Where are the libertarians in the coronavirus pandemic?

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Libertarians are certainly against the "promote the general welfare" part.

Of course everyone who doesn't "promote the general welfare" the way you would is actually against do it at all. Every time.

You have no basis for that claim.

You didn't read what ZiprHead wrote.

 

[ZiprHead]

You have no basis for that claim.

You didn't read what ZiprHead wrote.

I highly doubt that.

 

[Jarhyn]

So, I don't give a shit about the OP text or whatever other people have posted...

But Hey Jason, IF you were in charge of this epidemic, how would you do things? What is a "libertarian solution" to this kind of crisis?

That's what I really want to know. Can you answer those questions?

 

[laughing dog]

You have no basis for that claim.

You didn't read what ZiprHead wrote.

I read every actual word in his post. Your claim is not based on his words, but some straw man.

 

[lpetrich]

If there are no elected libertarians--not any, anywhere--then I guess there's no reason to vote for Libertarians. They're policies must be so unworkable that they can't win any elections.

Duverger's law is a complicating factor here -- first-past-the-post leads to a two-party system.

What Libertarians would have to do is run inside one or both of the two big parties, something like the Tea Party during the Obama Admin.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I don't see what the problem is here with divulging the Libertarian Plan. I've been seeing their plan through five pages of discussion. It's the same plan they have for everything.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You have no basis for that claim.

You didn't read what ZiprHead wrote.

I read every actual word in his post. Your claim is not based on his words, but some straw man.

You didn't read what I wrote then.

 

[laughing dog]

I read every actual word in his post. Your claim is not based on his words, but some straw man.

You didn't read what I wrote then.

Apparently you do not read what you write.

You responded to “Libertarians are certainly against the "promote the general welfare" part.” Your first sentence "Of course everyone who doesn't "promote the general welfare" the way you would is actually against do it at all. “ is a straw man because
1) Ziprhead specifically referred to “Libertarians” who are clearly not “everyone”, and
2) there is no basis in Ziprhead’s post that anyone (let alone everyone) who disagrees with Ziprhead’s view of “promote the general welfare” is against promoting the general welfare at all.

Instead of persisting in your straw man, why not present what you think the libertarian policy for the covid-19 pandemic?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So you are saying ZiprHead is wrong when he accuses libertarians of being against promoting the general welfare. Good on you.

 

[Arctish]

I don't know if Paul Ryan counts as a Libertarian but he's a huge Ayn Rand fan. He used to hand her books out as Christmas presents and made Atlas Shrugged required reading for his interns.

Rand-style Libertarianism's answer to the coronavirus pandemic is simple: let the sick die.

Remember that Objectivist hero doctor in Galt's Gulch who invented a treatment that could prevent strokes? He went on strike because the government wouldn't allow him to turn away sick people he didn't like or leech off them like a tick. So instead of saving the lives of ordinary people at a respectable profit, he sat on his ass in Colorado waiting for Galt to trigger the mass extinction event that was in the works.

Of course, Ryan is slippery as an eel so I don't expect to get a straight answer from him, but that is where Rand's philosophy leads. In her world, altruism is evil, abandoning lifelong friends is good, and openly declaring you won't lift a finger to help anyone else no matter how easy it would be or how much danger they're in, is morality at its finest.

 

[Bronzeage]

The people I have known who most faithfully lived a libertarian philosophy were toddlers. Adults I know who claim to be Libertarians never outgrew that phase.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I don't know if Paul Ryan counts as a Libertarian but he's a huge Ayn Rand fan. He used to hand her books out as Christmas presents and made Atlas Shrugged required reading for his interns.

Lol, no. Take a look at the actual positions he's supported and the actual votes he's cast and you get a different story.

Of course it is possible he is inspired by one of the villains of the book...

Rand-style Libertarianism's answer to the coronavirus pandemic is simple: let the sick die.

If you want it to be, I guess that is how you're going to see it.

 

[laughing dog]

So you are saying ZiprHead is wrong when he accuses libertarians of being against promoting the general welfare. Good on you.

Substituting one obvious straw man for another is not an effective strategy for effective discussion.

Still waiting on the libertarian policy on the covid-19 pandemic. Your inability to produce to one does lend credence to the conclusion that there is no policy whatsoever.

 

[marc]

Still waiting on the libertarian policy on the covid-19 pandemic. Your inability to produce to one does lend credence to the conclusion that there is no policy whatsoever.

Taking a wild guess and say the libertarian policy is that the Free Market^tm shall provide for all.

