Wednesday, February 25, 2009

The Evils of Fiat Money II

An anonymous poster made a comment to this post that I'd like to address. My responses are in bold brackets:

Skyler,

You have a way with words that can really get people into what you are saying, [Thank you!] but that [thank] goodness there are not more libertarians out there. Quite frankly, with the amount of stuff you want to privatize, this country would fail fail fail.

[And just what evidence do you have of that? And more importantly, what does it mean for the country to fail? Fail economically? Fail politically as in the government losing its power? Fail security wise, with everyone ending up dead at the hands of terrorists? Just what does it mean for our country to fail?]

I just can't agree with you, cause quite frankly, we don't own ourselves. Never have. Never will. We are debtors. All of us. Debtors.

[Debtors? To who? Those who came before us? I would agree that we owe all that we have to those who took risks in the past, but they're dead and gone and can't be paid. You're welcome to reject your self-ownership but I don't. And to be free means precisely that. We own ourselves and the fruits of our labor.]

Quite frankly, your columns are making me more grateful for the two-party system, and I hate the two-party system.

[Our two-party system is interesting as both sides are generally half-statist, half-libertarian. What I mean is that, generally speaking, Democrats or pro-civil-liberties, but anti-free-market. Republicans, on the other hand, are pro-free-market, but anti-civil-liberties. Of course these are broad generalizations and there's all sorts of mobility around the spectrum from the left to the center, to the right, to the top (libertarianism) to the bottom (statism), but the only logically consistent position when it comes to freedom and liberty is libertarianism. Libertarianism is pro-free-market and pro-civil-liberties. Libertarianism is anti-force, and thus anti-state, in all it's forms. In the words of Ludwig von Mises, government is the negation of liberty. And it is, whether statist or limited, since the whole foundation of the existence of the state is coercive taxation. It can't exist otherwise. It's founded on aggression. And both mainstream parties like government, just different sides of it.]

I would much rather pay taxes so I can drive on the roads and drink my water, rather than, to be honest, pay you to drive on roads and drink my water.

[I would rather you be free to pay for the services you want and not the services you don't. Be it roads, water, computers, or therapeutic massages.]

Capitalism is not all there is my friend. And your view of capitalism would never work.

[My view of capitalism is the reason I enjoy the standard of living I do. Capitalism is the very reason anybody has ever been brought out of poverty and subsistence. This is indisputable.]

Thank goodness so many of the American people are at least willing to throw support behind their leaders, even if they disagree with some of the plans. I heard it put this way, and I like it.

"You may not like the plays your quarterback is running, but you don't turn around and tackle him."

We are all on the same team. Stop tackling the quarterback.

[Your analogy is flawed. It assumes we are living for the country, or the state, and not for ourselves and our families. Players on a team are playing for that team and work to further the goals of that team. As a free individual, I no more live for my country and it's goals than I live for you.]

Your style is not how this country works, and it was NEVER how the Constitution was framed.

[The country was framed by framers who rebelled against their government through the treasonous act of declaring independence. Had they lost their cause, they would have been hung. Libertarianism is the direct result of the classic liberalism that characterized our country's founding fathers. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, dissent is the highest form of patriotism.]

For someone who talks a lot about personal responsibility, you sure like to shovel off the responsibility on others, namely the government.

[And what of my responsibilities have I shoveled off on the government?]

I know you have had an anonymous poster on here before, and quite frankly, I have to agree with that person. I respect your beliefs, but man, thank goodness those are not the foundations of this nation, no matter how rotten the government can be at times.

[I'm sorry you see the founding of our country differently than it actually was. The British government was pretty rotten, so it was rejected by the people and a new one established. And thank goodness for that. Keep the comments comin'!]

2 comments:

cobbforliberty said...

It looks like someone else agrees that we dont own ourselves... a man you may have heard of named Adolf Hitler "a powerful national government may encroach considerably upon the liberty of individuals as well as of the different states, and assume the responsibility for it, without weakening the empire idea, if only every citizen recognized such measures as means for making his nation greater."

Yophat said...

LOL He's correct though in that we are all currently slaves!

Leaves us two choices....rebellion or anarchy and submission.


He's obviously choosing submission which is hard to fault when contrasted with anarchy.

Post a Comment