But if you really wanted to achieve greatness....Yes, that would go a long way toward cementing your villainy.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why Aren't you a Libertarian?
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
Libertarians believe that cooperation is a natural state for humans. They would prefer to encourage individuals to work out disputes among themselves, however they recognize the need for a legal framework to settle some disputes which cannot otherwise be resolved.
Color me confused.
From post #145:
"People do that naturally..." darken my confusion...
I distrust people in general.
It's why we must be careful in granting them power in government.
Some earn my trust.
Some don't.
But I still manage to cooperate with most of them.
But if you really wanted to achieve greatness....
I remember as a kid, maybe around 11yo. I had a friend who had a business taking care of lawns. He had a client he called the 50 cent Lady. This was because they worked out a deal between to to take care of her lawn for 50 cents. Looking back this ability to negotiate at an early age seems good experience.
The ability to negotiate a wage that both parties feel is fair seems lost. People go into a job accepting the pay that is offered them. Then wait for the employer to decide when it's time to give them a raise. Again we feel the necessity of government control over our earnings basically destroying a much needed skill for the individual to get ahead.
"We need the government to force the our employer to pay us more since we are incapable of negotiating a fair wage for ourselves."
So you get minimum wage and I suppose you'll be stuck at that until the government decides it's time for another minimum wage increase. No way to get out of poverty relying on a minimum wage.
You're a better advocate for Libertarians than I am.
Curious George
Veteran Member
Except i have heard libertarians arguing for deregulation of finance, deregulation of department of ed, deregulation of OSHA, deregulatipn of environmental protection etc.
And the best you have is that maybe a california law should be reviewed. I think you have fundamentally misunderstood libertarians. All parties are for ridding the books of regulation that is detrimental.
I know big brother is a scary word to toss into the mix, but people have more control over government than they do on individuals. We through government can create and administer programs that benefit all of us. Wjy would you be against programs for the common good?
Trust is developed through cooperation. One shouldn't initially trust people you don't know. That's kind of foolish. Doesn't mean you can't cooperate. Through an effort to cooperate you usually find out who you can and cannot trust.
We have a common goal, we make a mutually beneficial deal, you hold up your end, I hold up mine. Trust develops naturally.
If you don't hold up your end of the deal the increase of distrust is also natural. You now find it harder and harder to make mutually beneficial deals since there will be other folks who can be found to be trustworthy. One of the main principles of libertarianism. The individual is accountable for the choices they make.
It wasn't my intent but these are good questions being asked. I'm learning a lot from seeing other people's perspective of libertarianism.
Maybe for humans in their natural state, living in hunting gathering bands of ten or twenty. In a modern society of thousands of strangers -- not so much.
As Revoltingest said: I don't trust people.
That could be the reason why.
Forests need fires, they're part of a natural cycle. Fire doesn't kill them, it rejuvenates them. Some plants can't even reproduce without fire.
Maybe for humans in their natural state, living in hunting gathering bands of ten or twenty. In a modern society of thousands of strangers -- not so much.
As Revoltingest said: I don't trust people.
Yet still here we are. We've managed to build a society despite a lack of trust. I look at the cooperation on the roads for example. Yes I realize it's not perfect but for the most part the majority of folks manage to get to work on time. We did this. We developed a system of cooperation that is mutually beneficial to all parties involved. Whereas I really have no reason to trust any individual behind the wheel of another car, yet it is mutually beneficial that we both get to where we want to go with as little difficulty as possible. I don't interfere with your goals, you don't interfere with mine.
When there are a hundred impoverished applicants willing to work at half what you're asking, where's your bargaining power?
AS I said each argument for or against a regulation should be done on its individual merits. I don't know enough about the specific regulations involved to make a argument either way.
If all parties are for ridding the books of detrimental regulations, then libertarians are no different in this case.
I disagree. I don't believe we have a lot of control over our Government. The government becomes its own monopoly. It has advertising agencies, it has lobbyists, it holds the purse strings for a lot of controlling interests. The government has been is the business of manipulating public opinion for many years. It gerrymandered political boundaries in many states so the powerful remain powerful.
Not to mention the government is made up of "individuals" That most people don't really know, have no real reason to trust anymore than anybody else and occasionally get to vote for based on a few sound bites. Generally enough money can buy elections. Most people aren't dealing with an individual politician to represent them, they are dealing with a PR firm.
There's hundreds of applicants willing to work at half wages because the idea of wage negotiations has been lost. The fact that this is true I find a bit sad. The product of non-libertarian economic views.
Yes I know there are companies that would go for the cheap labor but the reality is you get what you pay for. Companies who pay their employees well do well. They keep experience employees who can do the work with a level of quality that is mutually beneficial for society at large.
Those that don't, don't do well. They are forced to further cut conners. Cut labor costs further. Expect more work for less pay. Hire the minimum wage earner and demand more work out of them to keep their job cause there are plenty of more folks out there they can pay a minimum wage to to take their place.
I'd add that around here, no one works at min wage.
They earn much more because of competition.
So do the blue collar workers doing janitorial service or working warehousing or farming or food services also make more than minimum wage due to competition? Or are you only talking about people in jobs where proposing wage negotiations won't get you laughed in the face and shown the door?
Yes.
That's a load of bull.
Specifically, Detroit has the highest paid wages for janitorial services in Michigan due to unionization and a labor strike. Not competition. That wage is 15 an hour, which is minimum wage around here and will probably be for most of the nation in the not too distant future. Their average pay outside the city is around $10 best, which is fifty cents over minimum wage.