# I Pit Libertarians who don't even know the implications of their "philosophy" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 28, 2011, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533 "2011-05-28T06:06:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![randomface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/5fc32e/32.png) [@randomface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/randomface)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/121 "2011-06-01T13:34:52Z")
I’m saying that both of the matters are the same. The fact that there is regulation, but that it is ineffective partially through corruption is part of the same apparatus that keeps politically connected organizations afloat when they should have failed. To let them collapse would have shocked our economy, but to prop them back up should make it evident that the banking industry is no form of free market. For banking, the only regulations I would like to see strengthened would be those that bring transparency so that consumers can make informed decisions. ---
**Author:** ![Implicit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Implicit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Implicit)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/122 "2011-06-01T14:49:41Z")
> [@randomface](#): > > I’m saying that you can’t point to the crisis as a failure of a free market if everything about the crisis has the fingerprints of government intervention, including a reward of the bad actors by the government afterward. Sure you can. Two wrongs don’t make a right (except if you are a far right L_ie_bertarian) and you change the system to prevent that first wrong. > [@randomface](#): > > I’m saying that both of the matters are the same. The fact that there is regulation, but that it is ineffective partially through corruption is part of the same apparatus that keeps politically connected organizations afloat when they should have failed. To let them collapse would have shocked our economy, but to prop them back up should make it evident that the banking industry is no form of free market. > > For banking, the only regulations I would like to see strengthened would be those that bring transparency so that consumers can make informed decisions. Are you aware that in neighbouring Canada there were much stronger regulations on banks and no subprime lending crisis? It’s not rocket science. [Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland](http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/commentary/2009/0909.cfm) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/123 "2011-06-01T15:43:08Z")
> [@randomface](#): > > I’m saying that you can’t point to the crisis as a failure of a free market if everything about the crisis has the fingerprints of government intervention, including a reward of the bad actors by the government afterward. Sure you can. The economic crisis happened after government oversight was reduced. The problem was a reduction in government regulation and you can’t fix that by reducing government regulation further. Libertarians have one-track minds - they blame everything bad on the government. So if the government is reduced and problems occur, they figure the solution is to further reduce the government. If the problems grow larger, their solution is to shrink the government more. If the problems keep getting bigger, their solution is calls to keep making the government smaller. I’m not claiming the government is the solution to every problem. But I’m also not claiming the free market is the solution to every problem. But I do try to be pragmatic - if we try something and it isn’t working, that’s usually a sign we should try something else. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/124 "2011-06-01T16:02:21Z")
Booming economy? Tax cuts! Tanking economy? Tax cuts! Headaches, neuritis, neuralgia? Tax cuts! Chewing gum in class? Tax cuts! No, wait, that’s a paddling… ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/125 "2011-06-01T16:54:15Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Libertarians have one-track minds - they blame everything bad on the government. So if the government is reduced and problems occur, they figure the solution is to further reduce the government. If the problems grow larger, their solution is to shrink the government more. If the problems keep getting bigger, their solution is calls to keep making the government smaller. It’s even more insidious than this. Exaggerating slightly, we can say America has two major political parties: [ul][li] A right-wing party which allows government regulation to weaken – its symbol is the Donkey.[/li][li] A collection of imbeciles and lunatics whose answer to everything is “Cut Taxes; Go to War; Persecute Homosexuals.”[/li][/ul] In an Orwellian “Ignorance is Truth” twist the imbecunatics label the right-wingers as Socialists and thus conflate too little government with too much. (I apologize to any actual lunatics reading this thread for comparing you to Republicans.) ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/126 "2011-06-01T17:15:36Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > In one of the libertarian threads I made a rather long post about what it would take to safely order a sandwich in a libertarian country. (No food inspectors, that sort of thing.) I don’t recall much of a response to that one, either. Look man, once enough corpses stack up outside of the Quizon’s on Highway 80 the free market will see to it that people stop coming back there. Pussy. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/127 "2011-06-01T17:19:31Z")
> [@Merijeek](#): > > Look man, once enough corpses stack up outside of the Quizon’s on Highway 80 the free market will see to it that people stop coming back there. > > Pussy. > > -Joe That Quizno’s is very good about moving the bodies to the back and covering them with lime. You’ll be stuck with it. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/128 "2011-06-01T17:23:33Z")
> [@D\_Odds](#): > > That Quizno’s is very good about moving the bodies to the back and covering them with lime. You’ll be stuck with it. Yes, but the lime and labor necessary to do this lowers their profit margin, so they will be out competed by other restaurants in the area. The invisible hand provides. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/129 "2011-06-01T17:58:12Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Booming economy? Tax cuts! Tanking economy? Tax cuts! Headaches, neuritis, neuralgia? Tax cuts! Chewing gum in class? Tax cuts! No, wait, that’s a paddling… Paddling the school canoe? You better believe that’s a tax cut. ---
