A Libertarian's Viewpoint

[Bondhead88]

Over the past several years my viewpoint has changed from Conservative to Libertarian.

I always held a limited government view and probably bordered on Libertarian and it wasn't until this year that I moved to a true libertarian.

I do not mean an anarchist view. I believe there is a limited role in Government. Milton Friedman and Ann Rand, William F Buckley JR and others have agreed with that.

General Welfare of the People, National Defense are two of the area we need Government.

I have seen things like healthcare in many different ways administered by Governments.

The European System which you are told what Dr you will get, what healthcare you are allowed, no way to buy your way into better healthcare if you can afford it. 16 bed wards, government covered medication and reactionary medical care (no preventative medical care)

I have seen the Canadian System where it is now three tier, a governmental system very much like medicare, an HMO based system and a totally private system which is still in it's infancy. You have the ability to buy better coverage or maybe have an employer give you medical coverage that improves the basic system (Private or semi private hospital rooms, dental, prescription drugs, short term & long term disability coverage, life insurance, ect)

I have seen the American system which has offered some of the best medical care in the world, private hospitals, medicare for those unable to afford it, But it has been self destructing for years and one of the major players in it's destruction besides the government is the insurance companies.

I have also seen the Peruvian System where everything is based on the free market, plenty of Dr's who have different fees, fast access to medical needs, many dentists and specialist. And it has a very Libertarian methodology.

In Canada my Ventolin for my asthma is $16.00 at a Wal-Mart the exact same medication in a Wal-Mart in the US is $52.00 down here it is $3,00

When I had my kidney stone attack I was able to walk into a pharmacy and buy the pain medication I required without seeing a Dr or having a prescription. When the pain got worse we made a phone call and the pharmacy delivered the medication and a syringe to me and I had a nurse here inject me with to different kinds of medicine (muscle relaxant and pain meds).

When It continued and I no longer had access to a nurse the next day I walked into a Dr's office paid him the equivalent of $5.00 and got some advise and a prescription for a different type of pain medication. I walked down to the pharmacy and again paid the equivalent of $5.00 got the syringe and medication, walked up to flights of stairs and a nurse injected it for me. Her service came with the meds I had paid to the pharmacy.

It was their way of market competition offering this service. That last scenario took a total of 30 minutes and I took a taxi ride home (also no meters, you negotiate ahead of time how much you pay for the ride)

Some may say that the last system can be abused and their right it can be. But with all the controls Canada, the US and Europe has there are still large problems with prescription mills, Oxycontin addiction and wrong medication being prescribed.

As an adult I should be able to choose for myself what medications I want to take and when. When I wasn't sure what I needed I sought advise. I have also bought antibiotics down here without prescriptions.

My healthcare is my business and should not be subjected to the approval of a government or DR, nurse or pharmacist. I am not suggesting not using medical professionals but they are there to assist me in the decision making process when I need it and ask for it not processing my decisions for me and treating me like a child who can never take care of himself.

 

[rphutchi]

I find myself moving in the same direction. However.....how does a country move from the nanny state where the notion of self sufficiency and personal responsibility are foreign to a libertarian sink or swim model.

 

[88GT]

How do you define conservative, Bondhead88?

 

[EvilBlackGun]

How about ... ...

How do you define conservative?

"You leave Mine alone; I leave Yours alone. You try to take Mine, I turn Anarchist and eliminate You and take Yours." And I expect the same of You. Just for discussion. EBG

 

[Bondhead88]

How do you define conservative, Bondhead88?

Many things a conservative believe would be close to what I believe the difference would be methodology. While many conservatives and I would agree with many moral issues how we would handle them would be different.

For instance the current battle of marriage. While I believe that a marriage is between one man and one woman excluding all others, I do not think it is the Governments place to legislate this.

The institution of marriage is a spiritual one not a secular one. Once the government stepped in and took responsibility away from churches in governance of marriage we started having more and more issues.

I think taking heroin, cocaine, LSD, Marijuana and all the other substances like these is silly, dangerous to your health and just plain wrong. However I do believe that as an adult that the government should control this aspect of your life you should govern this area of your life. We currently allow other drugs like nicotine and alcohol to be sold. I do not think that if drugs were legalized tomorrow that all adults would run out and get some. I think that those who do become addicts should be held legally responsible for any acts they commit and I think they should be financially responsible for their health when they use these things.

I would not agree with abortion I am pro-life. I consider this to be an act that involves more than a singular person. Since a baby in the womb is not capable to defend him/herself I believe we have a duty and obligation to do so.

Many conservatives call themselves free-market supporters but then I constantly see them interfering with the market making new laws, subsidizing certain parts of the economy. Using tax payers money to invest in certain business.
I say leave the market alone. It will only bear what the public is willing to bear and when it has overtly high value it will correct its self.

I do not believe in funding other nations like many conservatives do. Foreign Aide should be stopped completely. If individuals want to send money to countries in need then they should be able to.

I think income tax needs to go. Tear down the IRS and have a fair tax system. I am not in favor of a flat tax system like many conservatives do.

