Yet there’s nothing unique protecting a libertarian state from degrading into a totalitarian state. They give away the game once they hand over the monopoly of force to the government. It’s the “just the tip” of government restraint.
You have to distinguish libertarians, Libertarians, libertarianism, and Libertarianism (if that last one is a thing). The Libertarian Party is not based on any particular political philosophy and simply borrows the name. Party politicians are all over the place ranging from anarchistic concepts to traditional anti-taxers to radical anti-government types, and everything in between and outside depending on what draws the crowds.
I have yet to meet any two self-designated L/libertarians who agree on more than a few very vague things. As I said above, they all tend to speak in sweeping generalizations or microscopic focus, and any attempt to connect either to a complete framework or reality provokes a nearly religious “you don’t understand” or “the libertarians I know don’t think that.”
Various stripes of Libber are endemic in the Heinlein world, and I tired of the pointless puffery decades ago. Every time I give one another chance to eddicate me, I end up in the same tired place.
Why would it be? Can you explain your chain of reasoning?
(Is the Osprey a failure? They’re still flying them out of Miramar.)
Serious question for Libertarians and Free Market enthusiasts: What’s your view on the recent price hike of EpiPen ?
(I wasn’t sure which thread to ask this question in.)
And the States, and Local jurisdictions. It’s bad everywhere used. Prisoners are treated poorly, the guards are underpaid and the work is extra hazardous. Finally, there’s a reason to try to keep people in longer, rather than rehabilitate and release.
I’m neither, but allow me to quote from something I recently wrote:
“A free market is no more a license for exploitation than the Second Amendment is a license to kill.”
with additional people comes additional taxes. So why won’t it work for 3 times as many people?
Firstly, you don’t actually think we have a free market for such pharmaceuticals in the US, do you? Your own cite notes several examples otherwise for this very product. Just to cite one:
So, right there you have the government interfering with the demand side of the curve.
Getting back to your question: A true Libertarian would tell you to get rid of the FDA, and allow people to buy medicines anywhere. As your cite indicates, this item is cheaper in other countries. Why do you think that company can charge a higher price in the US than they can in Canada?
Now, we can debate the pros and cons of having an FDA and the net benefit our society gets from its existence, but let’s not pretend that “the free market” is solely to blame for the high price of medicines in the US.
You need an additional amount of internal management. Management and support aren’t linear. You can’t just multiply the square footage of the building by three, and fit three times the number of people in it.
This is one of the classics of biology: you can’t just scale up a mouse to get an elephant. The bones break… Organizations have their own internal structural needs.
(Also, some things don’t scale up: you still only need one CEO, one VP of Finance, etc. But you need more than three times the file clerks.)
Trin already said it well, but really - you and every other small-governmenter should be able to work this out with simple tools.
One cop can’t patrol NYC no matter how much tax money you pay him. Think that through.
As I see it, the issue of private prisons is pretty much unrelated to the issue of libertarianism. First the private prisons: in general, there are things that government does better than private enterprise and things that private enterprise does better than government. A sane society assigns each their proper responsibilities.
I think operation of prisons is a proper government function. The government prison has two goals: keeping the public safe and housing the prisoners in a humane manner. Neither of these can or should be motivated by profit. The government prison doesn’t lobby the legislature to make longer sentences to improve their profitabliity. The government prison doesn’t gain when prisoners are released without the proper training to avoid a quick return to prison. The private prison has one motive: make money for their shareholders. If cutting staff adds profitablity, they’ll do it despite the increased security risk. If skimping on the quality of the food adds profitability, they’ll do it even if it means unrest inside. With the government prison you pay for the site, the buildings, the staff, and prisoner needs. With the private prison you pay for all that PLUS a healthy profit for the shareholders. If the private prison is competetive with the government-run prison, either something is funny with the numbers, they’re lowballing with the intent to file claims later, or they’re playing with fire by cutting too many corners.
Like any public agency, they submit budget requests based on anticipated costs. Could they set up a tight contract for a private entity? Perhaps. But you better believe the investors would be getting lots of help from their lobbyists to get favorable terms.
Politics would get into it no matter who runs it. A private prison would be just as hindered by zoning requirements, NIMBY types, and political influence as a public prison.
As for libertarianism, it seems to have a following here far exceeding its share of the public at large. It might be good for fodder for late night dorm bull sessions in your freshman year, but sophomores should have outgrown any curiosity about it.
The difference with liberarianism is that no society in the history of the planet has found it worthy of trying it as a model for government.
Often cited but never justified. You’re asssuming something that doesn’t exist: a fair marketplace for wages. If say Walmart were unconstrained by the minimum wage, they’d offer wages far below what a person could live on, knowing full well there’s enough people desperate enough to find a job. This whole libertarian argument is based on labor and management being on equal footing- that is far from the case.
That is true. And it’s the reason the OP does not have a coherent argument.
He does to the extent that Private Prisons are a horrible fucking idea.
Now the fact that some Libs would privatize* everything* and others not does make that Libertarian part of it only half true.
Perhaps the guiding principle should be: Don’t contract out something when the government is the only customer for that thing. There are no private entities that need prisons, but there are plenty of private entities that need:
- janitorial services
- food services
- uniform cleaning services
- facilities maintenance
- Accounting and/or Data storage
etc.
Or, it needs to be a “money is no object” thing like is often the case with weapons systems. The government doesn’t build its own fighter jets, but I don think we just contact that out to the lowest bidder.