Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   
Libertarian Party

Home // Other Parties



Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:08 pm    Post subject: Libertarian Party Reply with quote
from the Libertarian Party Website (www.lp.org):

Quote:
What is a Libertarian?

Let's start with Webster's definition:

    Libertarian: A person who upholds the principles of individual liberty
    especially of thought and action. Capitalized: a member of a political
    party advocating libertarian principles.
Libertarians believe in, and pursue, personal freedom while maintaining personal responsibility. The Libertarian Party itself serves a much larger pro-liberty community with the specific mission of electing Libertarians to public office.

Libertarians strongly oppose any government interfering in their personal, family and business decisions. Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another.

In a nutshell, we are advocates for a smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

Are Libertarians liberal or conservative?

Libertarians are neither. Unlike liberals or conservatives, Libertarians advocate a high degree of both personal and economic liberty. For example, Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we're in favor of lowering taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business, and charitable -- rather than government -- welfare. But Libertarians are also socially tolerant. We won't demand laws or restrictions on other people who we may not agree because of personal actions or lifestyles.

Think of us as a group of people with a "live and let live" mentality and a balanced checkbook.

In a sense, Libertarians “borrow” from both sides to come up with a logical and consistent whole -- but without the exceptions and broken promises of Republican and Democratic politicians. That's why we call ourselves the Party of Principle.

I toss that out here just to get the ball rolling... see if we can discuss libertarian principles and ideas.

===============================================
If you like, you can take this short quiz to see where you fall on the political spectrum...

Back to top
ringwormbettie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well I think I might have finally found a party that I actually agree with. People should be free to do what they wish as long as they only hurt themselves.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ringwormbettie wrote:
Well I think I might have finally found a party that I actually agree with. People should be free to do what they wish as long as they only hurt themselves.


Actually, Betty, Ron Paul was a Libertarian in the House. It is under Libertarianism that he resides. He will be under the Republican ticket (that's the only way that he can get national recognition or even into a national debate), which is May 3rd for the Republicans. Watch it, it will be funny watching him rip everyone there a coupla new ones!
Back to top
ringwormbettie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
ringwormbettie wrote:
Well I think I might have finally found a party that I actually agree with. People should be free to do what they wish as long as they only hurt themselves.


Actually, Betty, Ron Paul was a Libertarian in the House. It is under Libertarianism that he resides. He will be under the Republican ticket (that's the only way that he can get national recognition or even into a national debate), which is May 3rd for the Republicans. Watch it, it will be funny watching him rip everyone there a coupla new ones!


Cool. I'll be sure to do that.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:23 pm    Post subject: Libertarians on Drugs Reply with quote
One of the LP's platform positions that tends to drive some voters away is their stance on drugs...

Quote:
Repeal all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs. Repeal laws that infringe upon individual rights to be secure in our persons, homes, and property as protected by the Fourth Amendment. Stop the use of "anti-crime" measures such as profiling or civil asset forfeiture that reduce the standard of proof historically borne by government in prosecutions. Stop prosecuting accused non-violent drug offenders, and pardon those previously convicted.
http://www.lp.org/issues/platf.....ml#drugwar

While I agree with them, I wonder whether it would be possible to "table" this issue in some way... place it on the political back-burner and focus on the other positive things the party stands for and would do.

Thoughts?
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I only have problems with their economic and foreign affairs platforms. I think it's very foolish to entirely rule out economic and foreign intervention.

And i don't like their gun policy ideas, either.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
I only have problems with their economic and foreign affairs platforms. I think it's very foolish to entirely rule out economic and foreign intervention.

And i don't like their gun policy ideas, either.

I would need to give them a lot more thought, but at first blush, I like the idea of getting out of the business of buying support abroad. Imagine the things we could do domestically with that money.

And I'm 100% on board with their position on guns.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:

I like the idea of getting out of the business of buying support abroad. Imagine the things we could do domestically with that money.


I'm not quite sure what you mean.

Quote:

And I'm 100% on board with their position on guns.


What bothers me is the word "firearm". They don't really specify what they mean by that.

When the constitution was written, your selection of weapons was pretty limited; you could stab people, or use gun powder (the real kind) to throw lead balls of various sizes in their general direction.

We've greatly improved upon weapons technology, for better or for worse. I don't think it's any longer a good idea to say that there can be a free-for-all on weapons.
Back to top
IrishOutlaw
Newbie


Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 18
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:25 pm    Post subject: Re: Libertarians on Drugs Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
One of the LP's platform positions that tends to drive some voters away is their stance on drugs...

Quote:
Repeal all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs. Repeal laws that infringe upon individual rights to be secure in our persons, homes, and property as protected by the Fourth Amendment. Stop the use of "anti-crime" measures such as profiling or civil asset forfeiture that reduce the standard of proof historically borne by government in prosecutions. Stop prosecuting accused non-violent drug offenders, and pardon those previously convicted.
http://www.lp.org/issues/platf.....ml#drugwar

While I agree with them, I wonder whether it would be possible to "table" this issue in some way... place it on the political back-burner and focus on the other positive things the party stands for and would do.

Thoughts?


If the LP tabled things because they make some people uncomfortable, we might as well be the democraps or repuglicans.

The LP is THE party of principles. The drug issue is an economic issue and all about self ownership.

