pay for it. Cutting CEO's salaries isn't going to do it.

I'm a little older than you... I think.... and I never had the middle class dream. My parents worked hard. We had a house breifly. Most of the time we were broke. The recession in the 80s wiped us out. No college for me and my sister. Parents have no retirment. Not that long ago I made minimum wage. I had to work a couple of jobs. I didn't die. I make good money now, but my wife doesn't. I'm a one income houshold. Hopefully that will change. And I am not living in the lap of luxury. So I'm not sure where this idea that it was so great before and it isn't now came from. It's about the same for me. 

Hopefully that isn't too ranty.

I don't feel we're as far apart as you think, because I agree with a lot of what you've said.  However, I contend that what you are describing are real and valid symptoms, but they're not the underlying cause of the problem.  If people can't live on a minimum wage salary and we give them a pay raise through increasing minimum wage, it raises the costs of all of the minimum wage provided services that they live on.  So effectively it does very little to fix the true problem.  Even if we assumed a $15/hr. minimum wage and ignored all of the side effects it still isn't a living wage in most parts of the country for reasons you mentioned.
No matter what the career field, if we simply mandate pay increases via legislation or collective bargaining the costs will just circulate down the the end users and the whole bar will raise up an equal amount.  It may work for a year or two, but if you only treat symptoms, the underlying problem will still be there.

Also, I'm not suggesting that the only reason people are poor or middle class is because they lack drive.  What I'm suggesting is that when 30% plus of the potential workforce is heavily incented to not seek employment or "lack drive", it drags the economy as a whole down.  This dragging prevents entrepreneurs from building businesses and it stops people from trying to get a job.  When you throw in the class warfare rhetoric of "the man" keeping you down, people start to believe it and simply stop trying.

I know it's a complex issue, and it's nowhere near as simple as I'm making it out to be.  There are a multitude of things effecting the ever increasing separation of wealth, but the important thing is to focus on the causes and not the symptoms.

I do agree.  Why wouldn't they, they are subsidized to do so.  Hence another big government failure.  Granted, it's not lucrative but it's a way to get by and it's a lifestyle.

Meanwhile, some people go to school, work 60-80 hrs a week, make 6 figures and still consider a 2nd part time job because colleges want as much as $40k a year.  Yes, the system is stacked against the hard working, honest person.  I told my daughter that when she applies for college grants, she is going to be a lesbian, native American / Eskimo on the application.

That's a whole other can of worms that gets me worked up.  I agree with you completely about the problem, but have you ever taken a step back and wondered what actually causes inflation?  It's obviously a complex thing as well, but a big contributor is everyone expecting/getting annual pay raises.  Every major company I worked for always gave an approximate 3% per year pay raise due to inflation.  They then pass that cost onto their customers which in turn requires them to get a pay raise to stay the same.  etc...  It's almost as if inflation is a self fulfilling prophecy.

In theory, if we are going to have a minimum wage, it should be increased every year to keep up with inflation.

However, in a free economy there shouldn't be a need for a minimum wage because there would be a rate at which people simply wouldn't work, which would in effect become the minimum wage.  Unfortunately though, in our current economy with massive government involvement it would be a disaster if we removed the minimum wage.  I believe there are 40+ million people unemployed or under employed which would cause a lot of downward wage pressure.  With more and more outsourcing we are also continuing the shift to a service based economy which simply doesn't pay as much in the long run.
Throw in the undocumented workers as well and that depresses the wages even more.

So, it's a complex issue, but raising the minimum wage IMHO doesn't really help anyone.  It simply gives them a pay raise, but all of the minimum wage produced products and services that they use go up at an equal level.  So the net effect is nothing other than a feel good measure.

The government simply needs to get out of the way of business and let the greedy fat cats do what they do and create jobs.  The government does need to be a referee to ensure there is an equal playing field and safe working conditions, but that's about it.  Capitalism will sort the rest out.

Just remember, for every rule/law/regulation that the government comes up with there is a 99.9% certainty that there will be unintended consequences and those often are worse than the original problem they were trying to fix.

How exactly is the system stacked against being hard working and honest? Are you not in control of your life and gain satisfaction for it? Does your child have to go to a $40K/yr school or is that your choice because you can afford it? I don't get it.

But that's you... all those minimum wage workers have to pay the same too... which comes out of their pocket, which does not have much in it.

after re-reading LB's post it made me think about the gap between the rich and poor.  I wonder if the big increase is more due to the economy crashing and unemployment vs. the "rich getting richer".  I'm just speculating, so I don't know but I did find this chart that shows a massive spike in the poor the last decade which is obviously a result of the recessions.

I know we're out in the weeds a little bit on this thread, but I think the Libertarian approach is needed just as much (if not more) on the economy as it is on the social side.

As a general rule, I always tell people to think about the cause, not the symptoms.  Why did the crash of 2008 happen?  Because the government decided to back mortgage loans for everybody and their hamster which resulted in a lance armstrong steroid based economy that was growing like crazy.  Home prices went through the roof (supply/demand) and it all crashed down when reality set in and the money dried up.

