Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
That's not what I mean at all. I mean, if you create a system where people vote themselves benefits, they'll do so until the system collapses. We're seeing a variant of that right now in the 1-10%'s capture of the system. People will take until there's nothing left to take. True democracy doesn't empower the aggregate underclasses. It allows more people to vote themselves wealth transfers in smaller increments.
Rich, poor, middle - you can't allow people to grab economic benefits at the ballot box without causing dysfunctions and warped allocations.
True democracy is a universal disaster. No exceptions. Do I think smarter redistribution would lift more boats over the long term than this short term rentier/crony/financial engineering economy we have right now? Yes. That's why I'm not a serious libertarian. I think universal income is a solid economic/society-preserving idea. Libertarians who'd rather see us turn into Brazil demonstrate the limits of the ideology.
As opposed to the affluent Democrat ideal of redistributing so long as it doesn't hurt their bottom line? Say what you will of Rockefeller Republicans; they never felt the need to plead charitable bona fides while protecting their revenue streams. And Libertarians, of course, just don't give a fuck.
If you're telling someone what you believe they should do, and trying to pass rules to make him do it, for any reason, you've authoritarian tendencies. That you're a micro tin pot variety inflicting his will by encouraging others to vote a certain way just means you've less power and effectiveness than an actual one. If put in power, you'd try to compel people to act as you like. And that's on a continuum with Trump.
Sure there are. This place is littered with them. I even fall into it. Are you serious?
I'd trade it all to see true creative destruction of the kind we prevented in 2008. And I mean that with every fiber of my being. The stretch from 2008 through 2010, when it was seriously hairy, was the most fascinating set of events. That's how the system is supposed to clear out the dead weight. That should have been a reset that gave the little guys a chance. Instead, we allowed it to more aggressively entrench a very fragile and cynical system no one trusts anymore. Hence, populism.
Wait 'till it goes next time. Will you argue for fairness then, or will you do what so many charitable Democrats and Republicans do in those circumstances: Plead for the fix that protects your retirement?
|
The most notable and odious characteristic of "libertarianism" is that its really just an excuse for navel gazing while the world burns. Opposition to doing anything. The Berners are really good at this, too, but based on a different set of beliefs. Long and short, don't work on improving healthcare because (a) waiting for the market to do it is better, screw the dead people; or (b) waiting for the state to do it or set up a single payor to do it is better, screw the dead people.
And if anyone goes and tries to, say, improve healthcare, well, they're just going to cause more harm than good because democracy / capitalism / the system / the establishment / your navel sucks.
While the above post is just too damn long and wandering to read all of, it's a good illustration of the whole problem.