I think the EPA, the Fed, the IRS, The National Education System, The National Labor Board, the ATF, the FCC, the DEA and the Food & Drug Administration should all be scrapped.

I think there should be a constitutional amendment limiting how long a justice can sit on the supreme court (10 years)

 

[88GT]

Many things a conservative believe would be close to what I believe the difference would be methodology. While many conservatives and I would agree with many moral issues how we would handle them would be different.

For instance the current battle of marriage. While I believe that a marriage is between one man and one woman excluding all others, I do not think it is the Governments place to legislate this.

The institution of marriage is a spiritual one not a secular one. Once the government stepped in and took responsibility away from churches in governance of marriage we started having more and more issues.

I think taking heroin, cocaine, LSD, Marijuana and all the other substances like these is silly, dangerous to your health and just plain wrong. However I do believe that as an adult that the government should control this aspect of your life you should govern this area of your life. We currently allow other drugs like nicotine and alcohol to be sold. I do not think that if drugs were legalized tomorrow that all adults would run out and get some. I think that those who do become addicts should be held legally responsible for any acts they commit and I think they should be financially responsible for their health when they use these things.

I would not agree with abortion I am pro-life. I consider this to be an act that involves more than a singular person. Since a baby in the womb is not capable to defend him/herself I believe we have a duty and obligation to do so.

Many conservatives call themselves free-market supporters but then I constantly see them interfering with the market making new laws, subsidizing certain parts of the economy. Using tax payers money to invest in certain business.
I say leave the market alone. It will only bear what the public is willing to bear and when it has overtly high value it will correct its self.

I do not believe in funding other nations like many conservatives do. Foreign Aide should be stopped completely. If individuals want to send money to countries in need then they should be able to.

I think income tax needs to go. Tear down the IRS and have a fair tax system. I am not in favor of a flat tax system like many conservatives do.

I think the EPA, the Fed, the IRS, The National Education System, The National Labor Board, the ATF, the FCC, the DEA and the Food & Drug Administration should all be scrapped.

I think there should be a constitutional amendment limiting how long a justice can sit on the supreme court (10 years)

Thank you. I happen to hold a different view of conservative, so in these discussions it is prudent to define the terms prior to commencing the argument for the sake of clarity.

 

[daverezz]

What happens when you are little of both? I am very conservative on someissues and very Libertarian on others. Ithink that things should be left to the states (hello 10th amendment). If states want to legalize something, the Fedshould be very limited.. Lets get backto the Constitution. Let things getdecided at the local level.

 

[Cerberus]

Thank you. I happen to hold a different view of conservative, so in these discussions it is prudent to define the terms prior to commencing the argument for the sake of clarity.

Well, let's here it.

 

[Bondhead88]

What happens when you are little of both? I am very conservative on someissues and very Libertarian on others. Ithink that things should be left to the states (hello 10th amendment). If states want to legalize something, the Fedshould be very limited.. Lets get backto the Constitution. Let things getdecided at the local level.

I was kind of like that for many years. One issue is the word conservative has been muddled and distorted. There are so many varieties of those calling themselves conservatives it has become really difficult to nail it down. Then you have the famous saying' Well, I am a balanced conservative." But they all say that too.

So who is the real balanced one.

 

[Bondhead88]

Thank you. I happen to hold a different view of conservative, so in these discussions it is prudent to define the terms prior to commencing the argument for the sake of clarity.

So would you say Newt, Santorum or Bush were conservatives?

 

[88GT]

So would you say Newt, Santorum or Bush were conservatives?

No; no, but he's a fair example of the modern "neocon;" and could have been but for a guilty conscience and a misguided sense of fair play and compromise.

 

[J_Wales]

What declares the title "conservative" is often simply statism of another flavor.

You may enjoy reading Liberty and Tyranny.

 

[Bondhead88]

What declares the title "conservative" is often simply statism of another flavor.

You may enjoy reading Liberty and Tyranny.

I loved Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead

 

[rambone]

I think taking heroin, cocaine, LSD, Marijuana and all the other substances like these is silly, dangerous to your health and just plain wrong. However I do believe that as an adult that the government should control this aspect of your life you should govern this area of your life. We currently allow other drugs like nicotine and alcohol to be sold. I do not think that if drugs were legalized tomorrow that all adults would run out and get some. I think that those who do become addicts should be held legally responsible for any acts they commit and I think they should be financially responsible for their health when they use these things.

Thanks for sharing this thread. Would you mind clarifying this sentence?

You no longer believe in the prohibition of drugs and alcohol? If so, that is a major evolution of thought. Well done.

 

[Bondhead88]

Thanks for sharing this thread. Would you mind clarifying this sentence?

You no longer believe in the prohibition of drugs and alcohol? If so, that is a major evolution of thought. Well done.

Correct. I find them detestable, horrendous drugs which can and will destroy your life. But if that is what you want to do with your life then as an adult I believe you should be able to do so. But if by doing so you cause physical or financial damage to others I will not listen to "It's a sickness" argument. The person should be held legally and financially responsible. To the full extent of the law.

