Social Libertarian?

[The_Orlonater]

Does anyone disagree with me and why? What would you do in your community?

 

[acptulsa]

Does anyone disagree with me and why? What would you do in your community?

Accountability works, tyrrany doesn't. Many things are possibly viable if attempted with good motives and a good heart. Many things can be stolen from, as well.

I've long said that our philosophy of federal government is just as good for liberals as for conservatives because things are more efficient on the local level and because states' rights means what your state wants and can afford, it can have. Even if that includes a welfare state.

 

[The_Orlonater]

Accountability works, tyrrany doesn't. Many things are possibly viable if attempted with good motives and a good heart. Many things can be stolen from, as well.

I've long said that our philosophy of federal government is just as good for liberals as for conservatives because things are more efficient on the local level and because states' rights means what your state wants and can afford, it can have. Even if that includes a welfare state.

It's not a total welfare state, it's really small. Super small. MEGA small. ULTIMATELY small.

 

[AutoDas]

I do support Laissez-faire capitalism. I also support a little bit of social services because I believe the government plays a little role. I want it done by local governments. Welfare should be cut down by 95%. I think only very few people should be in government services. As you all know, we spend and print to much. If we would stop doing that we'd have enough to help some people who actually need it. Yes there are some people(not to many) who actually need it. I want to steer people away from the government.

Isn't that how all welfare starts? Keep it small for only those who "need it" but who defines needs? The voter. Once you allow welfare of any kind the people will want more of it. Just look at the situation now. People think they're entitled to more welfare because they have new needs (ex. socialized health care, "fixing" social security for the baby boomers)

I do belive in public schools for cities and towns. Only to be locally funded by everyone paying a little bit of taxes for the schools, or maybe people investing into one school and no taxation. I can't makeup my mind. This shall be locally run, if I did choose the local government one, it would be only funded by the goverment through taxation. No beaurocrat control, but parent and teacher control.

Or you could just privatize the public schools.

Don't criticize me and call me a big government socialist if you do choose to respond to my idea. Any questions will be accepted.
Carry on.

I wouldn't say you're a big socialist like many other people, but you calling yourself a libertarian is incorrect.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Are there any other Social Libertarians out there? I am a Social Libertarian.

Now for those who don't understand Social Libertarianism let me quote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to explain.

I beleive that federal level income taxes are wrong as are heavy taxation. I beleive in laissez faire and social freedom. But I also beleive the following Section 1 of Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is true.

THE UDHR?????????????? <horrified>

DO you also believe in #29:3 of the UDHR which states that the UN will be sole determiner of whether you are allowed to HAVE those rights or not?


Geesh, get a clue!

Anyone who ascribes to or believes in anything the UN is doing and thinks it's pro-liberty has a lot of learnin' to do......

 

[NH4RonPaul]

UN = Evil= Socialism

I didn't ask for criticism.

I don't think the goverment has a right to steal from other people. But I do think people have the rights represented in the former piece. Now please if you want to debate open another thread this is for people who think like I do...

Oh well, I just noticed it's the socialist troll again who posted this.

If you don't understand by now that the UN is about SOCIALISM, worldwide, then you are NOT a libertarian.

I guess the public schools have really done some damage in that you are thoroughly brainwashed by this nonsense that is playing all over the media, even in our local public TV cable outlets..

Horrific.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Socialists be gone..

The best way to make your argument would be to acknowledge that though you support preventing the government from limiting what people can do you also support programs at the government level which promote a certain level of equality.

But this is the point WE DON'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Because it's called SOCIALISM!!!!!!!

Get it? Ron Paul is not for it and neither are we!!!!!!!!



This is why the feds and their UN propagandistic GARBAGE must be banned from the public schools....

 

[user]

But this is the point WE DON'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Because it's called SOCIALISM!!!!!!!

Get it? Ron Paul is not for it and neither are we!!!!!!!!



This is why the feds and their UN propagandistic GARBAGE must be banned from the public schools....

Let's ban the public schools instead

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Udhr = un marxism

Where did this come from? Who wrote this? I would like a source and an internet link, I bet I could find something similar written by the UN. There is a difference between inalienable rights, and what certain people are calling 'human rights' in order to justify communism which is about slavery, oppression, and ends up involving genocide and much more. That Declaration sounds nice, but that's how communism is sold, by appealing to emotions and using fluffy, unrealistic idealism.

Sandy of course you are right, the UDHR is the UN's version of the Bill of Rights, but it is CONDITIONAL, based on whether you are 'contrary to their principles and purposes'.

Since we all know the UN is for total gun control, that's a red flag right there.

THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE PROMOTING TO OUR CHILDREN!

 

[NH4RonPaul]

UN must be banished from this country

I'm not a communist I simply think rights exist and one of those rights is the right to be healthy.

BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE COMMUNISTS at the UN TEACH IN SCHOOL.

Shameful.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Marxism is like a cancer. It tries to adopt the name of an opposing view point and eat away at it until it takes over the name. It did it with liberal, conservative, and now libertarian.

You got it!

It's about the corruption of words.

This is why you need to homeschool your kids -- so they can learn the truth and not be propagandized by this nonsense, in the UN controlled curriculum.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Not at all this was designed for a meeting of similair minds.