**Author:** ![randomface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/5fc32e/32.png) [@randomface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/randomface)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/130 "2011-06-01T18:02:43Z")
Enjoy the company of this field of strawmen. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/131 "2011-06-01T18:16:48Z")
> [@randomface](#): > > Enjoy the company of this field of strawmen. It seems appropriate, since most Libertarians have heads full of it. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/132 "2011-06-01T18:19:22Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Yes, but the lime and labor necessary to do this lowers their profit margin, so they will be out competed by other restaurants in the area. > > The invisible hand provides. They cut costs by recycling the meat. No inspectors, ya,know. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/133 "2011-06-01T18:22:03Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > The banking industry collapsed because people were stupid about their investments, and those are the same people that get sick. They put trust into things that should never have been trusted, they couldn’t be bothered to fact check or do a simple credit check or verify income. Victim-blaming. > [@D\_Odds](#): > > The idea that no one would get food poisoning highlights the blind faith libertarians have in a unregulated free market. > There is nothing wrong with putting some more onus on people to be responsible for their choices. Libertarian ideology just takes that much too far. I’m all for less government intervention; I’m not for almost no government intervention. Piffle. I already live in a society where the police go after those who look different, where doors are slammed in faces as politely but firmly as possible. I’m for more regulation, always. I can cope with authoritarianism, I grew up fundie. But the best answer is to let people do things, while teaching them how, & making sure they don’t screw it up. That’s not easy, & it requires cooperation instead of competition. But civilization depends on it. Arguments about “freedom” meaning unregulated chaos, & “security” meaning lack of opportunity miss the point. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/134 "2011-06-01T18:58:29Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Anyone that “lost money” in the crash should have known that was part of the risk of investing. From top to bottom the whole system was a mess of people that couldn’t be bothered reading the fine print. The rating agencies should not have been trusted to the point they were, which makes me wonder why they are _still_ trusted, can anyone answer that? Mortgage lenders should have checked their clients, and the clients should have checked their banks. Meanwhile investors were LOVING the returns. How many people independently said, “no, the market is up too high, I really should be in something safer.” Hell no, people LOVED seeing their portfolio climb. They loved that their house value tripled in a couple of years. Those people could have willingly sold it for less, why didn’t they? Hooray! It’s like my earlier post came to life and started posting: > [@Giraffe](#): > > Not just react – you also have to find reasons why whatever situation occurred was the person’s fault in the first place. Didn’t take a second job to pay for supplemental private health insurance after your employer cut your medical plan to the bone? Then you can’t complain when you lose your house after your kid is diagnosed with cancer, now can you? If you didn’t want to lose your house, you should have bought more insurance. Oh, you did have extra coverage, but the insurance company refusing to pay out? Well, if you had read page 478 of the contract, you’d see that this particular type of cancer isn’t covered. You can’t expect a business to cover something that you didn’t pay them to cover, now can you? They’re not a charity. > > As long as there is something someone _could_ have done in the past to prevent their unfortunate present situation, no matter how esoteric, it’s their fault that they’re now screwed, not anyone else’s. Thanks for the demonstration, **emacknight**. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/135 "2011-06-01T19:39:31Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > That’s the straw man people keep telling you about. Libertarians don’t say there won’t be food poisoning. What they say is that there currently is food poisoning, even though a lot of money id being thrown at the problem. Solution? More money. After that, more money. It always comes back to money, doesn’t it? OK, smart guy, consider this. The regulatory state is corruptible; so are independent accrediting agencies. But a functional regulatory state might be better for your bottom line, as it 1) pools everybody’s research budget into one complex of agencies whose regulations have teeth; 2) has the power to completely shut down the worst performers, thus saving the money consumers waste on them; & 3) most counterintuitively: by being able to coerce funding through taxes, it is able to pay middle-income salaries to its agents, allowing them 3a) to work full-time and gain expertise, thus improving the efficacy of the work, and 3b) to make decent salaries for their time invested, thus increasing the number of citizens with disposable income. Add up all these effects, and you may end up well in the black. > [@](#): > > Exactly, which is why it is not about _no_ government intervention, it’s about minimal. It’s about starting with personal responsibility and working from there, instead of starting with the assumption the government can save us–if only it had more money. It is entirely possible that certain regulation can make people more free. I’d say it’s a fucking certainty. Insecurity is NOT freedom. > [@randomface](#): > > I’m saying that you can’t point to the crisis as a failure of a free market if everything about the crisis has the fingerprints of government