Jump to content

Are You Libertarians Upset By Trump's Meddling In...


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Jesus Chris dude just post Equal Opportunity Not Equal Outcomes and be done with it.

I've been busy, and this cartoon has been bugging the hell out of me, so I dumped it here.

 

He asked for views/consistency. That has to be explained, especially when they are trying to skirt "equal opportunity not equal outcomes" with the equity bastardization of libertarian beliefs.

 

EDIT: And besides: have you entertained the idea...that he actually doesn't know what we believe, at all? I am done with assuming any leftist comes prepared for the meeting.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been busy, and this cartoon has been bugging the hell out of me, so I dumped it here.

 

He asked for views/consistency. That has to be explained, especially when they are trying to skirt "equal opportunity not equal outcomes" with the equity bastardization of libertarian beliefs.

 

EDIT: And besides: have you entertained the idea...that he actually doesn't know what we believe, at all? I am done with assuming any leftist comes prepared for the meeting.

 

Is Donald a stateist?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Donald a stateist?

Spelling is good way to prove you're not an idiot, especially when browsers come with spell-checkers now. It's Statist.

 

How about this: When Trump does things like gut the EPA of every last climate change clown(he already asked for a list of names, those names are scared, and they should be), then orders the removal of 60-80% of the EPAs regs in 6 months, then cuts its budget to 20% of what it is today, then orders the EPA to focus solely on its original mandate(Clean Air and Clean Water), then orders that every new rule it wants to enforce be reviewed by congress and be in alignment with its ordered mandate, then backed up by legislation, and finally, asks congress to turn his orders into law....you'll know what the opposite of a statist is.

 

This achieves three things statists hate:

1. It enforces separation of powers. Congress makes laws, executive branch enforces the law. (The notion that Trump is going to be Obama-right is hilariously wrong. He's not that stupid. No, he will make Congress vote on everything, so, if things go bad, he's not holding the bag by himself. Trump won't allow that to happen.)

2. It undermines regulation as a way to create law without the consent of the governed.

3. It destroys the excuse that huge bureaucracies need massive budgets just to function. No they don't. They need huge budgets to continuously grow, and operate outside their scope of mandated power.

 

I guarantee you,when the above destruction of the EPA's overreaching fiat-driven bad actors occurs, Carrier won't be on your mind. No, you'll be talking about how Trump added to unemployment :rolleyes: and, how terrible it is for the local DC economy(as if...double :rolleyes:).

 

Don't worry: you'll be hearing the screams and wails of the actual statists(EDIT: both R and D) so often, and to such a degree, that you won't even be able to hear yourself ask "Is Trump a Statist"?.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Spelling is good way to prove you're not an idiot, especially when browsers come with spell-checkers now. It's Statist.

 

How about this: When Trump does things like gut the EPA of every last climate change clown(he already asked for a list of names, those names are scared, and they should be), then orders the removal of 60-80% of the EPAs regs in 6 months, then cuts its budget to 20% of what it is today, then orders the EPA to focus solely on its original mandate(Clean Air and Clean Water), then orders that every new rule it wants to enforce be reviewed by congress and be in alignment with its ordered mandate, then backed up by legislation, and finally, asks congress to turn his orders into law....you'll know what the opposite of a statist is.

 

This achieves three things statists hate:

1. It enforces separation of powers. Congress makes laws, executive branch enforces the law. (The notion that Trump is going to be Obama-right is hilariously wrong. He's not that stupid. No, he will make Congress vote on everything, so, if things go bad, he's not holding the bag by himself. Trump won't allow that to happen.)

2. It undermines regulation as a way to create law without the consent of the governed.

3. It destroys the excuse that huge bureaucracies need massive budgets just to function. No they don't. They need huge budgets to continuously grow, and operate outside their scope of mandated power.

 

I guarantee you,when the above destruction of the EPA's overreaching fiat-driven bad actors occurs, Carrier won't be on your mind. No, you'll be talking about how Trump added to unemployment :rolleyes: and, how terrible it is for the local DC economy(as if...double :rolleyes:).

 

Don't worry: you'll be hearing the screams and wails of the actual statists(EDIT: both R and D) so often, and to such a degree, that you won't even be able to hear yourself ask "Is Trump a Statist"?.

He is still threatening businesses to do his political actions. I'm really surprised--not really--that all these Libertarians are not more concerned with this blatant use of state power to bully business. Maybe Libertarians are just a bunch of Republican cheerleaders acting like serious critics, which they are not.

 

This is just more proof Libertarians are a bunch of total phonies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is still threatening businesses to do his political actions. I'm really surprised--not really--that all these Libertarians are not more concerned with this blatant use of state power to bully business. Maybe Libertarians are just a bunch of Republican cheerleaders acting like serious critics, which they are not.

 

This is just more proof Libertarians are a bunch of total phonies

Mark Levin was on air last night complaining about Trumps tactics with Ford, GM and others. He is a fairly loud voice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a libertarian, we hold equity above all else. This concept has been bastardized by the left as follows:

 

IISC_EqualityEquity.png

 

This is blatant bastardization. Here is the actual libertarian view: IF the short dude did something legal to earn his 2 boxes, or the middle guy his one, Then, the government has no right to withhold them, using equality or fairness as an excuse. Also, the tall dude doesn't have to pay for any boxes, just because he is tall.

