Duh NO! I am opposed to people that think that Gov't is the problem until Katrina comes knocking on their door. I am Opposed to people that think that All tax laws are illegal I am opposed to people that find fault in Gov't and their solution is no Gov't. Before Anyone tries to say Libertarians aren't for No Gov't I disagree. If you don't believe in taxes and you don't like social programs, lets have no gov't for a year. Lets see how crime goes up when there are no police on the streets. I bet driving to work would be fun if your car were still parked outside and if you were still alive after the thieves broke into your... I digress.

No civilization has ever existed for any length of time where taxes weren't collected and there wasn't a heirarchy of established rule in that civilization. So I am sayign that a Libertarian is a fool that shouts at the wind that Gov't/taxes/social programs are bad, yet is unwilling to demonstrate a means of protecting a civilization from itself and foreign countries. I can only assume that This is a Party of Rich men, much like H. Ross Perots party. Perhaps we should all be serfs to the ultra rich. where we provide their protection and they get all the money. Oh wait we already have that, Nevermind!

Duh NO! I am opposed to people that think that Gov't is the problem until Katrina comes knocking on their door. I am Opposed to people that think that All tax laws are illegal I am opposed to people that find fault in Gov't and their solution is no Gov't. Before Anyone tries to say Libertarians aren't for No Gov't I disagree. If you don't believe in taxes and you don't like social programs, lets have no gov't for a year. Lets see how crime goes up when there are no police on the streets. I bet driving to work would be fun if your car were still parked outside and if you were still alive after the thieves broke into your... I digress.

No civilization has ever existed for any length of time where taxes weren't collected and there wasn't a heirarchy of established rule in that civilization. So I am sayign that a Libertarian is a fool that shouts at the wind that Gov't/taxes/social programs are bad, yet is unwilling to demonstrate a means of protecting a civilization from itself and foreign countries. I can only assume that This is a Party of Rich men, much like H. Ross Perots party. Perhaps we should all be serfs to the ultra rich. where we provide their protection and they get all the money. Oh wait we already have that, Nevermind!

Wow. You and Robert have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the libertarian school of thought, and have no problem proclaiming your ignorance about the Libertarian Party from the highest mountain. Your assumptions are no better than your errors.

No libertarian is for the complete absence of gov't--those people are called anarchists. Libertarians generally do not suggest that all taxes are illegal, nor that none of them would be collected. No libertarian is for the complete absence of police, or any of the other completely non-libertarian positions you are attributing to them.

Like Robert, you state these utterly erroneous conclusions that don't even rise to the level of being wrong as if they are self-evident. Do you think that helps your case-du-heures, or harms it?

"In Washington, one person's waste is another person's pork. Every dime spent by the federal government has well-connected advocates who swear the money is vital to the national interest. ... It's not that people in government aren't as good or competent as those in the private sector (though that may be true). The difference lies in the incentives and feedback they face. Bureaucracies have little check on what they do, no bottom line, no market prices for their 'output.' What they do have is an incentive to spend all the money budgeted or risk getting less next year. As Milton Friedman used to say, no one spends other people's money as carefully as he spends his own. It is absurd to think the humongous constellation of federal bureaucracies is going to identify and root out 'waste' in any significant way. It's just not in the nature of the beast." --ABC's "20/20" co-anchor John Stossel

I would like to thank you for quoting a raging Libertarian

Who makes a good point you refuse to address.

Does your opposition mean you are in favor of government waste and the poliferation of special interest groups in Washington? Do you really trust government to cut waste in a significant way? I do not think that is possible.

Duh NO! I am opposed to people that think that Gov't is the problem until Katrina comes knocking on their door. I am Opposed to people that think that All tax laws are illegal I am opposed to people that find fault in Gov't and their solution is no Gov't. Before Anyone tries to say Libertarians aren't for No Gov't I disagree. If you don't believe in taxes and you don't like social programs, lets have no gov't for a year. Lets see how crime goes up when there are no police on the streets. I bet driving to work would be fun if your car were still parked outside and if you were still alive after the thieves broke into your... I digress.

No civilization has ever existed for any length of time where taxes weren't collected and there wasn't a heirarchy of established rule in that civilization. So I am sayign that a Libertarian is a fool that shouts at the wind that Gov't/taxes/social programs are bad, yet is unwilling to demonstrate a means of protecting a civilization from itself and foreign countries. I can only assume that This is a Party of Rich men, much like H. Ross Perots party. Perhaps we should all be serfs to the ultra rich. where we provide their protection and they get all the money. Oh wait we already have that, Nevermind!

...Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent.

People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others.

They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices

We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology.

. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.

What I stated is fact.

So Rush, what is a libertarian for?

What I stated is fact.

Moot point since there are no libertarians elected in Washington. You can mutilate the platform however you wish, still doesn't make Obie's policies any better.

"The great advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science or in literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government." --economist Milton Friedman (1912-2006)

So Rush, what is a libertarian for?

Principled gov't. Not mob rule.

So Rush, what is a libertarian for?

Principled gov't. Not mob rule.

And whose principles would they be?

So Rush, what is a libertarian for?

Principled gov't. Not mob rule.

And whose principles would they be?

As an extension, no one has a right to INITIATE force or use fraud against another.

We see how well principles work when there are no laws or regulations. I hate to go back to it but Reagan and his deregulation of the Savings and loans is a fine example. FYI we finished paying for that debacle during the Clinton years. So these steady men of principle went haywire in a matter of years and brought down the savings and loans. Quite simply astonishing that it has to be argued that men + money - regulation = screwing over the general public. So I won't

The fact is regulations are a necessary evil. One where the general public is assure that the people playing with large quantities of money aren't running their business like a bunch of Cosa Nostra.

As an extension, no one has a right to INITIATE force or use fraud against another.

why not? there aren't any rules in this utopia.

As far as I've seen their wouldn't be anyone to enforce it anyway.

The only solution to this would be warlord, vigilantes and decline of a country into nation states ruled by so called warlords.

As an extension, no one has a right to INITIATE force or use fraud against another.

why not? there aren't any rules in this utopia.


Where the hell did you ever get that idea? Did you just make that up too? You would have to quote where I said there would be no rules. Oh, right, you can't.

As far as I've seen their wouldn't be anyone to enforce it anyway.


Let me guess, because you made up in your head some idea that I, or the libertarians, or the Libertarian Party have taken the position that there would be no police, or military, right?

Perhaps if you wrote more clearly Rush we could understand from what position you do speak from. Also dispensing with the insults might help too.

As regards "true anarchists" there are many types of anarchists, as there are many types of capitalists, libertarians, socialists, communists as there are many types of principles.

There is no one truth.

First off I would kindly ask you to refrain publicly from calling people idiots. Espouse? nice word. How about actually reading the manifesto and putting the people that exist today in your Utopia and work through a model of what really would happen with a Government that Has no means of collecting taxes or protecting itself from foreign and domestic aggressors. Let's eliminate 95% or more of all the roads and 95% of all the cars since we dont have the roads to drive them on nor does the Goverment have the power to take land to make roads.

As an extension, no one has a right to INITIATE force or use fraud against another.

why not? there aren't any rules in this utopia.


Where the hell did you ever get that idea? Did you just make that up too? You would have to quote where I said there would be no rules. Oh, right, you can't.

now you are just being coy. Did you not read their manifesto. THERE ARE NO RULES IN THE LIBERTARIAN GOVERMENT. So fraud can't happen? well no it can't because fraud is something that deals with laws and clearly their wouldn't be any. For your benefit we'll call fraud in libertarian land "Involuntary investment loss" that sounds so much nicer and doesn't include that nasty word "fraud" So back on track here. There is nothing in the Libertarian world that would stop a person from making "IIL's" on everyone other than a bullet. and since their is no regulation once again their is nobody to report this to and nobody that would even notice the exchange of money.

I have to tell you your counterpoints just have not bite. I provide pointed insightful rhetoric and you provide the "no it isn't answer" I think you need to give a real accounting of how this really works in Libertarian bizzaro world

As far as I've seen their wouldn't be anyone to enforce it anyway.


Let me guess, because you made up in your head some idea that I, or the libertarians, or the Libertarian Party have taken the position that there would be no police, or military, right?

Did you read anything I wrote or the Libertarians wrote. the very first line in the manifesto declares that they won't take take peoples money involuntarily. therefore as I so stated before the Libertarians will not collect any taxes. and by that line They have no regulating authority nor do they have the ability to create and regulate a militia. I'd love to hear how you'd run a government without tax collection. tic toc tic toc ehhhhhhh you can't

The only solution to this would be warlord, vigilantes and decline of a country into nation states ruled by so called warlords.


