Not to pick on Chuck, but his post over in the Militia discussion hit on something I've come across a few times lately, the extent of government in our lives.  From Chuck's post, mine in blue:

I would more say that I do not believe that taxes are a burden on my liberty, and are in fact the cost of living in a society where I don't do everything for myself.

 

But those are services and tasks which can be delegated to private organizations.  Again, how do you decide which is appropriate for private enterprise, and which is appropriate for government?

Some of it through historical reference, we've tried some things in the past, some of it is a case new to modern society.  There's a lot of trial and error going on.  Not all will work out the way anyone wants it.

 

I don't produce electricity, or procure running water, or manage my waste, or build the roads I utilize. I provide health care, but do not provide my own health care. I rely on armed men with legal authority to settle property disputes. I purchase food rather than grow or raise it.

 

Solar panels, wind turbines, and micro-hydro generators all do this, for individuals, and allow off the grid living.

 

A simple well or atmospheric condenser can provide running/drinking water.

 

Ever heard of a septic tank?

None of these options work in a city/high density area.  Personal power works in a suburb (and really only solar, maybe micro wind in the right area), but not wells or septics.

 

These are all things you *choose* to not do for yourself.  Liberty is the ability to make that choice.  My issue comes with a government that says that collecting rainwater in a bucket is an environmental crime.  My issue comes with regulations that state it is illegal to not have an electrical hookup to the grid.  Etc.

Spoken like someone who lives in a wet, rural area.  In the high mountain deserts of Colorado, water rights exist downstream as well as at the source.  It's actually worked into the State Constitution, and has been for over 100 years.  This includes rain water.  And for a very good reason.  If all 2 million people across the 300 square miles of the Denver Metro area decided to collect their rainwater and refuse run off, all the freeloading ranchers downstream wouldn't be able to illegally graze their cattle on public land.

 

Governmental regulations, even when they are for "our own good" are, by their very definition, removing that choice...and restricting liberty.

True, but so?  If pure socialism doesn't work in groups greater than ~100, neither does anarcho capitalism.  There is some collective responsibility to the detriment of individual liberty, it's probably a bad idea for society to allow demolition derbies in school parking lots.

 

I surrender a piece of my total liberty to not have to spend every hour of my day ensuring my and my children's survival, and do work other than procuring food and repairing my shelter - and I give a portion of the fruits of my labor so other people will do that shit so that I can play xbox and argue on the internet.

And, how large a piece of that liberty is surrendered is precisely the topic of this discussion.

 

Our founders suggested that government was necessary, but considered it a necessary evil and took great pains to severely restrict its authority and, consequently, its influence.  Your own willingness to embrace such influence, especially at the federal level, and the restrictions which they represent, are what many today view as "the problem."

 

A return to constitutionally limited government is "the cure."

 

Yes, I align with the libertarian wing of conservatism.

As I said above, some of the services we turn over to the government are truly for our own good.  We've tried private fire and police services before, to everyone's detriment, including those private services.  That shit did not work out well at all, even though some jurisdictions still have private ambulance, those also have issues.

There are major environmental issues with allowing everyone their own well and septics, even in wet areas.  When sewer systems are used, water reclamation requires a certain amount of clean runoff, which means you can't cap your yard.  In some wet locals, your neighbor is allowed to cap your yard in order to keep your runoff from destroying his land.

In a nation as large and diverse as ours, we do have collective assets, as well as collective responsibilities.  Our collective assets in water, air, forests, fisheries, hunting grounds etc; were damn near destroyed by unchecked capitalism.  Contrary to anything the environmentalists claim, those assets are better off today than at any time in the past.  And, contrary to anything libertarians claim, it's precisely due to government management of those assets.

Our collective responsibilities begin with; don't be a drain on society.  Too many individuals failed in that; so now we have Government mandated, collective retirement funds, unemployment funds, healthcare funds, death benefit funds (so your fatass body you refused to take care of through your life doesn't rot in the streets) etc.

If communism can't work because it removes the components of greed and laziness from the individual; then those components need mitigated in capitalist societies.  Especially one of 300million+.

Views: 807

Replies to This Discussion

You came back to comment with this shit?  You're off your game.

