Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government • Hacker News Board

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#141

Post by grannyg00se » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 6:34 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #123

ac132 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in china for a month and had a great time eating at local restaurants that weren't monitored by health inspectors. Most of the developing world does not have health inspectors monitoring restaurants because it's not that important of a thing to do. The lack of food regulations in China made it possible for lots of amazing restaurants to exist because local people don't worry about regulations. If they want to s…

My family hails from a developing nation. People get sick eating restaurant food all the damn time.

That sounds strange. Why would I eat where people are getting sick all the damn time? Is the alternative (avoiding restaurants) worse?

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#142

Post by jacobsimeon » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 6:34 AM UTC

praxeologist wrote: post #93

astrodust wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Others have chimed in with similar explanations but it often revolves around the principal problem of how do you allow "freedom" without infringing on someone else's? For instance, if I want to drink radiation laced water, Libertarians would think I have the right. They'd also say I should have to pay for my own medical treatment resulting from that. Reasonable enough. However, if I drank radiation laced water becaus…

>However, if I drank radiation laced water because a chemical company was disposing of their waste in my backyard and I didn't know, Libertarians would tell you it's your fault for not having the proper testing equipment or paying a company to run these tests for you. This is simply false. Pollution would be treated as a tort. Now, you can't set up a home near an already existing, noisy club and complain about noise…

You're right in saying that the libertarian would say that a person is responsible for their own actions, but your argument lacks completeness. A company which pollutes water at large would suffer the consequences of its own actions. People aren't stupid; they'd notice the contamination and act.

Your argument implies a lack of faith in a single person or a small group of people to effect change. Do you believe that only government has the ability to keep our water clean?

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#143

Post by curt » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 6:45 AM UTC

The libertarian viewpoint is very simple and not the dog eat dog world people here are making it out to be. Libertarians such as myself believe that people should be left alone to make their own decisions and live with the consequences, except that you need laws to stop one person from hurting another. Does that mean everybody for themselves? No. Before the creation of the welfare state we had mutual aid groups where communities would help each other. The groups could be based on religion, ethnicity, occupations, etc... People naturally took care of each other.

Would a simple world like this work today? No. But you can still use the guiding principles to form a freer world. That's where Ron Paul went wrong, he lived in an idealistic world. We have legacy costs and promises that must be kept.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#144

Post by CamperBob2 » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 6:48 AM UTC

mkr-hn wrote: post #88

snitko wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you still haven't come up with a monopoly example. Can you prove that monopolies would exist in a completely free market?

It's hard to create examples of something in a system that has never existed.

He rephrased his question, and he shouldn't have, because his original one works pretty well. Can you name a single instance of a harmful monopoly that didn't either form or persist because of government backing?

No goalpost-moving this time.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#145

Post by mibbitier » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 6:57 AM UTC

robrenaud wrote: post #122

ac132 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in china for a month and had a great time eating at local restaurants that weren't monitored by health inspectors. Most of the developing world does not have health inspectors monitoring restaurants because it's not that important of a thing to do. The lack of food regulations in China made it possible for lots of amazing restaurants to exist because local people don't worry about regulations. If they want to s…

I have one Chinese friend who married a Chinese American and had a child with her. He then got a job opportunity in Shanghai and took it, leaving her in the US with the child because the food safety is so bad in China. Knowing nothing about the particulars of food safety in China, I thought this was insane. I brought it up to two other Chinese born coworkers, and they thought it was reasonable to raise the child in t…

Briefly searching around the net, anything can be found to be very scary.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#146

Post by rayiner » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 7:04 AM UTC

yaks_hairbrush wrote: post #137

rayiner wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your explanation ignores both externalities and transaction costs, not to mention more subtle things like information asymmetries and cognitive overload. You can't just ignore the parts of economics that don't fit into your ideology.

> Your explanation ignores both externalities and transaction costs Well, handling property damages in court is deterring "tragedy of the commons" by making putting the commons-over-user at financial risk. > ... more subtle things like information asymmetries and cognitive overload. You pay someone to give you information. We do this now: our taxes fund the EPA and they give us information. > You can't just ignore th…

My point is that he libertarian approach is non-sense.

You have a market failure: pollution creates negative externalities and are over-produced in a free market.