Many like us feel the poor deserve a right to have a chance to do the same things that those better off do...

Yes they have the right to work hard just as we did.

And not have their dead husband's SS money stolen and given to some welfare family.

 

[Kraig]

I didn't ask for criticism.

I don't think the goverment has a right to steal from other people. But I do think people have the rights represented in the former piece. Now please if you want to debate open another thread this is for people who think like I do...

So get out of fantasy land and tell us who is going to pay for that standard of living without having the government steal from other people.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Oh come on now man. Ron paul has nothing to do with his supporters, i thought we learned this with the whole Don Black episode? Ron paul advocates not leaving people out in the streets, and cares deeply for the poor, and has shown this. You are seriously underestimating the power of charity in a healthy economy. That being said, you are free to have your views. Most peoples criticisms were simply that you were not really "libertarian" in the tradition "negative liberty" sense of the word, and i'd agree with that. Not voting for Ron Paul, who im sure you came to for reasons other than his wonderful platform of [sarcasm]leaving to poor to die on the streets[/sarcasm], would be utterly absurd simply because you received some criticism, maybe a bit too harsh, from some posters in an internet forum.

Think for a sec here, buddy.

But NOT via the redistribution of the wealth with something like the ONE campaign, that's for sure. That's for Obamatards.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

See I don't think one should have to rely on charity to fufill a basic right.

This is where strong FAMILIES come into play.

The family is the first unit of government and a voluntary collective.

With strong families who can help each other through the bad times (yeah, living on the couch in your parents home until you get back on your feet) you don't have to rely on the government putting a gun to your head to collect money to give to some unknown person here or worse yet, ABROAD....

 

[NH4RonPaul]

i took a couple of those internet polls earlier today to determine where on the 'grid' i stand, and it placed me as a 'commie liberal b****' as well :? When you think about the circumstances of lets say having only those wealthy enough to afford medicine, such as lets say mitt romney, over someone who cant even afford a rent and are evicted or something because they work in perhaps a kitchen which wages have been sunk rock bottom because of the overabundance of cheap, often illegal labor... and you think "wtf, thats just wrong. id much rather see some dude strip a digit's place off of romneys bank account and start treating medical conditions for those that cant afford their daily bread."

But then you also have to think about the expense of those services of which we all have a 'right' to, and how that would be far less of an issue to tackle if the cost of medical services were competitive like most other industries unsubsidized by government.

You could make another hypothetical case where a drug abuser and felon were dying of an illness of his/her own devices, and under that same creed, this person would be able to siphon money from joe-goodyboots who is trying to raise an honest family with moral values and just happened to have a little good fortune in his business affairs along the way. i think people like you and i that lean on that humanitarian side to be far less inclined to apply those same rules in this particular case.

I think the main point standing that those here 'holier than thou' (curse you for being sympathetic at heart, you better leave! because we arent begging for all the supporting members we can find or anything </sarcasm> ) is that the constitution defends the rights of everyone by denying government the ability to meddle in individual affairs in perhaps well-intentioned but ultimately ill-mannered practices which in all cases forces someone to cover that cost (whether it be financial, through services, etc). So the moral argument isnt really what is in question, i think most people here are very sympathetic to those causes as well, they just believe that having government handle these programs at the federal level is unconstitutional and grossly inefficient.

Good LORD! Methinks the class warfare CRAP that has been instilled in you youngsters by the public schools is APPALLING.

Unless Mitt Romney held a gun to your head and stole the money from you directly, he has every right to have been a good capitalist and made that money no matter how much you hate him.

I can see where this country is headed if we don't get these communists out of our schools systems teaching IB and Goals 2000 with the idea that they are going to make little liberal activists for world government out of you all.

Sheesh.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

I've given $4500 so far this year to non-religious charities, 90% of that to a cancer support organization.

I've paid enough in forced taxes to support three families over my lifetime.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Now I can't get my husbands SS that he worked for 45 years and contributed to, but never collected.

That should be family money, private!

 

[NH4RonPaul]

These so-called rights have been decreed by, for example, supra-national bodies such as the United Nations.

F*** the UN, they don't rule over me and they are NOT a government and certainly not MY government...and I can't tell you what I'd do if I saw a blue-helmet near my home.

They are not god-given or held by us by virtue of our being born (I put it that way to cover the theists and non-theists among us).

WHAT? Bill of Rights guarantees rights by BIRTH. Not by some commie organization like the UN.
You cannot argue with a UN flunkie.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

By taxing luxuries...

The property rights only protect income from tax at a federal level. No one ever said taxes on non essential items were wrong. And they're completely voluntary. If you dont want to pay the taxes don't buy the item; since they're luxuries there nothing you need.

I don't think its irrational or crazy to say that the goverment can tax things like the sales of alcohol, tobacco, and recreational drugs...

Because you obviously have class envy? GET LOST BUDDY.

WHO ARE YOU TO SAY WHAT I 'NEED'???

CLEARLY you have the twisted logic of a Marxist.

 

[NH4RonPaul]

Let's ban the public schools instead

They have proven to be unable to deliver a product (education) without the poison of political bias, so yes, they deserve to have funds yanked and given back to the hapless who are forced to pay.