I must be doing something right...

[Belsnickel]

(03-24-2017, 11:53 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  You are not pro-choice.  You are only in favor of pro-choice for the people rich and powerful to have choices.

Without government regulation there would be no "choice" for a safe workplace or a clean environment.

Do you think poor people not having access to health care is a "social" or "financial" issue?

This is the kind of rhetoric that really just increases divides and does not further any sort of genuine discussion. I would be someone that thinks the libertarian ideology has a level of naivete with those issues, but addressing it in this way is not going to win anyone over. Arguments can be made that the government's hand in the market has corrupted the free market system and that deregulation could cause corruption. That a free market with competition improves efficiency, innovation, and a host of other things, and would improve worker safety on its own because a free market for consumers also means a free market for employees. That it was the government's hand in the market during the industrial revolution that caused the issues we saw.

I'm not buying what they are selling on that, but there is an argument to be made there and so coming at someone with the rhetoric you're using is going to get you absolutely nowhere. Access to healthcare is absolutely a social issue. How that access is ensured is a fiscal one. The sooner we stop looking at things in simplistic terms and recognizing the complexities of the situations, as well as the fact that other people tend to actually have a reasonable, logical reason for their positions, the sooner we can get back to where we were as a country in the years between the Civil War and now, when the ideological divide was not so vast.

[xxlt]

(03-23-2017, 03:49 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Thank you !
I am keeping a close eye on Libertarian leadership.
I've actually friended several on Facebook and I've friended ex-leaders.
I'm finding out why the ex's left and if anything is being done to rectify the offending situation.
There is a bit of turnover and some very good people being burdened by several jobs.
I'm not a dive straight into the pool kind of guy.
I'm more of a squint at the horizon for a week to get a lay of the land, before I saddle my horse kind of guy.
I've also come across some broken financial promises, from the national.
We'll see how that shakes out.

Oh, I'm assuming you meant Republicans were not FINANCIALLY conservative enough and people went to the Libertarian Party.
Because otherwise, we are mostly pro-choice on everything.

A side note:
I've been watching Twitter, particularly Freedom Caucus members.
I'm thinking they may have the right idea.
Run as Republicans, take massive amounts of Republican money, and use those funds/position to promote Libertarian ideals.
Hmmmm....

Pro Choice: Choose to pollute, choose to oppress, choose to squander resources (like our National Parks), choose to give more to the top 1/10th of a percent and let the rest "choose" to buy fewer i-phones, choose to further empower corporations and march us ever closer to a fascist system... If these are what you mean by pro-choice (and I hope they aren't) you may be their nominee for president next year. I think you are going to find a big gap between broad libertarian thought and what the Libertarian Party are all about. Just keep digging and doing what you are doing.

[xxlt]

(03-24-2017, 01:31 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is the kind of rhetoric that really just increases divides and does not further any sort of genuine discussion. I would be someone that thinks the libertarian ideology has a level of naivete with those issues, but addressing it in this way is not going to win anyone over. Arguments can be made that the government's hand in the market has corrupted the free market system and that deregulation could cause corruption. That a free market with competition improves efficiency, innovation, and a host of other things, and would improve worker safety on its own because a free market for consumers also means a free market for employees. That it was the government's hand in the market during the industrial revolution that caused the issues we saw.

I'm not buying what they are selling on that, but there is an argument to be made there and so coming at someone with the rhetoric you're using is going to get you absolutely nowhere. Access to healthcare is absolutely a social issue. How that access is ensured is a fiscal one. The sooner we stop looking at things in simplistic terms and recognizing the complexities of the situations, as well as the fact that other people tend to actually have a reasonable, logical reason for their positions, the sooner we can get back to where we were as a country in the years between the Civil War and now, when the ideological divide was not so vast.

Good post from a historical perspective. To put a finer point on not buying what they are selling, what I am hearing is you would not sign on to the L(ibertarian) plan for "fixing" America. Correct?

[Belsnickel]

(03-24-2017, 03:10 PM)xxlt Wrote: Good post from a historical perspective. To put a finer point on not buying what they are selling, what I am hearing is you would not sign on to the L(ibertarian) plan for "fixing" America. Correct?

Correct. I disagree with their positions on a great number of things. I just know that there is a whole lot of talking at people going on in the political arena and very few discussions.

[Rotobeast]

(03-24-2017, 11:53 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No. You are not pro-choice. You are only in favor of pro-choice for the people rich and powerful to have choices.

