A Blank Spot on the Map

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Good Thread from Cafe Hayek

Quotation of thee day Sept 9, 2011

http://cafehayek.com/2011/09/quotation-of-the-day-57.html

muirgeo September 9, 2011 at 8:41 pm

We’ve been tribal for the last 5 million years or so… indeed civilization is a strain for beings genetically adapted for tribal existence.
This debate is ultimately genetic. Selfish genes making proteins and programming patterns to best get themselves reproduced. This is second, third or even fourth order levels of natural selection. I can’t imagine that in populations of millions and billions that genes for individualism will prevail.
JS September 9, 2011 at 9:28 pm
Yes. I agree. Every organism is completely selfish and although our world view may differ, both are manifestations of what pleases us, as individuals. That said, your world view might please you, and it may please you even more to subject others to it through the use of political compulsion. My world view doesn’t require telling you how to conduct your affairs.
Keep in mind that those debating you here are arguing against you trying to coerce them, not the other way around.
muirgeo September 9, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Here’s how I see it JS. You guys are trying to coerce just the same. If you are NOT an anarchist then we BOTH have ideas on how to set up society. You want to ban group decision making. I want to promote it.
IMO your ideas lead to impoverishment of many to the benefit of the few and your ideas are LESS efficient economically and as well as for the cause of advancing human civilization. I see you as promoting a society of LESS liberty even though you think it would have more liberty. For most people liberty will be hard to find being impoverished and a decreased standard of living for most people will be the results. And worst of all your ideas would promote a society of privilege where the most important key to success is choosing the parents you are born unto. Likewise it’s a wasteful society that allows so much human talent to go uneducated and unfulfilled. Its a dreary miserable world with NO TRESPASSING signs all over it and where the worst people freed of any debt to society and unwilling to be charitable will always come out on top.
Your ideas sound great on paper but are tragic when put to practice and thus have NEVER been shown to be a better way to order society than the social democracies that have been so great at advancing the human enterprise and in spite of the dragging down of society by philosophies like your contaminating the democratic process.
So again don’t pretend you have the high moral ground or that your are without a doubt the true promoter of liberty…. I think you are ultimately, if unknowingly, a promotor of serfdom because in your society all the land and means of production will eventually be in the hands of a minority leaving the others with no choice but indentured servitude.
SweetLiberty September 9, 2011 at 10:38 pm
Dead wrong, but not worth the effort.
Iain September 9, 2011 at 10:40 pm
No libertarian wants to ban group decision making, only to empower groups who want to associate with each other. That is, the kind of “group decision making” you’re talking about is really single people making decisions for the whole group.

Iain September 9, 2011 at 11:15 pm

But hey guess what, we already have that. Ever wonder how much land in the U.S. is owned or controlled by the federal government?
Iain September 9, 2011 at 11:15 pm
“will eventually be in the hands of a minority leaving the others with no choice but indentured servitude.”
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 12:55 am
Lots of land is owned by We the People…. I hike on it regularly unimpeded and with few rules. I can fin isolated places where I will see no one for days yet everyone is welcome. It’s the most liberating thing I can think to do…. hike in our public lands….
samgrove September 10, 2011 at 11:25 am
I’m not quite so happy to pay for it, since I rarely hike those lands myself.
I’m sure slave owners found slavery liberating.
Josh S September 10, 2011 at 5:59 pm
I find it quite liberating to help myself to muirgeo’s gas tank while he’s off hiking.
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Sam wrote, “I’m not quite so happy to pay for it, since I rarely hike those lands myself.”
Our public lands are easily a net positive on the economy. You pay almost nothing for them and likely get free stuff from the money they make for us.
But indeed I am not so keen paying for the Highways YOU drive all the time because I really don’t use them much.
Sam grow up…please….. you need to get over your 4 year old stage.
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 10:06 pm
Josh S September 10, 2011 at 5:59 pm
“I find it quite liberating to help myself to muirgeo’s gas tank while he’s off hiking.”
LOL….that was YOU…. great… how’d my Beetles diesel fuel work in your standard engine??? hehehe… I leave the fuel tank unlocked in my front yard for the nimrods who have siphoned my gas before.

