Clever story re: the "single-payer law enforcement" debate (wink)

My brother sent me this one:

Humorous, though I guess I don’t get it – are we supposed to be reassured that public health will work as well as our pathetic roads, schools, and police? Holy shit, I hope that’s not the plan.

Lind missed an easy floating curveball though by forgetting to satire citizens who defend their own homes as crazy herbal medicine kooks. :) The idea is probably too foreign to him though, heh.

So, Tim. As a libertarian, do you just write off the entire health care debate as rubbish in your view? I mean, why inject the government in an industry that is currently dominated by private companies, right? What do you think?

Violent crime has been trending down for awhile generally. Is that because our police suck? Our interstate infrastructure is breaking down because we haven’t continued investing in upkeep and repair… I wonder why we haven’t? There is a problem with our elementary and secondary schools, but that’s more a matter of changing a century old philosophy.

Wait, so that was seriously the point?

My perspective is so far removed from a typical political-media narrative/blogger that I have to double check occasionally. But jeez, last thing I want to do is get into an overarching debate about government and “private” industry again. It’s a nice Tuesday, and I want to go try the ToEF in ADOM, and Public Enemies comes out tomorrow. Time for a beer!

I am fucked now though because the usual suspects are going to come in and say I don’t contribute anything but caustic remarks. :( Can I get one per week?

Oooh, one last funny thing that struck me: I have to admit I will chuckle at the irony of this article when the Supreme Court eventually finds that the US’s public health plan has “no general duty to protect individuals.” Hehe.

All of those things are high quality if the public pays enough money for them; middle class have decent to good and rich districts have great instances of each. So I’m not sure what you mean.

The point is in response to the comical number of people who think health care is like corn or something.

The key thing is the ‘overbeatment’ in that article’s analogy. heh, I like that word.

Edit: Also, I just read in an Economist article that health care doesn’t get better as cost goes up across geography within the united states. They said there was a significant negative correlation.

Uhm… Wouldn’t a libertarian be opposed to both? I mean, I’d think from a libertarian perspective, the difference between a couple of mega corporations and a state running healthcare, is kind of moot.

Listed in rough order of opinion toward corporatism, from active dislike through neutrality all the way to active support:

A left-libertarian would hate any kind of entrenched faceless corporation out of principle.

An anarcho-capitalist would only object to something that developed out of past or present state manipulation, positive or negative, and is mostly skeptical of scare stories regarding the negative consequences of free enterprise or merely silent on the issue and would sometimes accept reasoned debate for the more difficult-to-comprehend aspects of anarchy.

An Objectivist is mostly similar but takes a supportive opinion of whatever corporatism exists presently, ignoring most but not all historical state intervention, and actively supports minarchist principles of giving certain but significant swaths of society to government.

A beltway-libertarian would focus more on top-down/coercive market-based “pragmatic” reforms of the status quo with a much better understanding of reality than a typical conservative.

A Republican tries to talk these issues but lacks an understanding of unintended consequences, is completely unaware like most Americans of the concept of state-enabled corporatism that is often called the “private” “market,” and mostly just wants to help megacorps for political donations or anti-left tribal reasons.

Today’s educational lesson in stereotypes is based on my limited understanding from observations for a few years, and was brought to you by Lollerskates brand sportswear.

Heh, America is weird. You made me look it up though, and your summary seems pretty accurate. Never underestimate the educational value of lollerskates.

Anyway, what kind of libertarian are you? Laissez-faire? Neo-Liberal? Perhaps an actual libertarian (read: against authoritarian/hierarchal social, political and economic systems)?

In real life I am agnostic. Been years since I’ve watched a cable news show, read any tomes, or voted on anything past the state level; never lifted a finger for a political campaign, won’t open my mouth about politics, and feel like violently throttling someone who wants to do so in my company. I’m sure it’s “important” and all in a secular religion kind of way, but I’d rather go do something more useful in life.

On the Internet I play a rabble-rousing AC, mostly for their revisionism and criticism because it’s surprising how much we take for granted, but I also acknowledge a healthy dose of pragmatism in the company of friends. The fantasy utopian ideas are all mental masturbation, but since I have to live with whatever absurdity the powers that be come up with, it’s nice to pretend that poking a few places occasionally means they won’t come up with something quite as worthless as last time. I’m not naive enough to believe it makes a difference though.

I’m also a Leo and like '80s action movies. Want to be Facebook friends?

Maybe. Do you put out on the first date? :D

AC = AnCap, yes?