What would be more accurate is that this is the only solution that you managed to come up with. Which, as usual, is just dead wrong.

WOW thats good. Sooo your argument once again is "no it isn't." I think your days on the debate team are to be short lived. If you have a better explanation for that manifesto other than we intend to run everything on trust. that anarchy wouldn't ensue from lack of GOv't then I beg you to give an answer that could explain how a gov't would generate funds without rules regulations and taxes. I expect an answer that is more than "thats dumb" or "no it isn't"

Rush you are obviously an intelligent person. how about an answer that shows it.

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

Perhaps if you wrote more clearly Rush we could understand from what position you do speak from. Also dispensing with the insults might help too.

Hev, I've said this to you before. I am writing clearly, I usually use the format [statement] because [reasoning], i.e., "[ownership is a fundamental part of capitalism] because [it rests on the the principal that one has the right to their life and labor]. If you are unclear on something, ask.

As far as the "insults," rare indeed do I comment on the poster as a person, I comment on what they write. I did not set the tone around here. I do not launch tirades against the Democrats, or the liberals, or Gordon Brown or whatnot as many others here do. I will, however, answer in kind.

As regards "true anarchists" there are many types of anarchists, as there are many types of capitalists, libertarians, socialists, communists as there are many types of principles.

Sure. That's why I said, "generally derived from the idea that each individual has a right to exist in and of themselves and that as such, they own themselves, their labor, and the product of that labor.

"As an extension, no one has a right to INITIATE force or use fraud against another."

There is no one truth.

If that is true, then there is no reason to use gov't force to anyone's truth or ideas onto anyone else. Yet that's what is constantly supported here.

First off I would kindly ask you to refrain publicly from calling people idiots.

Espouse? nice word.

How about actually reading the manifesto and putting the people that exist today in your Utopia and work through a model of what really would happen with a Government that Has no means of collecting taxes or protecting itself from foreign and domestic aggressors.

Let's eliminate 95% or more of all the roads and 95% of all the cars since we dont have the roads to drive them on nor does the Goverment have the power to take land to make roads.

As an extension, no one has a right to INITIATE force or use fraud against another.
why not? there aren't any rules in this utopia.

Where the hell did you ever get that idea? Did you just make that up too? You would have to quote where I said there would be no rules. Oh, right, you can't

now you are just being coy. Did you not read their manifesto. THERE ARE NO RULES IN THE LIBERTARIAN GOVERMENT. So fraud can't happen? well no it can't because fraud is something that deals with laws and clearly their wouldn't be any.

For your benefit we'll call fraud in libertarian land "Involuntary investment loss" that sounds so much nicer and doesn't include that nasty word "fraud" So back on track here.

There is nothing in the Libertarian world that would stop a person from making "IIL's" on everyone other than a bullet. and since their is no regulation once again their is nobody to report this to and nobody that would even notice the exchange of money.

I have to tell you your counterpoints just have not bite. I provide pointed insightful rhetoric and you provide the "no it isn't answer" I think you need to give a real accounting of how this really works in Libertarian bizzaro world

As far as I've seen their wouldn't be anyone to enforce it anyway.

Let me guess, because you made up in your head some idea that I, or the libertarians, or the Libertarian Party have taken the position that there would be no police, or military, right?

Did you read anything I wrote or the Libertarians wrote. the very first line in the manifesto declares that they won't take take peoples money involuntarily. therefore as I so stated before the Libertarians will not collect any taxes. and by that line They have no regulating authority nor do they have the ability to create and regulate a militia. I'd love to hear how you'd run a government without tax collection. tic toc tic toc ehhhhhhh you can't

The only solution to this would be warlord, vigilantes and decline of a country into nation states ruled by so called warlords.

What would be more accurate is that this is the only solution that you managed to come up with. Which, as usual, is just dead wrong.

WOW thats good. Sooo your argument once again is "no it isn't." I think your days on the debate team are to be short lived. If you have a better explanation for that manifesto other than we intend to run everything on trust. that anarchy wouldn't ensue from lack of GOv't then I beg you to give an answer that could explain how a gov't would generate funds without rules regulations and taxes. I expect an answer that is more than "thats dumb" or "no it isn't"

Rush you are obviously an intelligent person. how about an answer that shows it.

And you once again neglect to answer the questions put forward. It seems to me you don't have the answer because there isn't one.