Dan J September 10, 2011 at 12:17 am

Ban group decision making? you would promote it?
And for those who refuse to have choice in participation, you would have them jailed. Just plain filth.

Dan J September 10, 2011 at 12:19 am

Wow! When history has shown that empowering individualism is what has advanced society and gift centralization has ALWAYS led to misery.
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 12:58 am
Dude… I’m sure I am not drunk but reading your post made me question that… are you partying tonight or what?
Dan J September 10, 2011 at 3:51 pm
iPad and haste makes does not bode well for posting.
Group decision making is fine if in voluntary participation. I do not subscribe or volunteer to participate in your conclusions. So any effort in my compliance, from you or others, is oppression and tyranny.
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 9:46 pm
So Danj, wants to be a member of the Country Club but does’t want to pay the fees or follow the rules… you’re a real adult Danj… that’s real BIG of you Danj.

JS September 10, 2011 at 8:51 am

There is no such thing as “group decision making”, unless it is unanimous, and then the point becomes moot.
The ‘group’ you describe is only the ‘powerful’ within the group, and they disguise their tyranny by using romantic references to collective concepts.
However, I agree that the powerful always rule and that ‘might is right’, and that anyone with power will use it to advance his own interests and the interests of the groups he belongs to.
But despite how society might be structured, correct economic theory shows that a libertarian legal structure promotes the greatest welfare of the people. However many, and yourself inlcuded, aren’t comofortable in an environment where so much individual responsibility is placed on their shoulders, so they use politics/power to shift some of that responsibility on to the shoulders of others.
The difference between you and me is that you advocate a certain society to advance your private interests while lying about how it would affect society, and I am truthful about what I claim is best for society while lying that I’d truly advocate it. I’d rather the deck be stacked in my favor too, but this blog site is about what’s best for the economy, not me, or you.
Stone Glasgow September 10, 2011 at 1:36 pm
*like*
Don Boudreaux September 10, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Well-said.
Dan J September 10, 2011 at 3:48 pm
WINNER!!! JS delivers knockout punch. Although, it was an unfair battle as Muirgeo is impaired.
Methinks1776 September 10, 2011 at 9:13 pm
I’m going to join the chorus of “likes”.
I only disagree with one point. Muirdiot is not lying about how it would affect society. Unlike you, he’s just too stupid to understand.
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 9:48 pm
JS September 10, 2011 at 8:51 am
There is no such thing as “group decision making”, unless it is unanimous, and then the point becomes moot.
Good point there are some murderers out there that believe murder should be legal and we as a group have no right to infringe on them unless we ALL agree…. again… grow up libertarian dudes.
muirgeo September 10, 2011 at 9:59 pm
JS
“But despite how society might be structured, correct economic theory shows that a libertarian legal structure promotes the greatest welfare of the people.”
Nonsense… libertarian societies exist no where. When policy swings too far in the libertarian direction Depressions follow and people by the numbers and as a whole ARE NOT better off.
My purpose for society IS NOT for personal favor but for rules and guidelines with out which advantage goes to the lowest of lowlives not required to give back to society what they used and likely to push all burden of charity onto those who would otherwise add the most to society.
I’ll take a publicly funded medical researcher over a hedge fund manager anyway if we are talking about true value to society.
And I don’t advocate MY society I advocate a democratically representative society of what PEOPLE want which is NOT always what corporations want or what maximizes profits.
Society is far more than JUST the economy and Economic Freedom is not a substitute for true freedom.
We did an experiment here and made up a libertarian society and I showed how awful it would be when I showed methinks… a caring doctor,…. providing charitable car would be run out of business by those far less charitable and only concerned with profits.
I trust the decisions of people lead democracy to diffuse power while libertarian societies would surely concentrate wealth, power, property and the means of production leaving liberty for a small minority and the so called limited government ultimately captured by these hoarders of wealth.
Methinks1776 September 10, 2011 at 10:01 pm
See?


0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home