Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Babusek who wrote (2569)	4/29/1999 9:08:00 AM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13062

That's kind've my point. The macro view is invariably wrong-headed. It is an aggregate of the micro. That is precisely why it rolls into the Libertarian philosophy so nicely. The one brother is allowed to put up the hammock and rest under a Libertarian philosophy. Under most others, the gov't has to step in and "even out" things from a macro standpoint. Conservatives are fond of saying they oppose the welfare state - but they would never eradicate it totally. Why? Because it would erode their power base. Of course, Liberals claim that the world is unbalanced and some people don't get a fair "chance" at making it. I don't wholly disagree with the Liberal argument, but if we even out the "chances", we have to eliminate alot of the "choices" (take a look at what Affirmative Action as "accomplished"). I believe the choices are more important, because it requires thought and action. Evening out chances requires no thought and coerced action. Libertarians don't need/require a power base, since we are free-thinking individuals. So eliminating the welfare state isn't a difficult step. Charity doesn't begin at the state level, it begins at home.