Doses every facet of libertarianism need to be applied in order for it to work? (1 Viewer)

[Cuntsucker]

As in, can only some aspects of libertarianism be implented and others excluded? Or do all aspects of libertarianism have to be implemented in order for it to work? I ask because anti-libertarians would argue that if governments didn't interfere in what people ate, or legalized drugs, health bills would shoot through the roof and blow out the budget. Of course, if we didn't have universal healthcare, that wouldn't be an issue.

 

[funkshen]

you don't have to eat the whole cow in order to have a nice dinner

 

[Phoenix Fury]

As in, can only some aspects of libertarianism be implented and others excluded? Or do all aspects of libertarianism have to be implemented in order for it to work? I ask because anti-libertarians would argue that if governments didn't interfere in what people ate, or legalized drugs, health bills would shoot through the roof and blow out the budget. Of course, if we didn't have universal healthcare, that wouldn't be an issue.

there's your answer?

 

[Cuntsucker]

you don't have to eat the whole cow in order to have a nice dinner

We've eaten part of the cow in Australia and it's proven to be off at times.

 

[Cuntsucker]

there's your answer?

So you agree that every aspect of libertarianism needs to be applied in order for it to work?

Also, that quote in your signature is fucking hilarious.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

So you agree that every aspect of libertarianism needs to be applied in order for it to work?

Also, that quote in your signature is fucking hilarious.

I'm not yet familiar with every aspect but currently I would say most probably yes.

That doesn't mean that having some aspects would not be a significant improvement, but for it to work properly and optimally all (or a vast majority I guess) of what constitutes libertarianism would need to be applied imo.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

Also plenty of libertarians see it differently than others, some only accepting certain aspects or up to a point etc.

 

[Cianyx]

We've eaten part of the cow in Australia and it's proven to be off at times.

Which part did we eat?

 

[Chemical Ali]

Yes

You can't deregulate inefficient industries, cut unnecessary tariffs or increase personal liberties without abolishing medicare and public education. It's one or the other.

 

[scuba_steve2121]

As in, can only some aspects of libertarianism be implented and others excluded? Or do all aspects of libertarianism have to be implemented in order for it to work? I ask because anti-libertarians would argue that if governments didn't interfere in what people ate, or legalized drugs, health bills would shoot through the roof and blow out the budget. Of course, if we didn't have universal healthcare, that wouldn't be an issue.

there are so many forms of libertarianism so your question can't really be answered. All I can say is that most of us agree on either vastly limited government and/or decentralised government

 

[cheese_cheese]

Some drugs should be illegal, while others not. I support marijuana becoming a legal controlled product (when purchased from controlled outlets), although also support tobacco becoming an illegal product. Heroin/ice must remain an illegal product and have stronger penalties attached to it as it is truly a harmful drug.

 

[boris]

meth is delicious and not harmful

why would they give it to USAF pilots if it was harmful

also





cuntsucker

 

[cheese_cheese]

meth is delicious and not harmful

why would they give it to USAF pilots if it was harmful

Meth is a dangerous drug. Heroin is another dangerous one. Ecstasy is also pretty dangerous.

I'm not saying that Marijuana and cocaine (NOT crack cocaine) are not potentially harmful still, although they are safer when looking at it relatively.

 

[boris]

wrong

cocaine is far more harmful than ecstasy
so is alcohol

meth is regarded as harmful due to the high level of physical dependence but apart from that it is fairly benign

you're out of your league son

 

[cheese_cheese]

wrong

cocaine is far more harmful than ecstasy
so is alcohol

meth is regarded as harmful due to the high level of physical dependence but apart from that it is fairly benign

you're out of your league son

Ecstasy is more harmful than cocaine. Yes, meth/ice is dangerous.

Yes, obviously alcohol, tobacco and caffeine are the most widely abused substances.