If you drive drunk down the road with your kids in the backseat. Say goodbye to your kids. If you kill your liver on alcohol do not ask medicare to pay for anything.

 

[rambone]

Correct. I find them detestable, horrendous drugs which can and will destroy your life. But if that is what you want to do with your life then as an adult I believe you should be able to do so. But if by doing so you cause physical or financial damage to others I will not listen to "It's a sickness" argument. The person should be held legally and financially responsible. To the full extent of the law.

If you drive drunk down the road with your kids in the backseat. Say goodbye to your kids. If you kill your liver on alcohol do not ask medicare to pay for anything.

That's great. I recall about 1 year ago when you held the opposite position; we were talking about marijuana and alcohol. I argued that a government which can ban plants, can ban anything it wants to.

Very glad to see you've come around.

 

[Bondhead88]

That's great. I recall about 1 year ago when you held the opposite position; we were talking about marijuana and alcohol. I argued that a government which can ban plants, can ban anything it wants to.

Very glad to see you've come around.

I am still not in favor of using them but I don't want to take away liberties. But understand my stance. If you kill someone while doing a non prescribed drug such as heroine, LSD or drinking and driving I believe you should face the death penalty.

When I said full extent of the law I meant it.

 

[John Galt]

I loved Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead

Me too!

 

[ViperJock]

The definition of conservative has changed from constitutionalist small federal government to what is really better named "the religious right". By my definition conservative would mean moderates interested in fiscal responsibility, minimal interference, and otherwise constitutionally supported government.

Unlike EBG, I do not think the FF intended anarchy or vigilante law. The purpose of government is two fold; 1. To protect the citizens right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 2. To defend us from foriegn powers that wish to remove our liberty by force.

Are there really any other constitutionally accepted mandates for federal government? Certainly entitlement, social security, health care, etc do not fall into their purview.

Both the right, those who would legislate their interpretation of God's will, and the left, those who actively legislate in favor of atheism misunderstand the relationship the FF intended for what has become known as "seperation of church and state.". My worship or lack thereof is nobodies business. Conservativism would say so. But the as we see in today's election, the Republicans are forced to adopt religious principles or be shunned as "not conservative.". The left is no better with their attempt to restrict which is absolutely forbidden by the constitution. True conservatives are what is left over.

I have never strongly associated myself as a republican but tend to vote that way for the lesser of two evils. I probably lean more toward libertarianism more than anything. Tea party in its true form supporting fiscal conservativism is great but it has been hi jacked by the religious right.

What we need is a "common effing sense party." We could combine fiscal responsibility with personal responsibility with mind your own business and THEN we would have something to shout about!

 

[Bondhead88]

The definition of conservative has changed from constitutionalist small federal government to what is really better named "the religious right". By my definition conservative would mean moderates interested in fiscal responsibility, minimal interference, and otherwise constitutionally supported government.

Unlike EBG, I do not think the FF intended anarchy or vigilante law. The purpose of government is two fold; 1. To protect the citizens right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 2. To defend us from foriegn powers that wish to remove our liberty by force.

Are there really any other constitutionally accepted mandates for federal government? Certainly entitlement, social security, health care, etc do not fall into their purview.

Both the right, those who would legislate their interpretation of God's will, and the left, those who actively legislate in favor of atheism misunderstand the relationship the FF intended for what has become known as "seperation of church and state.". My worship or lack thereof is nobodies business. Conservativism would say so. But the as we see in today's election, the Republicans are forced to adopt religious principles or be shunned as "not conservative.". The left is no better with their attempt to restrict which is absolutely forbidden by the constitution. True conservatives are what is left over.

I have never strongly associated myself as a republican but tend to vote that way for the lesser of two evils. I probably lean more toward libertarianism more than anything. Tea party in its true form supporting fiscal conservativism is great but it has been hi jacked by the religious right.

What we need is a "common effing sense party." We could combine fiscal responsibility with personal responsibility with mind your own business and THEN we would have something to shout about!

Personally I do not believe there is any such thing or person as a moderate. We always say we're the moderate their not and point to the right and left of us.

Moderate is a very subjective term and in modern day politics is used to try and scare someone off their personal stands. they will say "Your stand is to extreme you need to moderate it closer to the left or to the right to capture the votes you need."

I am sorry but I do not go for it when you move off your principles to gain popularity (whether it be for money, fame or power) you are not being a moderate you are compromising.

And that is exactly how the US left it's origins of a Representative Republic to some quasi-social democracy. It needs to get back to it's origins.

One thing of note. It was never freedom of religion or freedom from religion, it is freedom FOR religion. Whatever that may be. I have a very strong belief system. While I do not accept other beliefs. I respect their right to hold to them, to have them and to practice them including atheism (which is a religion) having said all that the US was founded based upon Christian values (I know it was not based as a Christian country) But to deny the founders suggested that it was based upon anything secular is either an outright display of ignorance of the facts or an outright attempt at deception.
They did want however at the same time anyone to be able to practice their own religion as they saw fit.

[ame="http://youtu.be/f8Hy306pGmU"]http://youtu.be/f8Hy306pGmU[/ame]