See, what makes the LP different then the Dems and Reps is that we believe people should be free to do whatever they want to/with themselves. Isn't that what freedom is about?

Truthfully, I don't know how anyone can claim to love our freedoms, and then continue to vote for the two major parties. Neither one of them gives a crap about protecting our rights and freedoms. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, your still voting for evil.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:

I like the idea of getting out of the business of buying support abroad. Imagine the things we could do domestically with that money.

I'm not quite sure what you mean.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. You wrote, "I think it's very foolish to entirely rule out economic and foreign intervention." It was to this I was responding.

exton wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:
And I'm 100% on board with their position on guns.

What bothers me is the word "firearm". They don't really specify what they mean by that.

But they do...

Quote:
Transition: We oppose any government efforts to ban or restrict the use of tear gas, "mace" or other self-protection devices. We further oppose all attempts to ban weapons or ammunition on the grounds that they are risky or unsafe. We favor the repeal of laws banning the concealment of weapons or prohibiting pocket weapons. We also oppose the banning of inexpensive handguns ("Saturday night specials") and semi-automatic or so-called assault weapons and their magazines or feeding devices.
http://www.lp.org/issues/platf.....#rightkeep

I note that they oppose gun bans specifically "on the grounds that they are risky or unsafe;" I wonder whether there are grounds on which they would support some bans. While I am a gun owner and staunch defender of the 2nd Amendment, I do recognize that, absent the need to rise up and defend ourselves against our own government, there are some weapons the individual does not need to own. C4 is an armament, and I think most rabid gun nuts would agree that people shouldn't be able to just buy it at Walmart. If we can draw the line for arms that don't happen to have a barrel and a projectile, we can probably draw the line for a few that do.

exton wrote:
When the constitution was written, your selection of weapons was pretty limited; you could stab people, or use gun powder (the real kind) to throw lead balls of various sizes in their general direction.

We've greatly improved upon weapons technology, for better or for worse. I don't think it's any longer a good idea to say that there can be a free-for-all on weapons.

I don't see any mention of a "free-for-all." Wink In fact, I note that they are not uniformly opposed to all restrictions, rather they seem to be opposed to banning weapons for the wrong reasons. (But that's just my take on their statements.)
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Getting rid of regulation in the way that libertarians want will lead to corparatism.
Back to top
IrishOutlaw
Newbie


Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 18
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lester wrote:
Getting rid of regulation in the way that libertarians want will lead to corparatism.

I am personally not opposed to corporatism, lol.

I don't think any kind of destructive corporatism would be possible in a libertarian society though.

A job would be a contract between the two parties involved. No government intervention on who can and can't be hired. The lowest paying jobs would be filled by those willing to do them. There would be no government intervention on free trade, not even with other countries. You could bring in anyone you wanted from any place in the world to do the job you have. If someone from BFE on the other side of the world is willing to do it for .5c a week, then they would get the job and both people would be happy.

Then there is the issue of corporate welfare, tax cuts for huge businesses and endless loans to certain industries. Those would be gone. Tax shelters, gone. We will all be paying the same taxes on our purchases. There are lots of businesses that wouldn't be around today if the government didn't give them so many tax breaks. I think about wal-mart and how many tax breaks they get. And Halliburton (who just took the money and ran).

With less taxes taken out, you have more spendable income. Money really runs this country, I don't care what party you belong too. You could be a wacko animal cruelty group, and you could get a huge chain to only sale free range chickens, as long as you can convience them that it is going to cost them more money in the long run. With more money you don't have to take as crappy a job, you can afford to be choosier. Companies like Microsoft treat their employees very well, while companies like wal-mart don't. Microsoft knows it is hard to get good people in their fields, so they are good too their people. Wal-mart has a million more applications on file. In a libertarian country a business or industry that treated its workers bad couldn't count on the government to bail them out if all their workers go on strike.

Anyway, I was talking to some friends of mine the other day and we were discussing how long it would take to impliment a Libertarian agenda. We didn't figure out how long it would take, but we did finally agree that it would take 11 straight years before you could even get a majority of Libertarians in power. After that, you would have to go down the list of things that the government has done to the people and start working on them one by one. There would never be a sudden jolt to the system and all our laws are gone. That just isn't possible, even if I wanted to.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Only very few people can get the credentials to work at microsoft, and if you take away government sponsored programs for education those who are poor will always be poor. While the average spendable income may be higher, the majority of people will find they have a huge decrease in their spendable income as skill-less workers get paid chump change and skill-less executives get paid the big bucks. No-one would go on strike because there would always be more people waiting to get their job, why do you think kids in sweatshops don't go on strike? Because the government won't do anything about it if the company just fires them and replaces them with someone who wants the job more. Workers have far too little power already.

If everyone in the world started on the exact same income, and *then* we went libertarian, perhaps it would be ok.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lester wrote:
...if you take away government sponsored programs for education those who are poor will always be poor.

This notion flies in the face of the fact that many, many people throughout history got very, very rich in the absence of said programs.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 4650

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Many many???

Name ten that moved from lower class to upper class.
Back to top


Post new topic   Reply to topic   Quick Reply    LVC Home // Other Parties All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics
Politics blogs Politics blogs Article Directory Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Top Blog Sites