# Rand Paul's interview on Rachel Maddow - A real Libertarian meets the real world **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 20, 2010, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157 "2010-05-20T18:07:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/381 "2010-05-23T18:53:46Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t see why a single union needs to have a monopoly. Why couldn’t there be multiple unions negotiating for “market share” within the corporate world the same way corporations fight for market share among consumers. The reason we have “corporations fight for market share” is that we enforce laws against monopolies. Unions have a much stronger position if they band together or “collude” than if they operate independently. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/382 "2010-05-23T18:56:49Z")
Why do Rand Paul and his father run on the republican ticket? The Republican platform is in conflict with many Libertarian beliefs. Shouldn’t they be running as Libertarian and allowing society and the free market select the best option? ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/383 "2010-05-23T18:57:27Z")
It’s ironic that we are having this discussion over the internet which was developed under Govt contract, based on transistors developed at the research center of a regulated monopoly, using PCs (some of us anyway) that have their OS and hardware available separately because of a govt injunction against IBM. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/384 "2010-05-23T18:58:27Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Why do Rand Paul and his father run on the republican ticket? The Republican platform is in conflict with many Libertarian beliefs. Shouldn’t they be running as Libertarian and allowing society and the free market select the best option? Because the Republican party is home to people that rue the civil rights act. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/385 "2010-05-23T18:59:44Z")
Been watching the arguments in this thread and it’s amazing and truly comical how the magical thinking of the Libertarians parallels the magical thinking of Communism. “If we say the world is going to act _this way_, then it WILL! (Despite thousands of years of historical citations that Human Nature does not work that way)” Communists, Anarchist, Libertarians. Ignoring Human Nature to bring you a better world. ---
**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:** [May 23, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/386 "2010-05-23T19:12:36Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > It’s ironic that we are having this discussion over the internet which was developed under Govt contract, based on transistors developed at the research center of a regulated monopoly, using PCs (some of us anyway) that have their OS and hardware available separately because of a govt injunction against IBM. And on a moderated message board, no less. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/387 "2010-05-23T19:16:12Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > And, in practice, it doesn’t work that way with government officials, either… Paul Krugman [puts it succinctly](http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/why-does-regulation-work/): > [@](#): > > I pointed out that the libertarian alternative to regulation — just use tort law to make people pay for the damage they cause — doesn’t work in practice, because when push comes to shove politicians will shield the rich and powerful from paying the real cost. Commenters say, but isn’t that an equally strong reason to believe that regulation won’t work either? > > Well, here’s the thing: regulation demonstrably does work where tort law doesn’t…But one thing we tend to forget in this age of Reagan is the importance and virtues of a dedicated bureaucracy: when you have professional government agencies with a job to do, and treat them with respect, that job often gets done. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/388 "2010-05-23T23:25:56Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > And if they refused to do so, as was common in the south during Jim Crow, would you send in Federal troops? What authority would you use if no Federal laws were being broken? You’re arguing from an assumption which has not been agreed on. The assumption “Libertarian government would be less likely to intervene against physical violence than the 1960s Federal government was” is simply not correct. Every argument you make while assuming such is flawed. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/389 "2010-05-23T23:32:20Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > Why do you think whoever made the best sandwiches at the best price would make the most money? I’m supplying a poorer clientele, plus some fragments of a richer clientele. (You’re not going to argue that, I hope?) while the more exclusive store is supplying a richer clientele. That might be how it would work. I see it as “the more exclusive store supplies some fragments of a richer clientele,” but I could be wrong. Whether I’m right or wrong, a Libertarian would argue that it’s not the government’s place to decide which of those two sandwich shops are worthy of staying in business. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2010, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/390 "2010-05-23T23:51:33Z")
> [@Mosier](#): > > You’re arguing from an assumption which has not been agreed on. The assumption “Libertarian government would be less likely to intervene against physical violence than the 1960s Federal government was” is simply not correct. Every argument you make while assuming such is flawed. By what authority would the Federal govt intervene? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/391 "2010-05-24T02:20:22Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Why do Rand Paul and his father run on the republican ticket? The Republican platform is in conflict with many Libertarian beliefs. Shouldn’t they be running as Libertarian and allowing society and the free market select the best option? From [_The Nation:_](http://www.thenation.com/blog/what-happens-when-serious-libertarian-gets-serious-attention) > [@](#): > > So the libertarian movement has always remained small. There really are true believers in the ideology, and the Pauls (father and son) come pretty close – so close, in fact, that the father left the GOP in 1988 to seek the presidency as the nominee of the Libertarian Party. Ron’s message that year was as critical of Republicans as it was of Democrats, with the formerly Republican congressman declaring that: “Big government is running away with our freedom and our money, and the Republicans are just as much to blame as the Democrats.” Of GOP icon Ronald Reagan, the elder Paul said: “Ronald Reagan has given us a deficit ten times greater than what we had with the Democrats. It didn’t take more than a month after 1981, to realize there would be no changes.” > > Ron Paul was right, as he was when he told a convention of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws that the war on drugs was a failure. And who could argue with the Libertarian Party platform proposal to included the removal of all U.S. nuclear weapons from Europe. But Paul’s preaching about the need to return to the Gold Standard got a bit arcane. And Rand Paul got arcane with his dad; serving as the elder Paul’s chief campaign aide and frequent spokesperson and representative. > > The campaign did