intervention, including a reward of the bad actors by the government afterward. Well, it may be the failure of an under-regulated, wrongly-regulated, or simply badly-regulated market. In any case, materially good outcomes are not the same thing as greater “market freedom”/“negative liberty”. > [@randomface](#): > > For banking, the only regulations I would like to see strengthened would be those that bring transparency so that consumers can make informed decisions. And if they lack the accounting expertise to tell the difference between options, what then? I suppose even mathphobes often have someone to turn to from whom they may take advice, but government can go beyond an advisory role to actually shutting down the bad actors–if regulatory agencies are given that power. Why should we leave a bad actor–a swindler or not-quite-swindler–in business, and instead denounce & downsize the public servant who would stop the swindle? See why the left think the right is _criminal?_ > [@septimus](#): > > (I apologize to any actual lunatics reading this thread for comparing you to Republicans.) Sing three bars of “Sister Moon,” draw some funky Wonder Woman bracelets on the icon of your choice, & we’re good. 😉 Go in peace my son. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/136 "2011-06-01T19:51:13Z")
So… The libertarian in the thread is telling us that we’re fools to trust government testing of water. Instead, a better system would be to: 1. Get our water from a private supplier 1a. Find out that private supplier’s ratings from an ‘impartial’ third party, which won’t do it for free, so is either being paid by me or by said water supplier 1b. Find out whether we the impartial third party is trustworthy. Presumably by seeking assistance from a fourth party. 1c. Goto 1a. Assuming we’ve broken free of that loop we are supposed to “take responsibility for ourselves” by then buying water filters and water testing kits. Of course, we can’t trust the water filters or water testing kits. Doing so wouldn’t be taking responsibility for ourselves. So, that means we need to: 1. Research our water filter manufacturer 2a. Find out our water filter manufacturer’s ratings from an ‘impartial’ third party, which won’t do it for free, so is either being paid by me or by said water supplier 2b. Find out whether we the impartial third party is trustworthy. Presumably by seeking assistance from a fourth party. 2c. Goto 2a. And then we get to do it again for our water testing kit! All for a glass of water. Brilliant philosophy. Really. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/137 "2011-06-01T20:03:00Z")
Well, I know people who feel like they need to do that anyway. They think their government sucks, & is untrustworthy, & is just defrauding them. And sometimes these accusations are true. But that doesn’t mean that people _in government_ should give up on responsible regulation, not that\* legislators\* should undermine its capacity, nor that _I as a voter_ should vote for anti-regulation politicians that make government less helpful. I’m such an anarchist I went all the way through and around to progressivism: Government will always be a coercive racket. May as well make them do something useful. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/138 "2011-06-01T21:14:59Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > What I am saying is that the market has built-in mechanisms to keep restaurants from killing their customers. If I open a restaurant, I’ve invested a lot of time and money into growing my business. Why would I want to do something like feed my customers maggot-infested meat to save a few bucks when the downside is their deaths, bad publicity, loss of customers, and a possible huge lawsuit? I want you to look into your libertarian crystal ball and stop me from doing the following: I’m rich. I want to kill people cause I’m a bastard. I open up a restaurant (or, to make it easier, I work at restaurant). I taint the food, not with deliberate poison which would be criminal, but simply lax safety and health regulations. I serve people spoiled food, don’t clean up, and store ingredients in dirty places. People die. By your market mechanism, I’m found out and people stop coming to the restaurant. But then what? The people I’ve injured are still injured, some of them are dead. If I have money, I can simply open up another restaurant or get another job somewhere else where they don’t know me. You’ve essentially given me a free pass to kill people through negligence And no, you cannot sue me or have me arrested. You said it was silly to assume there was no police or tort system to punish people, but you forget one thing: in order for someone to be arrested, you have prove they broke a law. Since you’re against regulations, what law am I breaking if I serve people bad food? If they get sick, it’s their own fault! The same problem appears when you want to sue me. What law have I broken? What are you suing me for? I can just as easily say you chose to eat in my restaurant, so its your fault. See, without actual laws and regulations, people cannot be compensated for damage. You can’t sue someone if they broke no law ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/139 "2011-06-01T21:29:50Z")
Don’t you see…everyone will know you are a bad restauranteur, and no one will visit your new ventures. And those that do deserve it because they didn’t do basic research. Caveat emptor. Libertarian society is great for those who feel the Earth is too populated and are wholely amoral. Personally, I’m not wholly amoral…yet. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533/140 "2011-06-01T21:44:40Z")
But if I feel the earth is too populated and am wholly amoral, why would I not actively purge much of mankind? Libertarians are too focused on individual rights to effectively cull the population in a consciously directed fashion, I’m afraid. Also they’re against environmental regulation, which means they work against the quality of life for those of us who would survive a purge. _Immoral_ might be a better word, except that these people are driven by morality. It’s just a morality without eye to consequence. Sort of like Lawful Neutral that thinks it’s Chaotic Good. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-libertarians-who-dont-even-know-the-implications-of-their-philosophy/583533.md?page=8)