Libertyist Credo

[Martin Hash]

I have made it a goal this year to enumerate "Liberalist" ideological beliefs. I welcome discussion on the contents & the wording of each article.

1. Liberty first. The wants of the individual come before the needs of the group, unless Due Process of Law.

However, Liberalists (as opposed to Libertarians) recognize there are other people in society. We don't have to like or even respect them to make them our allies, so together we both sacrifice some of our Liberty to placate the other. The 5 areas where Liberalists are willing to do that are: Protection, Jurisprudence, Social Safety-net, Environment & Healthcare. (Socialists want it the other way around: they assume all things are group first, with carve-outs for individuals.)

2. No aristocracy, and certainly no Class system. Families cannot pass on dynasties.

Inheritance is limited to whatever the current deduction is. (Something over $5 mil today.) The rest of the estate is absorbed by the State, or better, given as $1 mil (or therebouts) "Gifts" to as many people possible, as specified by the testator.

3. Progressive taxation.

Taxation's primary purpose is to redistribute opportunity. "The most liberty to the most people."

4. Increasing productivity.

Government's economic role is to provide an environment where productivity can continually increase such that people need to work less and less to live at the same comfort level.

5. No government borrowing.

"Sons are not responsible for the debts of their father." Pay-as-you-go public projects limited to 5 years (the median time of residency). This includes no accrued debts of any kind, most importantly, no delayed retirement funding.

6. No public employee unions.

Public officials making deals with public employees is collusive in nature.

7. Minimize public employees.

Any Market-sensitive job should be done by the Market. Only jobs that cannot reliably be performed by markets, due to monopoly (healthcare), lack of profit motive (Social Safety-net), or danger of exploitation (military, regulatory oversight), should be done by government.

[Fife]

What's an example of an activity that falls outside the scope of the Five Areas?

[Martin Hash]

What's an example of an activity that falls outside the scope of the Five Areas?

Everything else but there is a gray area. For example, it's government's duty to make sure every child gets an education, but Government should not actually be DOING the educating, that should be vouchers to Charter Schools. Another example: roads should be publically owned but not built or maintained by Government, that should be through private bidding.

Then it gets very gray: who owns the Natural Resources? Currently, our government essentially gives them away to private enterprise that then exploit their natural monopolistic position; the best example being energy, with dams at the top of the list, and oil/gas a major example of how other countries finance their Social Safety-net via the publically-owned natural resources. (Scandinavia, Britain.)

[Fife]

What's the purpose of government funded and mandated (and thereby government controlled) education? What tangible benefit does it produce (and assuming there is some benefit, to whom does it inure)?

Which of the Five Areas covers state funded and managed education?

[Speaker to Animals]

What's the purpose of government funded and mandated (and thereby government controlled) education? What tangible benefit does it produce (and assuming there is some benefit, to whom does it inure)?

Which of the Five Areas covers state funded and managed education?

Go to Uganada and ask a villager that question.

[Fife]

Redpill me on Uganda. What kind of schools do they have?

[Speaker to Animals]

Redpill me on Uganda. What kind of schools do they have?

I don't really know. I think you understand the point. The point was referring, for example, to those priests who come to my parish once a year to describe what it is like in a Congolese village in the jungle, trying to provide basic literacy and competency to people who live pretty far back in history compared to us.

There exists a kind of polarity here where, at the extremes, nations begin to regress. When the state doesn't have an education policy, expect dark ages soon. When the state gets overly involved in education (like we have now), expect dark ages. There does exist a sweet spot in between those extremes, and I think maintaining probably requires getting government the hell out of providing education directly, but our centralizing the funding of education for the national good. The same is likely true for health care, and probably a few other big ticket items.

When the state controls the schools themselves, then they stop educating people and start indoctrinating. Dark ages cometh. When the state gets out altogether, most citizens lose access to an education. Dark ages cometh.

It's a similar dynamic with health care.

[Martin Hash]

What's the purpose of government funded and mandated (and thereby government controlled) education? What tangible benefit does it produce (and assuming there is some benefit, to whom does it inure)?

Which of the Five Areas covers state funded and managed education?

None of the 5 socialistic areas cover it. Education is something the people of a nation determine everyone should have and contribute taxes to make it happen, otherwise a Class system develops. I suppose there are Libertarian utopian concepts that accept that some large percentage of its population can't read, write or add, but I only need remind them that, by the same ideology, those people can own guns, and those they DO know how to use. So unless every Libertarian is willing to fight off the unwashed hordes, or hire private security (who they should also fear) to do it for them, Libertarian utopia ain't gonna last for long.

[Fife]

Redpill me on Uganda. What kind of schools do they have?

I don't really know. I think you understand the point. The point was referring, for example, to those priests who come to my parish once a year to describe what it is like in a Congolese village in the jungle, trying to provide basic literacy and competency to people who live pretty far back in history compared to us.

There exists a kind of polarity here where, at the extremes, nations begin to regress. When the state doesn't have an education policy, expect dark ages soon. When the state gets overly involved in education (like we have now), expect dark ages. There does exist a sweet spot in between those extremes, and I think maintaining probably requires getting government the hell out of providing education directly, but our centralizing the funding of education for the national good. The same is likely true for health care, and probably a few other big ticket items.

When the state controls the schools themselves, then they stop educating people and start indoctrinating. Dark ages cometh. When the state gets out altogether, most citizens lose access to an education. Dark ages cometh.

It's a similar dynamic with health care.

At first I didn't understand, but I get what you are saying now. It's a reasonable point you are making. It does come with some tough questions, though. How much compulsory education is enough? And on what topics? I certainly expect the state isn't going to hand out vouchers to schools that don't toe the line, whatever the line is.

[Fife]

What's the purpose of government funded and mandated (and thereby government controlled) education? What tangible benefit does it produce (and assuming there is some benefit, to whom does it inure)?

Which of the Five Areas covers state funded and managed education?

None of the 5 socialistic areas cover it. Education is something the people of a nation determine everyone should have and contribute taxes to make it happen, otherwise a Class system develops. I suppose there are Libertarian utopian concepts that accept that some large percentage of its population can't read, write or add, but I only need remind them that, by the same ideology, those people can own guns, and those they DO know how to use. So unless every Libertarian is willing to fight off the unwashed hordes, or hire private security (who they should also fear) to do it for them, Libertarian utopia ain't gonna last for long.

Pure elitism. What's the purpose of using "utopian" in that sentence other than as a silly intellectual euphemism? You statists have no real critique of liberty other than accusing people who talk about it of being foolish utopia-dreamers.

Liberty isn't a path to utopia. There is no path to utopia. Liberty, even with all its faults, is a better choice than gang violence, however, IMNSHO.

Anyway, I'm trying to grok the Five Areas. If compulsory state education isn't in one of them, what is it (in something other than a self-referential statement)?