Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Because places like Mississippi are really rocking it in the employment department with their low minimum wage...

Isn't it funny how there's so many examples out there of his utopia and they're all backwoods backwater hellholes that no one in their right mind would want to live?

[Rover]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Isn't it funny how there's so many examples out there of his utopia and they're all backwoods backwater hellholes that no one in their right mind would want to live?

I always wondering why libertarians don't just all move to Somalia, where there's no government and presumably if you arm yourself enough, no taxes either.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I always wondering why libertarians don't just all move to Somalia, where there's no government and presumably if you arm yourself enough, no taxes either.

Another perfect example.

[FreshFish]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I always wondering [sic] why libertarians don't just all move to Somalia

Probably for the same reason that progressives don't just all move to Cuba or Nicaragua....

[Rover]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Probably for the same reason that progressives don't just all move to Cuba or Nicaragua....

Why would we move there since we're running everything over here?

[unofan]

Probably for the same reason that progressives don't just all move to Cuba or Nicaragua....

I'd be willing to move to Scandinavia or pretty much any other western European country if I knew there was a similar job for me over there and barring any other logistical hurdles. I'm happy where I am, but I'd be equally happy there.

Is there a libertarian paradise for which you could make a similar claim?

[Rover]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I'd be willing to move to Scandinavia or pretty much any other western European country if I knew there was a similar job for me over there and barring any other logistical hurdles. I'm happy where I am, but I'd be equally happy there.

Is there a libertarian paradise for which you could make a similar claim?

North Korea, but they don't like to say that out loud!

[Old Priocless]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I always wondering why libertarians don't just all move to Somalia, where there's no government and presumably if you arm yourself enough, no taxes either.

Because that would require them to live with black Muslims, duh.

[FreshFish]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I'd be willing to move to Scandinavia or pretty much any other western European country if I knew there was a similar job for me over there and barring any other logistical hurdles. I'm happy where I am, but I'd be equally happy there.

Is there a libertarian paradise for which you could make a similar claim?

Iceland.

[St. Clown]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I'd be willing to move to Scandinavia or pretty much any other western European country if I knew there was a similar job for me over there and barring any other logistical hurdles. I'm happy where I am, but I'd be equally happy there.

Is there a libertarian paradise for which you could make a similar claim?

From an economic perspective, the closest I know of is Singapore. From a social perspective, the choices are slimmer.

[unofan]

Ireland.

Yes, a place with socialized healthcare, public education, membership in the EU, income tax brackets of 20% and 41%, welfare, a state pension, a VAT, and 20% of its workforce employed by the government sure sounds libertarian to me.

Sounds about on par to the US.

[FreshFish]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I'd be willing to move to Scandinavia or pretty much any other western European country if I knew there was a similar job for me over there and barring any other logistical hurdles. I'm happy where I am, but I'd be equally happy there.

Is there a libertarian paradise for which you could make a similar claim?

The plan was, under our federal system, you wouldn't need to leave the US to escape an intrusive and over-bearing federal government.

Ideally, the 10^th Amendment granted to the states the primary authority to regulate our daily lives (the constitution in theory forbids the federal government from regulating people, which power the states have; the federal government is only supposed to be involved managing interstate activity).

So, if you want to live in a place with lots of state regulations and lots of state-sponsored social welfare programs, you could move to CA or NY or CT; and if you wanted to live in a state that did a good job in providing basic services, where you had the people themselves running the social welfare programs and the people themselves had enough maturity to comport themselves like responsible civic-minded adults, you could move to Wyoming.

There is a huge gaping logical hole in progressive thinking, which (erroneously) assumes that if the government doesn't do it, it doesn't get done. There are situations in which such an assumption may very well be warranted, I do agree (see last paragraph). However, making that blanket assumption to apply to everyone everywhere quickly becomes problematic, because you are forcing one person's idea of right and wrong onto everyone else, whether they agree or not. The more they disagree, the more forcefullly you try to compel them. Now, is that any way to persuade people you are right? or do you breed additional resentment that way?

Yet in Wyoming there are lots of poor people, yet few go wanting, because the people band together on their own initiative to take care of each other voluntarily. There are good schools, good libraries, the roads are well taken care of, the police, fire fighters, and court system all do their jobs well. You get as good or better social services but don't pay taxes to finance them, and the money not taken in taxes is voluntarily shared. People who have a little left over willingly share that with those people in times of duress, no one has to force them.

I remember once, sitting in a local watering hole there, listening to some long-time residents talking. "Do you remember the murder?" -- yeah, when was that, anyway, 1983?

If you are driving and notice someone coming up behind you, you just pull over, let them through, then continue on your way. You figure they have their reasons and who are you to second-guess them? the exact opposite driving behavior dominates in the east: "oh, he's going to tailgate me, eh? I'll show him by refusing to let him pass!"


It seems to me that the core element here is how much in-migration you have.

Wyoming was a pretty settled place; people knew each other from years of association together. Newcomers arrived in small batches over time and assimilated to the local culture. In NY or CA, lots of people would arrive all together, you couldn't rely so much on a stable and settled local culture to absorb them all at once, and so more government involvement was necessary, not because it was somehow "right" or "more noble" but merely because you needed an impartial arbiter to standardize the situation among a group of strangers to each other.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

There is a huge gaping logical hole in progressive thinking, which (erroneously) assumes that if the government doesn't do it, it doesn't get done.

Couple of points:

Nothing is good in extreme. Huge government is bad, microscopic government is bad. That's the problem with labels like liberalism and conservative.

Both Democrats and Republicans are fine with significant government. So while your post has validity...it doesn't really tie over to our existing politics.

IMO where there is a difference is just where that government increase in should exist, remembering that issues like welfare have reached societal consensus. Conservative big government comes in...in public censorship in 'family friendly' everything, taking away a women's right to choose for herself and abundant military. Liberalism is about getting tools in the hands of its citizens in order to shape the US workforce into the world's best (primarily via education, workforce training and infrastructure). And workforce competitiveness is a greater challenge facing the country than business freedom by far. Am I cherry picking? I suppose. But IMO those are the cherries that matter.

[Rover]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Big thing for me is one side is behind hypocritical, and the other isn't. At the base level Dems think govt can solve some problems. At the base level GOoPers think we should have no govt. Great. Problem is, name me the last Republican Prez to actually shrink govt or federal spending? How about...nobody? The whole foundations of conservatism are based on BS, which is why the absolutism of libertarianism is starting to have some appeal on the right. IF you truly want minimal govt, I expect the House majority to bring to a vote the elimination of Social Security. Why they have not done so tells you all you need to know.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Big thing for me is one side is behind hypocritical, and the other isn't. At the base level Dems think govt can solve some problems. At the base level GOoPers think we should have no govt. Great. Problem is, name me the last Republican Prez to actually shrink govt or federal spending? How about...nobody? The whole foundations of conservatism are based on BS, which is why the absolutism of libertarianism is starting to have some appeal on the right. IF you truly want minimal govt, I expect the House majority to bring to a vote the elimination of Social Security. Why they have not done so tells you all you need to know.

This.