Pretty much in my landscape. I am no Libertarian by true definition, it is simply that the LP tends to have views "closer" to mine than others. Pure Libertarianism as the party wants it to become will simply not work. However, the "do as you want to do as long as it doesn't hurt others" and small government (a bragging right of the conservatives) IS EXACTLY what I want. Though far from verbatim, that is similar to what you seem to like in what I quoted .
By varying degrees, yes. I believe that government should be frugal, and for the people. I can't deny that some of the libertarian ideals are somewhat whimsical, if it were even possible to put them into practice. The "do as you want as long as it doesn't hurt others," mantra, for example, is laudable. On an individual basis I agree with it wholeheartedly. It would eliminate so much clutter from our daily lives; however, corporations exist to generate profits, and they will put others at risk for the sake of profits. This has been documented enough times that the government had to step in and do something about it. That's where things break down, in my opinion. Libertarianism is great at a personal level, but things blur when the focus shifts to larger groups, companies, and countries.
I own at least one of Ron Paul's books. I like the guy a lot, and believe he has some good ideas, and a few great ones. I think his views on our government and the Federal Reserve are good starting points, but are too idealistic to work in the real world. There's no denying that some of his supporters are racist. Over the years he has repeatedly tried to distance himself from that debacle, but it has crippled his political aspirations.
His son, Rand, on the other hand, is a raging douche-tard who should leave politics altogether before he destroys the last remnants of his father's legacy.
You are obviously an intelligent person , by the quality of your post, but I take offense to some of your reply. I am a Libertarian leaner with conservative roots. I am also NOT racist. I have a Japanese wife and half Japanese children. Do I think there should be immigration and welfare reform ? Absodamnedlutely. That does not make "bad" nor "racist" because there are sorry people that simply don't like to work from all races, and I don't want to foot their bill. I also don't want people coming into this country without regulation taking jobs away from Americans, simply because they will work for less money. There is nothing racist about either of those views, and if there is, then I will proudly wave the racist flag.
Thank you, but I'm a moron.
Seriously... just ask my wife. lol...
There's a reason I mentioned the Tea Party. When the TP started out it was an impressive grass-roots movement. Then it got corrupted by GOP special interests. There are a gobs of libertarian-leaning folks who aren't racist, but a lot of racists tend to identify with the pseudo-conservative/libertarian ideals that groups like the TP promote, especially in its current form. That's not how the TP started out, but that's where they are today. Here's where, I believe, things gets tricky.
We're being manipulated to pick each other apart, when the real problem lies in the large corporations. No full-time employee of Wal-Mart should need government, or state, assistance. The same goes for many other bottom feeding corps like McDonalds, etc... The government is subsidizing their salaries, while these companies take
advantage of the rest of us. In a free market we shouldn't have to worry about someone undercutting our salaries because our skill set should dictate what we earn. The problem is that there is so much rampant corporate welfare and loopholes that not only do many corporations get large tax breaks, they don't even have to pay their employees enough money to sustain them. That is a failure of the free market, and it reflects the level of corporate corruption. The sad truth is that a majority of government assistance goes to working households.
The irony is that many outspoken proponents who want to abolish government assistance often took advantage of government assistance themselves. Some of these same people then try to justify their outrageous incomes - incomes which are not in line with any other first-world country, yet resist any thought of an employee earning a "living wage."
Greed. You've got to love it.
The image of the lazy, deadbeat, is a tool of propaganda, just as the image of the large corporation being a "jobs creator" is a myth. But they're used to manipulate the masses into passing legislation that benefits a small percentage of individuals while adversely affecting large swaths of the less fortunate. The poor have no voice, because that requires funding, which is something they're in desperately short supply.
Not trying to pick on you brother. Religion and politics often get people riled up. I have no problems with your views on things, but you seem to have stepped right on top of some of my views. I am not exactly Libertarian, nor am I exactly Conservative. If I had it my way, I would like the USA to be a monarchy with ME is King, but that isn't likely to happen.
My second choice would be a socially liberal and fiscally conservative government where everyone gives each other hugs and we are all millionaires. That is how Libertarians would like it. Not going to happen. We just have to do the best we can do.
It's all good. I'd like to see a functioning free market. Where healthcare wasn't used to separate the rich from the dead, and where tens of thousands of children didn't have to go hungry, or not have access to critical health care, because their working parents simply couldn't afford it.
