posted
I can't vote for anyone yet, since I'm not registered with a party. Being Independent, you're really limited to the two idiots the parties decide to throw out there... or a third party.
I normally end up voting third party, mainly because the two-party candidates I've liked have never made it out of the primaries because they were too middle-of-of-the-road.
So, I'll see what the two parties give me as options this year, then I'll start making my decision.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't actually believe that he will be able to get many of the cuts that he wants.
If you listen to him and read his writings, you find out that he doesn't expect implement his vision of America.
What he does see as possible is starting an immediate but orderly troop movement out of Iraq and other countries. He will also veto anything that goes over budget. He will start a discussion with the American people and congress about what the role of government should be.
He has already stated and proven that he has never voted to take money from social security and would not cut people off who rely on the government, and he never will.
He will start the reigning in process with full awareness he needs the support of the people and congress.
I sent $100 on Nov 5th. I will send $234 on Dec 16th, the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party.
The first paper I read that really clarified where Dr. Paul is coming from:
quote: Simply put, freedom is the absence of government coercion.
quote:The political left equates freedom with liberation from material wants, always via a large and benevolent government that exists to create equality on earth. To modern liberals, men are free only when the laws of economics and scarcity are suspended, the landlord is rebuffed, the doctor presents no bill, and groceries are given away.
quote: The political right equates freedom with national greatness brought about through military strength. Like the left, modern conservatives favor an all-powerful central state-- but for militarism, corporatism, and faith-based welfarism.
quote: We must resist any use of the word freedom to describe state action. We must reject the current meaningless designations of liberals and conservatives, in favor of an accurate term for both: statists.
posted
Let me get this straight, you're a "Dr. Paul" supporter, and those are the best quotes you could find?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Simply put, freedom is the absence of government coercion.
I prefer to think that freedom is the absence of coercion from any source and not just the absence of government coercion. I simply don't see that coercion by bullies, thieves, businesses, religions, corporations and so forth is less of an intrusion on my freedom than coercion by government.
I guess Ron Paul doesn't know many people who are compelled to work in a job that makes them miserable not because they couldn't find another job but because they or a family member has cancer, or rheumatoid arthritis, or some other chronic illness that would be exempt from medical coverage unless they stay in their current job. I know many of those people.
He probably doesn't know many older people or disabled people who can't move to the state where their family live because they wouldn't qualify for full medical coverage there. I know those people. He probably doesn't know anyone who can't walk in their neighborhood after dark because of fear of attack. I know those people.
What's more, freedom means nothing unless people have viable options.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
Isn't a sedan an automobile? Is there something I'm missing, or is this just a failed analogy?
I believe that the point was that republics are one of the most common forms of democracy just as sedans are one of the most common forms automobile.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess Ron Paul doesn't know many people who are compelled to work in a job that makes them miserable not because they couldn't find another job but because they or a family member has cancer, or rheumatoid arthritis, or some other chronic illness that would be exempt from medical coverage unless they stay in their current job. I know many of those people.
This seems to be a direct contradiction to HIPAA. I can't figure out a scenario where someone would be stuck at a job that provides a group health plan more than a year because of preexisting condition worries.
If you'd like to help these people overcome this problem, it shouldn't be too difficult to point them to some useful resources.
quote:He probably doesn't know anyone who can't walk in their neighborhood after dark because of fear of attack.
This is too often overlooked in examining protection of liberty. Criminal enforcement is a civil right - not a traditional individually enforceable right, but a right none the less.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: He probably doesn't know anyone who can't walk in their neighborhood after dark because of fear of attack.
Protecting citizens is a responsibility of the government. I don't see how you could think Dr. Paul's positions are anything but an effort to get back to the protection of citizens rights, safety, and pursuit of happiness.
quote:Let me get this straight, you're a "Dr. Paul" supporter, and those are the best quotes you could find?
No, I could quote mine, but those quotes meant something to me because it clarified in my mind why I am so disappointed with the Republicans (my party). It also provides a framework to understand Ron Paul. Layers of government does not make something more efficient. Both parties have become statists.
I am really on the fence about his positions on his medical plans and immigration, but I do love his integrity. I can see where he is coming from.
I am completely behind him on foreign policy, protection of individual liberty, and his fiscal responsibility. Plus I want to reward someone who seems to honestly want to work for the people and not some special interest group.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Isn't a sedan an automobile? Is there something I'm missing, or is this just a failed analogy?
I believe that the point was that republics are one of the most common forms of democracy just as sedans are one of the most common forms automobile.
Yup. When someone says something like "America is a republic, not a democracy!" they don't know what they're talking about. The statement is incorrect.
quote:Both parties have become statists.
Given the means by which 'statist' is defined by the few people who actually use that line, nearly everyone in America is a statist.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, HIPAA has improved things significantly but it hasn't solved the problem for several people I know. These people would like to go to work for start up companies, small businesses or start their own businesses where a group health plan isn't available. Because of their family medical problems or medical history, no insurance company will cover them outside of a group health plan without exorbidant fees.
But those details are basically immaterial to the point I was trying to make. Ron Paul claimed that freedom is the absence of government coercion. I argue that government is far from the only source of coercion in our world and that it is not fundamentally worse than the many other forms of coercion we face.
Many libertarian thinkers would claim that the laws like HIPAA which regulate medical insurance are an example of the type of government coercion that denies them the freedom to run their businesses as they see fit. The flip side to that is the reality that regulation of the medical industry, with laws like HIPAA, can greatly improve peoples freedom to choose different jobs and move from job to job.
Coercion comes in many different forms not just government regulation. It is ridiculous to suggest that we would all be perfectly free if the govenment never coerced anyone to do anything they don't want. When people live together in a society, individual freedoms and rights are constantly in conflict. My freedom to own property is in direct conflict with your freedom to take whatever you want. Your freedom to breath clean air is in direct conflict with my freedom to burn trash in my backyard. We have chosen to make laws that prioritize those freedoms and rights and which provide guidance in the constant conflict between individuals freedoms. Our government is the way we have chosen to create and enforce those laws. It is obsurd to suggest that we would all be perfectly free without government coercion.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:These people would like to go to work for start up companies, small businesses or start their own businesses where a group health plan isn't available.
Ah - I understand now. Sorry for the confusion.
quote:But those details are basically immaterial to the point I was trying to make. Ron Paul claimed that freedom is the absence of government coercion. I argue that government is far from the only source of coercion in our world and that it is not fundamentally worse than the many other forms of coercion we face.
I wasn't attempting to enter the larger discussion with the HIPAA reference but to possibly help out.
quote:Many libertarian thinkers would claim that the laws like HIPAA which regulate medical insurance are an example of the type of government coercion that denies them the freedom to run their businesses as they see fit.
I agree with their characterization of HIPAA as coercion and a reduction in freedom for the business owners. I just disagree with them that this automatically means that such regulations are bad. In other words, I agree that there's always a flip side, and that honest the analysis of such regulations requires assessing that flip side.
On a related note, I find that many people who advocate such regulation don't acknowledge that they are a form of reduction in a particular freedom and coercive. That's NOT aimed at anyone in this thread - this is a general observation of some pro-regulation arguments I've seen.
quote:Coercion comes in many different forms not just government regulation. It is ridiculous to suggest that we would all be perfectly free if the govenment never coerced anyone to do anything they don't want.
I agree, although all other things being equal, an infringement of a freedom by government is something I fear more than infringement by private actors.
All other things are seldom equal, of course.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