Why are jobs all jacked up right now and the recovery going so slow?  Even thought the government is dumping a gabillion dollars into the economy via the banks, Dodd/Frank has scared them all from actually lending any of it out so businesses and consumers can benefit.  So, we're massively going into debt to essentially bolster big bank balance sheets at this point.
Things like the ACA, which is the government trying to fix a real symptom (people with no healthcare) while ignoring the actual cause is likely to result in even more people without healthcare and has turned 30 hours into full time work.

You can't make this stuff up, and the government HAS to get out of the economy if it's ever going to function the way it's supposed to IMHO.

Well... through legislationthe government set the stage to take out risk from risky investments. It allowed sub prime mortgages to increase dramatically, and derivatives backed by those mortgages ballooned. Housing was a bubble... with values increasing backed by no real change in value.

The Dems were trying to give sweet heart deals to their peeps, and the Repubs were giving sweet heart deals to theirs. They crashed the economy, and not one pitch fork on the WH lawn, and not one person in jail.

But what did we get... a deeper divide with both sides pointing to the other. The Class war being fueled by gasoline. And the American people playing their part buying this big load of B.S., and demanding more hand outs and intervention to fix the mess. When will it end is anybodies guess.

Obviously inflation is a lot more complex than just pay raises, but it's one of many factors that lead to raising costs to the consumer which requires the need for people to make more money.

With the bread example, the wages for a minimum wage working may not have gone up a lot, but they've still gone up significantly.  I was making $3.35 an hour in 1988 working at a car wash.  Minimum wage is $7.25 right now which is a 216% increase.  You couldn't live on $3.35 an hour back then any more than you can live on $7.25 an hour today.  Minimum wage never has been and never will be a living wage.  You could raise it to $50/hr. and within 2 years we would be having the exact same discussion about it not being a living wage because stuff is still too expensive.

Also, to dive a little deeper on your bread example, store employee wages are a contributing factor that go into the grocery store markup on a loaf of bread but it's just one of many things that make up the price of that loaf.  You have farmers growing wheat, you have bakeries baking the bread, you have a bag company that makes the bags, you have a twist tie company that makes the twist ties, you have a trucking company that transports the bread with fuel, you have construction workers and architects that build the grocery store, you have utilities.  I'm probably missing half of the things that make up the cost of a loaf of bread, but my point is that there are many areas where the costs go up and add to inflation.  Everything from labor contracts, to emission standards raise prices and lead to inflation.  I was just trying to simplify it a little by strictly talking about labor costs because it's a big chunk.

You got that right. I swear our country is going to be overrun by the ignorant. 

Come on...even I'm not that cynical.

Bottom line is this, scavenging has always been, and will always be an effective survival strategy. There are those that are content to live off others. We can't get rid of them... but it is also a standard of living I have no desire to live at.

Welfare fraud, and the guy on food stamps with Cadillacs are fun to highlight, but I do not think it is the norm. Fraud is fraud, and it will always exist. All we can do is minimize it.

In a country as rich as ours, we can indeed afford certain "social protections". A minimum subsistence for the elderly. Medical care for theme and those that have no other choice. Preexisting conditions covered. A minimum wage... and most importantly, a hand up for those that have fallen. With all that, we will certainly have fraud, waste and abuse.... but we can afford it.

All that will be expensive, but it is the right thing to do. The American people still want the dream. They still want to be free, and they still will work hard. If the government will get out of their way, it can still be that way. People came from every corner of the world... AND STILL DO... for that dream. The one that says if they work hard, they can build a life for themselves and their family.

But if we continue to foster this mentality that the collective is more important that the individual, that government is th solution to all problems, and government can engineer the perfect society... then that dream will indeed die. Because it is men and women that build things, not government... even by proxy. People have to know they are in charge of making this world better. When the responsibility is passed, it stops working.

I agree with you for the most part, but I think you under estimate the people who legally follow the rules to maximize the entitlement system in their favor.  They follow the rules, but they maximize their ability to take advantage of those rules by positioning themselves in a certain way.  As a result, they spend an entire lifetime living off of the government by having lots of kids and they're actually quite smart about all of the other programs.

When I was a kid we'd spend entire Saturdays driving all over town to get cheese and butter, or free shoes, or free clothes from every charitable place in town.  They'd we'd go and sell most of the clothes and food and use that money for other stuff.

There will always be true fraud, and I agree that all we can do is try to put controls in to minimize it. It's also likely a small single digit percentage of the overall cost of entitlements.

Yes... they were legally entitled to it, and they accepted it. The exact same way I am legally entitled to write off my mortgage on my taxes and claim my MIL as a dependent. In my case, I do pay taxes, so I get to keep more of my money by taking advantage of what is offered me. For those that do not pay taxes.. well they are just accepting what somebody wants to give them.

But the problem is not with the people that take, it is with the system that gives. After a point, there is no accountability. If somebody is going to give me something, why not take it?

But just like in your case, that was not good enough for you, even though you were raised in it. You wanted something different. Slaves or not to an entitlement system/mentality...I still believe people want to be free. And they want to be in charge of their own life and no have to live off somebody else. There will always be some that do, but I do not think that is what makes up the core of Americans.

I agree completely