Without government regulation there would be no "choice" for a safe workplace or a clean environment.

Do you think poor people not having access to health care is a "social" or "financial" issue?

Honestly, if I had my druthers, there'd be no partys.
But we know that will never happen.
Other than that, why would I favor rich people ?
I'm not rich.
I'll finish my response within my final entry of this post, as it will cover others comments as well.

(03-24-2017, 12:52 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Good luck to you!

But for us poor souls who do not know Ohio geography very well......where in the world is Coshocton?

Thanks !
Draw a line between Columbus and Canton.
We are pretty much half way between the two.

(03-24-2017, 01:31 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is the kind of rhetoric that really just increases divides and does not further any sort of genuine discussion. I would be someone that thinks the libertarian ideology has a level of naivete with those issues, but addressing it in this way is not going to win anyone over. Arguments can be made that the government's hand in the market has corrupted the free market system and that deregulation could cause corruption. That a free market with competition improves efficiency, innovation, and a host of other things, and would improve worker safety on its own because a free market for consumers also means a free market for employees. That it was the government's hand in the market during the industrial revolution that caused the issues we saw.

I'm not buying what they are selling on that, but there is an argument to be made there and so coming at someone with the rhetoric you're using is going to get you absolutely nowhere. Access to healthcare is absolutely a social issue. How that access is ensured is a fiscal one. The sooner we stop looking at things in simplistic terms and recognizing the complexities of the situations, as well as the fact that other people tend to actually have a reasonable, logical reason for their positions, the sooner we can get back to where we were as a country in the years between the Civil War and now, when the ideological divide was not so vast.

You're a good man, Matt.
I mean that.

(03-24-2017, 03:06 PM)xxlt Wrote: Pro Choice: Choose to pollute, choose to oppress, choose to squander resources (like our National Parks), choose to give more to the top 1/10th of a percent and let the rest "choose" to buy fewer i-phones, choose to further empower corporations and march us ever closer to a fascist system... If these are what you mean by pro-choice (and I hope they aren't) you may be their nominee for president next year. I think you are going to find a big gap between broad libertarian thought and what the Libertarian Party are all about. Just keep digging and doing what you are doing.

(03-24-2017, 03:10 PM)xxlt Wrote: Good post from a historical perspective. To put a finer point on not buying what they are selling, what I am hearing is you would not sign on to the L(ibertarian) plan for "fixing" America. Correct?

(03-24-2017, 03:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Correct. I disagree with their positions on a great number of things. I just know that there is a whole lot of talking at people going on in the political arena and very few discussions.

For what it's worth, I'm a Minarchist.
I want minimal government, but I know we need a level of oversight.
There are far too many evil people out there to not have something in place.

I am digging into the guts of the party and I've found plenty to question.
Some things seem to only be about money, big surprise.
The tickets to our state conference were waaayy overpriced and this cat wasn't shelling out a dumb amount of money.
Regardless, I have MY ideology, not the exact party platform.
That's the double-edged sword with the party though.
Anyone can have different views, but they generally end up arguing amongst other members.
Unity just doesn't thrive in an environment like that.
It's the closest to how I identify politically though.
I'm continuing to evolve and I think we all do (or at least should).

Fred, bless you.
It was a good try, coming back in here swinging.
But, you know me a bit better than that.
I just let a young lady go for 7 months without paying rent.
Does that fit that picture you painted ?
I even sold some family heirlooms to get by and try let her get on her feet.
It was stupid, as I'll never get my money back, but that's just me.
I'd also sit and drink a beer with any of your clients, just as I have done with people that may be well off or members of the Outlaws MC.
It's never really safe to assume anything about me.
I share a lot here, but not everything.
I am just me.

[xxlt]

(03-24-2017, 03:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Correct. I disagree with their positions on a great number of things. I just know that there is a whole lot of talking at people going on in the political arena and very few discussions.

Fair point. When you initially raised that point I didn't think the post you highlighted was as off putting as you did, I just felt it needed a little unpacking. But I could certainly see where it would rub you or another the wrong way. It seems like when certain assumptions are baked in (for example, the "Reagan assumption" that "government is the enemy,") then all the discussion and reasoning in the world won't matter. Sometimes believing that people just condense their argument. I know I have been guilty of that but will try to be less "talk atty" and more "chatty" as you have called us to be.

[xxlt]

(03-25-2017, 03:36 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Honestly, if I had my druthers, there'd be no partys.
But we know that will never happen.
Other than that, why would I favor rich people ?
I'm not rich.
I'll finish my response within  my final entry of this post, as it will cover others comments as well.