not go very far, however. Ron Paul won only 431,750 votes – for a little less than 0.47 percent of the vote. (In Sarah Palin’s Alaska, the Libertarians took over 2 percent that year, but that was the high-water mark.) > > The disappointing 1988 result was about as good as its gotten for Libertarians in the past quarter century. And the Pauls recognized pretty quickly that, if they wanted to actually win elections, they would probably have to do so as Republicans. > > Ron Paul scrambled back into the GOP fold quickly, supporting Pat Buchanan’s Republican presidential bid in 1992 and getting reelected to Congress – over the objections of the party leadership – in 1996. > > In Congress, Ron Paul has served as a caucus of one, regularly casting solo votes against legislation that the rest of the House backs. He’s not always alone. But he is frequently at odds with the Republican caucus and sometimes more in synch with the most left-wing Democrats than with the most right-wing Republicans – but only sometimes. > > Rand Paul has made a point in this campaign year of suggesting that he differs with his dad on some key issues; but the fact is that the younger Paul’s Senate run was managed and funded by many backers of the father. They are dedicated, true-believer libertarians who have accepted, as the Paul’s have, that there is more room to maneuver in the Republican Party than on the third-party fringe. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/392 "2010-05-24T02:32:59Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Quick question for you libertarian folks. > > Boss threatens to fire all his female employees if they don’t have sex with him, as is normal some of his employees can’t afford to lose their jobs. > > Should the government intervene? His best workers (female and male) will quit, and either start their own company or work for a competitor. The ho’s that remain will likely not keep him in business. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/393 "2010-05-24T02:50:44Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > His best workers (female and male) will quit, and either start their own company or work for a competitor. The ho’s that remain will likely not keep him in business. Maybe in the long run that will work. But what if the employee is a 23 year old single mom living paycheck to paycheck? She can’t afford to be unemployed for a period of time until this new company starts. Plus, who is to say that the quality employees won’t put out? I would think that personal sexual morality would be independent of job performance, so you would have equal number of quality workers in the “must sleep with boss” company versus the other one. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/394 "2010-05-24T02:58:30Z")
Or perhaps a perk, or an incentive bonus! “Oh, goddamn! I won employee of the month again! Shit!” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/395 "2010-05-24T03:27:57Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Boss threatens to fire all his female employees if they don’t have sex with him, as is normal some of his employees can’t afford to lose their jobs. I actually worked for this guy. Only it wasn’t ALL the female employees. It was just the receptionists. We went through two or three a month. They’d take the job, find out that keeping it involved sleeping with Joe, and either quit or get fired. One time a girl’s boyfriend showed up and tried to beat the crap out of Joe so I got to help bust up a fistfight in the lobby. Eventually he found a receptionist that would put out, and the firings stopped. It was a crappy place to work and most of the people who stayed any length of time did so because they had some reason they were afraid to quit. One of the programmers was fresh out of drug rehab and was worried no one else would hire him. Another was afraid he’d be deported to Iran if he lost his job. I was going back to school in six months and figured it was easier to stick it out than try to find a place that would hire me for such a short stint. I don’t know if any of the receptionists ever filed a complaint with the EEOC. Joe was violating so many labor laws, that I’m sure eventually they would have gotten him on something. (I personally reported him to the IRS for not withholding taxes from my paycheck.) He wound up getting busted for forging prescriptions before the feds got around to investigating him. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/396 "2010-05-24T04:40:15Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > He can have my hamster porn when he can pry it from my cold, dead hand! And they can have my gerbil when they pull it from my puckering dead ass. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2010, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/397 "2010-05-24T12:50:46Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t see why a single union needs to have a monopoly. Why couldn’t there be multiple unions negotiating for “market share” within the corporate world the same way corporations fight for market share among consumers. Because many of the goods produced by unions are public and non-union members cannot be excluded. If you can’t exclude people from public goods, they tend to free ride. Why join any union at all if you can reap the benefits anyway? Compulsory, monolithic unions are basically required to reduce free riding and increase the provision of public goods. The intuitive logic of this problem is laid out [here](http://books.google.com/books?id=jzTeOLtf7_wC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22mancur+olson%22+union&source=bl&ots=5DOxfFHPXi&sig=IBrWn4uM2oKvxfUd0oEOJt29W28&hl=en&ei=6XX6S_3KHML38AbGtKH0Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false). ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/398 "2010-05-25T15:58:15Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > As an aside, I always assumed that “Rand” was named after the infamous author of that name, but it’s actually short for “Randal”. Could still be a reference to she who must not be named, but not as directly as “Rand” would be. Oh, and his middle name is “Howard”. Coincidence? You decide! weren’t there two Cunninghams named randall and howard? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/399 "2010-05-25T16:20:42Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > As an aside, I always assumed that “Rand” was named after the infamous author of that name, but it’s actually short for “Randal”. Could still be a reference to she who must not be named, but not as directly as “Rand” would be. Oh, and his middle name is “Howard”. Coincidence? You decide! Oh, I get it! His maternal ancestry includes Curly, Shemp, or Moe. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157/400 "2010-05-25T16:26:08Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > But labour unions are largely ineffective unless they can form a monopoly or near-monopoly on the labour for a given employer. They achieved that by means of physical coercion - beating the crap out of scabs. Nowadays the government enforces their monopoly. This is just ridiculously, staggeringly, blindingly wrong. I won’t hijack this thread, but I couldn’t let this grossly distorted comment go unremarked upon. You should really read up on the labor movement in the US, and see which side was really beating on which (and who was killing whom). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rand-pauls-interview-on-rachel-maddow-a-real-libertarian-meets-the-real-world/540157.md?page=21)