 

The lie here is that boxes just materialize out of thin air. No. Somebody has to manufacture them, somebody has to transport them, and somebody has to store and sell them. This costs $. Somebody has to part with their $ for somebody to get boxes from the government, for free.

 

Forcing the tall dude to pay for any box in this scenario? That is by definition inequitable. Also, the law is based on equity, not on morality. Above is a bastardization of that concept as well. Has the tall guy done anything to deserve having to pay for the boxes? Is he responsible for the shortness of the other 2. No? Then he is not liable to pay for boxes. It may be moral for him to bring boxes along to help out his friends, but he is not required to do it. Conversely, it may be immoral for him to pay for boxes, because that makes the short guys dependent on him, rather than finding a way to get boxes.

 

Now consider: the Tall guy in this case is Carrier/US technologies corporate. The ballgame is the American marketplace. What are they doing? The Carrier workers pay for their boxes via their labor, but, they also have a need to see the ballgame(maintain an American standard of living). Carrier thinks it would be cheaper for them to move to a place where people don't need/care to see ballgame, or don't need boxes to see them. They are wrong.

 

They are wrong because: Carrier doesn't want the ballgames to cease. They still want to go see them.

 

The ballgame is going to be there whether the workers are or not right? Wrong. When you remove workers from the market, you hurt the market. Do it enough and there is no ballgame, because nobody can afford to go. Short term layoff gains are exactly that. If every company moves offshore, there is no ballgame. Besides, have the workers done anything to the tall guy that justifies his removing the way that the workers pay for their boxes? No. Removing the boxes is therefore, inequitable.

 

Ultimately, the deal that was struck said: we will keep the middle guy's way to pay for his boxes, but, we can't keep the short guys way, because his way of paying for boxes costs us too much.

 

That is a compromise. Libertarians are fine with compromise, provided it is equitable. Carrier has no liability to maintain the short guy's way of paying for boxes, largely because he needs two of them. Meanwhile the guy that only gets one box shouldn't be screwed by the guy that needs two. If one box is the market price for gaining access to the market, but, the short guy needs two? Then it's on the short guy, and nobody else, to provide the extra box. There are lots of way to find that extra box. The government is merely the easiest.

 

Life is about equity. Not morality. When we pretend that false "morality" justifies inequity, we get into all sorts of problems. Charity is about grace, not about retribution or compulsion. Charity is morality. IF one wants to be moral, they should be charitable. Charity means giving of oneself. Charity does not mean not taking from others, then deciding whom to give the spoils, demanding their loyalty for the gifts, and calling oneself "morally superior" for doing so.

 

They are equally stealing from the ball park owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spelling is good way to prove you're not an idiot, especially when browsers come with spell-checkers now. It's Statist.

 

How about this: When Trump does things like gut the EPA of every last climate change clown(he already asked for a list of names, those names are scared, and they should be), then orders the removal of 60-80% of the EPAs regs in 6 months, then cuts its budget to 20% of what it is today, then orders the EPA to focus solely on its original mandate(Clean Air and Clean Water), then orders that every new rule it wants to enforce be reviewed by congress and be in alignment with its ordered mandate, then backed up by legislation, and finally, asks congress to turn his orders into law....you'll know what the opposite of a statist is.

 

This achieves three things statists hate:

1. It enforces separation of powers. Congress makes laws, executive branch enforces the law. (The notion that Trump is going to be Obama-right is hilariously wrong. He's not that stupid. No, he will make Congress vote on everything, so, if things go bad, he's not holding the bag by himself. Trump won't allow that to happen.)

2. It undermines regulation as a way to create law without the consent of the governed.

3. It destroys the excuse that huge bureaucracies need massive budgets just to function. No they don't. They need huge budgets to continuously grow, and operate outside their scope of mandated power.

 

I guarantee you,when the above destruction of the EPA's overreaching fiat-driven bad actors occurs, Carrier won't be on your mind. No, you'll be talking about how Trump added to unemployment :rolleyes: and, how terrible it is for the local DC economy(as if...double :rolleyes:).

 

Don't worry: you'll be hearing the screams and wails of the actual statists(EDIT: both R and D) so often, and to such a degree, that you won't even be able to hear yourself ask "Is Trump a Statist"?.

 

One of the problems with nit-picking spelling errors is that inevitably one makes a near-similar mistake, e.g., not always capitalizing Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Levin was on air last night complaining about Trumps tactics with Ford, GM and others. He is a fairly loud voice.

Good to see one then! The last eight years the interweb has been full of these people but they seem to have disappeared now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
USA TODAY - an hour ago
General Motors said today it will invest an additional $1 billion at several plants in the U.S., a move that comes just a week after President-elect Donald Trump's latest tweet critical of the automaker's Mexican car production.
Fortune - 2 hours ago
The number of jobs is a drop in the bucket for the nation's largest private employer - Walmart has 1.4 million U.S. employees - but comes as many companies fear being lashed by Trump.

 

 

Big brother might be a winning strategy! All president will use this from now on I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Where does is say that Amazon and Walmart made those decisions to add jobs based on anything Trump has said or done?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it were due to an anticipation of an easier regulatory environment, not limited to repealing the ACA.

 

Don't know how that's bullying, either...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...