Checked the 2018 Libertarian Party platform, their section on healthcare:

2.13 Health Care

We favor a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want (if any), the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.

So once the market sees that they can make money providing vaccines for the virus they will get right on it, and provide them at only a modest *cough* profit.

 

[Arctish]

I don't know if Paul Ryan counts as a Libertarian but he's a huge Ayn Rand fan. He used to hand her books out as Christmas presents and made Atlas Shrugged required reading for his interns.

Lol, no. Take a look at the actual positions he's supported and the actual votes he's cast and you get a different story.

Of course it is possible he is inspired by one of the villains of the book...

You mean like Francisco d'Anconia, who lured people into believing they could trust him, a Captain of Industry, to set a safe and profitable course right up to the moment he revealed he had deliberately screwed them over and then ran off to Galt's Gulch?

Yeah, I can see the similarity.

Rand-style Libertarianism's answer to the coronavirus pandemic is simple: let the sick die.

If you want it to be, I guess that is how you're going to see it.

That's how Rand saw it.

It's right there in her book. The doctor who refuses to share his life saving technique unless he has unlimited profit and can turn away anyone he doesn't want to treat, Dagny's reaction to a socialized healthcare plan for autoworkers, her reaction to the story of a man who beat a child so severely he knocked out every tooth in her mouth because his community decided she needed braces more than he needed to buy a new record (Dagny's sympathy was for the man,not the 8-year old victim; so was Rand's for that matter), and most of all, her Objectivist heroes crisply stating they feel absolutely no obligation to help anyone but themselves and then proving it.

John Galt plotted to bring about the death of billions of people and then did it. The Objectivists in the Gulch knew that all their family and friends not currently in the Gulch would go through hell on Earth, that if any of them survived it would be damn mean miraculous, and they approved. Do you honestly think an Objectivist would care about millions dying from a viral infection?

 

[Arctish]

Libertarian Party platform, their section on healthcare:

2.13 Health Care

We favor a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want (if any), the level of health care they want, the care providers they want,

So far, so good...

the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions.

Oh really? Patients get to decide which medicines and treatments they will use? And the doctors, hospitals, clinics, etc. have to provide it?

Well, that's different.

People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.

If they're strictly individual plans, not connected in any way to anyone else's plan, then yeah. But not if those plans are subsidized by state taxpayers, or ones with rates and benefits set by state regulations, because that would be mooching.

 

[ZiprHead]

One has to wonder why Jason finds it so scary to answer the question. I suspect he would find it impossible to rationally justify the answer.

 

[laughing dog]

You mean like Francisco d'Anconia, who lured people into believing they could trust him, a Captain of Industry, to set a safe and profitable course right up to the moment he revealed he had deliberately screwed them over and then ran off to Galt's Gulch?

Yeah, I can see the similarity.

Rand-style Libertarianism's answer to the coronavirus pandemic is simple: let the sick die.

If you want it to be, I guess that is how you're going to see it.

That's how Rand saw it.

It's right there in her book. The doctor who refuses to share his life saving technique unless he has unlimited profit and can turn away anyone he doesn't want to treat, Dagny's reaction to a socialized healthcare plan for autoworkers, her reaction to the story of a man who beat a child so severely he knocked out every tooth in her mouth because his community decided she needed braces more than he needed to buy a new record (Dagny's sympathy was for the man,not the 8-year old victim; so was Rand's for that matter), and most of all, her Objectivist heroes crisply stating they feel absolutely no obligation to help anyone but themselves and then proving it.

John Galt plotted to bring about the death of billions of people and then did it. The Objectivists in the Gulch knew that all their family and friends not currently in the Gulch would go through hell on Earth, that if any of them survived it would be damn mean miraculous, and they approved. Do you honestly think an Objectivist would care about millions dying from a viral infection?

What is truly ironic is that Ayn Rand had nothing but disrespect for the libertarians of her time and the Libertarian party.

Q
Why don’t you approve of libertarians, thousands of whom are loyal readers of your works?
AR
Because libertarians are a monstrous, disgusting bunch of people: they plagiarize my ideas when that fits their purpose, and denounce me in a more vicious manner than any communist publication when that fits their purpose. They’re lower than any pragmatists, and what they hold against Objectivism is morality. They want an amoral political program.

(source: http://aynrandlexicon.com/ayn-rand-ideas/ayn-rand-q-on-a-on-libertarianism.html)

 

[Bronzeage]

No true Scotsman would be a Libertarian.

 

[Elixir]

No true Scotsman would be a Libertarian.

Well hell - Jason should have simply said that by way of explanation!