Well, it's good to see some things never change!

Marx's communism was a direct response to the alienation of the individual by capitalism. Capitalism, according to Marx, removes the individual from himself.  Communism was seen as an egalitarian response, with the individual working for the self fulfillment of the individual, not for a wage.

Yes, it's one of Marx's peculiarities. The solution to the problem of individual alienation? Make a system that is inherently anti-individual and give it authority over every single aspect of human life!

What it forgot was, humans don't work for work's sake.  Humans work to survive.  And without that, greed and laziness take over.  As we saw.

Lack of ability to make economic calculation under socialism had more to do with it. Stalin solved the whole "people are lazy and need motivation" problem from the very beginning!

I was pointing out there are areas where self sufficiency is an impossibility.

But I'm saying "self sufficiency" is a canard, and not much related to the government question. The real issue is the nature of human interaction, not whether humans can interact at all.

Imagine I rob you at gunpoint, and when you protest, I retort with something like, "Are you some guy who doesn't want money to change hands? Do you want our economy to grind to a halt!?"

A few disjointed thoughts, for what little they're worth:

America is far more "socialist" than I think a portion of the public believes. In other countries I've been to, business is much less encumbered by regulation. BUT, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

In South America, you can make money with a wheelbarrow of oranges, an orange press, ONE GLASS, a bucket of soapy water, and a bucket of rinse water. People buy a glass of fresh squeezed orange juice you press for them, then give you back the glass to wash and rinse. 

This past January, I saw a business in Cusco, Peru that provided 3D sonograms to pregnant women, told you the sex of the baby, and did a cursory health exam of said baby. Now, mind you - these weren't doctors - just a dude with a sonogram machine that would burn you a video or pics onto a DVD for like $10. 

I needn't describe the regulatory climate for those two businesses in America.

When I evaluate a municipality, I look at their roads, how they dispose of their trash, the water supply, the crime rate, and the availability of health care. 

I appreciate the role of government in all of those areas, and don't mind paying taxes for quality services. I've seen Mad-Max like towns with no zoning - birds nests of power lines atop poles, or power lines affixed to trees, often with a ladder leaning up against said tree.

I don't mind food subsidies or medical subsidies, either - even if part of the expense is the people who use the safety net for a hammock. Lots less kids with a lazy eye than in other places, or mildly retarded people who suffered brain damage from a high fever as a child.

John,  Some regulatory "climates" came about because shrewdies figured out ways to cut costs by taking huge risks with other people's health and well-being.  We got the FDA and USDA food inspections because of stuff like 19th century canned peas being treated with copper sulfate-made the peas nice and green, but not so great for the person eating them.  Medical practice regulations came from a combination of a professional union (the AMA) and a lot of quacks selling what amounted to opium cut with raw whiskey as a cure all.

In Mexico they had inline electric hot water heating shower heads.  Which were wire nutted to the line voltage.  Electrocuted my ass while I was trying to wash my hair in their short ass showers.

This past January, I saw a business in Cusco, Peru that provided 3D sonograms to pregnant women, told you the sex of the baby, and did a cursory health exam of said baby. Now, mind you - these weren't doctors - just a dude with a sonogram machine that would burn you a video or pics onto a DVD for like $10. 

These are all over the place. You can find them even in Chicago for about $35 a pop. They don't pretend to be doing any sort of in depth diagnostic sonograms, or practicing any kind of medicine (heartbeat, all the parts - congrats it's a boy) - and for the most part, they are regulated thusly. 

Perhaps it was the typical gaudy South American advertising that took me by surprise. Plus, the place had their curious habit of kiosk businesses within business. By that I mean you'll be in a shoe repair store that also has a little counter that sells JUST avocados; or a sonogram biz where you can reload your cell phone.

Our debt really isn't extraordinary by percentage of GDP. It's ranked number one by it's sum, but so is our economy. Sorted by GDP percentage, there are many countries who's Debt:GDP exceeds our own.

It's like trying to loose weight and still eating too much food or exercising.  Doesn't work too well.

In "communist" Vietnam, I met a guy who decided to start his own business (a sports bar) in his front yard. What he needed: a few tables, a few chairs, a TV to watch sports, a few cases of beer, some snacks to sell. All he had to do was set up shop and start taking customers; no licenses required, no taxes to pay, etc. 