Thanks !
Draw a line between Columbus and Canton.
We are pretty much half way between the two.


You're a good man, Matt.
I mean that.


For what it's worth, I'm a Minarchist.
I want minimal government, but I know we need a level of oversight.
There are far too many evil people out there to not have something in place.

I am digging into the guts of the party and I've found plenty to question.
Some things seem to only be about money, big surprise.
The tickets to our state conference were waaayy overpriced and this cat wasn't shelling out a dumb amount of money.
Regardless, I have MY ideology, not the exact party platform.
That's the double-edged sword with the party though.
Anyone can have different views, but they generally end up arguing amongst other members.
Unity just doesn't thrive in an environment like that.
It's the closest to how I identify politically though.
I'm continuing to evolve and I think we all do (or at least should).

Fred, bless you.
It was a good try, coming back in here swinging.
But, you know me a bit better than that.
I just let a young lady go for 7 months without paying rent.
Does that fit that picture you painted ?
I even sold some family heirlooms to get by and try let her get on her feet.
It was stupid, as I'll never get my money back, but that's just me.
I'd also sit and drink a beer with any of your clients, just as I have done with people that may be well off or members of the Outlaws MC.
It's never really safe to assume anything about me.
I share a lot here, but not everything.
I am just me.

I can relate to pretty much everything in this post. We can only know someone so much through this environment, some even less because they are total frauds. I don't think I know everything about you, but I also don't think you are a fraud.

I also understand the frustration of a living in a representative democracy where very few elected voices represent my views. But, as one of my philosophy teachers used to say, "We live in hope."

I have encountered many people who are minimal government advocates, but I think many have been lied to since Reagan or before, and thus have a false sense of what government is and should be. Our clean air and water, our airports, our roads, our military (way bigger than it needs to be, but whatever), our justice system (warts and all), our consumer protections - these are all provided by government and I for one think they are all pretty damn important. Anyone who wants to destroy government like Bannon or that moron Grover Norquist will get an unending battle from me. Government can, has, will, and should do many things well. Period.

I fear you will increasingly find that the minimal government advocates on the L train want to deregulate financial markets (that works really well for people 99% of us ) but have no problem with regulating butt sex. Sure there are some on the train who want the government out of their bedroom, but they better be careful with their vote because the same vote that legalizes one kind of sodomy can legalize another. (You can stick it to your partner and "the man" can stick it to you!)

So to go back to the thread title, I think what you are doing right - whether you end up more active in local politics or not - is learning more about the whole shebangabang. Good stuff.

 

[Rotobeast]

(03-25-2017, 09:10 AM)xxlt Wrote: I can relate to pretty much everything in this post. We can only know someone so much through this environment, some even less because they are total frauds. I don't think I know everything about you, but I also don't think you are a fraud.

I also understand the frustration of a living in a representative democracy where very few elected voices represent my views. But, as one of my philosophy teachers used to say, "We live in hope."

I have encountered many people who are minimal government advocates, but I think many have been lied to since Reagan or before, and thus have a false sense of what government is and should be. Our clean air and water, our airports, our roads, our military (way bigger than it needs to be, but whatever), our justice system (warts and all), our consumer protections - these are all provided by government and I for one think they are all pretty damn important. Anyone who wants to destroy government like Bannon or that moron Grover Norquist will get an unending battle from me. Government can, has, will, and should do many things well. Period.

I fear you will increasingly find that the minimal government advocates on the L train want to deregulate financial markets (that works really well for people 99% of us ) but have no problem with regulating butt sex. Sure there are some on the train who want the government out of their bedroom, but they better be careful with their vote because the same vote that legalizes one kind of sodomy can legalize another. (You can stick it to your partner and "the man" can stick it to you!)

So to go back to the thread title, I think what you are doing right - whether you end up more active in local politics or not - is learning more about the whole shebangabang. Good stuff.

 

Eloquent as always.
The kind words and shared wisdom are always appreciated.
Hopefully I came off ok.
Had a couple bottles of wine at IndianBear winery and watched my friend play guitar/sing.
We met a couple from Findlay and we really hit it off, with conversation.
We already had 2 bottles of wine and they bought us a third.
We indulged, as we couldn't appear rude.


But anyway, I still love Fred.
If anyone did ever wonder about me, I have no problem adding any of you to Facebook.
I am friends with a few people from here.