You use one common solution to market failures: create property rights that can be protected by litigation.

You now run into another economic problem: Coase's theorem only guarantees efficient outcomes if transaction costs are low. The cost of litigation to enforce injuries as diffuse as environmental injuries would be huge.

You also run into another problem: it's nearly impossible to track injury resulting from pollution to a source once it's out and mixed with all the other pollution.

The libertarian approach runs face first into the brick wall of the very economic theory it's based on.

The sensible solution, as Coase himself noted, is a regulatory apparatus to stop pollution before rights are violated. As a lawyer I'd love the litigation free-for-all that would arise in the libertarian scenario, but it's just an unworkable approach. The fact that it is repeated so much is a triumph of ideology over rationality.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#147

Post by rayiner » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 7:05 AM UTC

mbetter wrote: post #133

snitko wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, sure. Let's not argue then. I have a question though (and it's not intended to spark an argument), I'm just curious to know, how and why do you think people become libertarians?

Because having a simple and logically consistent system to decide what is right and wrong in any given situation absolves one of the responsibility to make complicated moral decisions on their own merits. I understand libertarianism and I very much appreciate that it is built on a foundation of reason. However, being an imperfect being, a wise man tempers his reason with empiricism.

It's not built on reason. It's based on Econ 101 oversimplification along with principles no less arbitrary than any other political ideology.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#148

Post by danmaz74 » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 7:05 AM UTC

snitko wrote: post #65

scarmig wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what's the alternative to having majorities vote? Since I gather you're a libertarian, let's make a market-based argument. There will always be some demand for violence (meaning the application or threat of force to cause other autonomous agents to act a certain way), and there will always be suppliers of violence. The question then becomes of market structure: do we want decentralized and competing suppliers o…

I think you're assuming that violence is somehow more profitable than no violence. I disagree. In fact, I think it's the opposite: violence is much less profitable than a non-violent solution. Violence only becomes more profitable when you have a monopoly to it: it doesn't cost you anything to use it, because you know no one is even gonna try to challenge you. On the other hand, when you don't have a monopoly, even i…

Violence only becomes more profitable when you have a monopoly to it: it doesn't cost you anything to use it, because you know no one is even gonna try to challenge you

Unfortunately, it looks like nobody explained this to criminal gangs. They obstinately use violence against each other, especially when no one gang has a near monopoly...

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#149

Post by Steko » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 7:09 AM UTC

wyclif wrote: post #24

thesagan wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's one of the few politicians of that caliber where I think he's both batshit crazy while being a force for good (?) in the public sphere. I don't really know what to make of the man.

Precisely what part of Ron Paul's policies are "batshit crazy", hmmm? Which policies, specifically? Not wanting to fund wars and nation-building in other countries? Not picking sides in foreign revolutions, operating drone wars in other countries, assassinating American citizens and maintaining a secret "kill list" without any congressional approval? Wanting to close down Guantanamo Bay? Vetoing legislation that is u…

Cherry pick the relatively popular policies and anyone can look reasonable. You want batshit?

Getting rid of the Fed.

Repealing the Civil Rights Act.

Global warming denialism.

Getting rid of clean air and water standards.

Seizing the Panama Canal.

There's no shortage of batshit insane ideas when you go down Ron Paul's rabbit hole.

Re: Ron Paul’s Farewell Address: The Internet Can Stop Big Government

#150

Post by mbetter » Sat, Nov 17, 2012, 7:16 AM UTC

Gormo wrote: post #138

mbetter wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because having a simple and logically consistent system to decide what is right and wrong in any given situation absolves one of the responsibility to make complicated moral decisions on their own merits. I understand libertarianism and I very much appreciate that it is built on a foundation of reason. However, being an imperfect being, a wise man tempers his reason with empiricism.

> Because having a simple and logically consistent system to decide what is right and wrong in any given situation absolves one of the responsibility to make complicated moral decisions on their own merits. But libertarians are the ones who want to take direct moral responsibility for their circumstances; it's statists who seek to outsource that responsibility to distant formal institutions or systems of pre-defined…

You may want to take direct moral responsibility for your circumstances, but that would be very dishonest. Whether you like it or not, you are part of a society and the very existence of society makes your circumstances possible.