Try doing that in your "capitalist" front yard and see how long it lasts. 

Whether that Vietnam story is apocryphal or not ... I'm pretty sure that's exactly what libertarians have been saying all along.  Welcome aboard.


JB

Undeveloped/developing countries tolerate a lot of this type of thing, despite what label their parties have, or what the official mode of operation is.  Socialism requires a free market to work, and communism allows for artisan shops (it's worked into the ideology).  It's not against the grain for something like that to happen in a socialist/communist society, especially one which is developing.

Not to pick on Chuck, but his post over in the Militia discussion hit on something I've come across a few times lately, the extent of government in our lives.  From Chuck's post, mine in blue:

Thank you for being so diplomatic.  It's appreciated.

 

None of these options work in a city/high density area.  Personal power works in a suburb (and really only solar, maybe micro wind in the right area), but not wells or septics.

Fair point.  But, it also comes down to the fact that you made a choice to live in a high density area.  

 

You want government involved?  Fine.  But make it a local government...environmental impact in New York City, with the highest population density in the US (I believe) *should* be handled differently than on a 640 acre cattle ranch in Nevada.

 

My post dealt with federal vs state vs local intrusions, though admittedly only tangentially.

 

Besides, those were only quick examples, not an exhaustive list.

 

There is some collective responsibility to the detriment of individual liberty, 

And, how large a piece of that liberty is surrendered is precisely the topic of this discussion.

I do believe I accepted the premise of *some* degree of collectivism being desirable.  As I stated, it is a question not of whether to surrender liberty, but of how much liberty must be surrendered.

 

As desirable as the theory of anarcho capitalist libertarianism can be, the theory does not match the results of practical implementation.

 

Our founders realized that government, or some degree of collectivism if you prefer, is a necessity.  But they took great pains to keep its influence and power as minimal as possible.

 

Theirs was a great idea.  And, while I do concede that some degree of federal power, and state power as well, is needed...the level to which it has been taken is ridiculous such that it is now unreasonably involved in the day to day life of the individual citizen.

 

Notice, my next-to-the-last line in the original post.  Limited, not absent.  Why some people find this to be a radical concept is...well, in all honesty, incomprehensible to me.

A return to constitutionally limited government is "the cure."

RSS

Latest Activity

Dogface Jake joined James Machamer's group
Thumbnail

Freemasonry

A place where many good and worthy fellows can discuss all things Masonic.
7 hours ago
Liam Strain posted a photo

bench_primer

Big stuff done. Sloppy primer is on it (and seats/covers propped open). Now it's just more sanding, more painting, and trim.
7 hours ago
Shane replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion "I like guns" in the group The Great Debate
"What do you know? Nothing. You didn't find any statistics. You found an article based on an anti gun subreddit which ignores FBI data. Here you go: https://m.fbi.gov/#https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats Furthermore, we don't…"
8 hours ago
Dogface Jake joined E.A. Burt's group
Thumbnail

Moleskine Notebooks

'To lose a passport was the least of one's worries. To lose a notebook was a catastrophe.' - Bruce ChatwinSee More
9 hours ago
Dogface Jake joined Scott White's group
Thumbnail

Folklorists

A place to talk Folklore, and share any information and resources anyone might have
9 hours ago
Paul MacAlindin replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion "I like guns" in the group The Great Debate
"Thanks for that. I'm glad the reaction here is to try and negate the very source I was asked to check out. Since I'm a foreigner here, I look forward to seeing some true American statistics to counter what I've found out for myself.…"
9 hours ago
Shane replied to Paul MacAlindin's discussion "I like guns" in the group The Great Debate
"Here's some scale for you."
10 hours ago
Dogface Jake joined Nolan Poulson's group
Thumbnail

The Barbershop

It's just seems natural that Art of Manliness should have a barbershop group.  My intent of this group is to gather and share general thoughts and experiences concerning barbershops. Anything from a good barbershop that you have found  to pictures and stories of shops you have visited to discussing anything barbershop.  See More
10 hours ago

© 2015   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service