/p/
Toledo Talk forums search sign-up login

Democracy vs. Libertarianism

It would seem to make sense that as one ages, and doesn't have the resources to take care of his/her own medical needs that he/she would favor Medicare, or some other "socialist" solution over dying sooner. Libertarians are against taxation (excpet for one segment that favors taxes for national defense). Now Medicare resulted from the passage of a bill in Congress. I assume that the overwhelming majority of those who voted for it were looking toward their next election. That is one of the reasons that "term limits" are so important. If Congressman and Senators don't have the option of another term they might be more likely to vote the "national" interest over their own. So things such as Medicare may become less likely in the future with term limits.

Another factor is that the elderly (along with other voting segments) are too lazy to vote. Luckily for those with "conservative" agendas those who most benefit from a "socialist" agenda (the elderly, and the poor) often don't bother to vote. This (not the "Reagan" revolution) is why "conservatives" have done so well since 1980. Of course, the poor are often the most "conservative" (when it comes to social issues) of voting segments. You'll find many "fiscal" conservatives are on their second marriage, and have a mistress on the side. Hopefully, over time democracy will give way to the libertarian ideal, and we can have a life expectancy of around 40-50 "productive" years, and not have to clutter the political landscape with our desires for immortality.

created by oldsendbrdy on Feb 26, 2008 at 12:03:57 pm     Comments: 6

source      versions

Comments ... #

the elderly (along with other voting segments) are too lazy to vote.

Where do you get your facts, because the above is 100% incorrect. Seriously.

posted by billy on Feb 26, 2008 at 12:26:07 pm     #  

You'll find many "fiscal" conservatives are on their second marriage, and have a mistress on the side.

This is true, but misleading in its narrowness.

If you pick up any history book worth it's salt, you'll find extramarital issues in politicians of all parties, and it's been like that since before the signing of the declaration, so limiting what you're implying about "cluttering the political landscape with desires for immorality" on conservatives only is just as silly and bases on bunk as saying that seniors are too lazy to vote.

posted by billy on Feb 26, 2008 at 12:31:49 pm     #  

Fix medicare and social security, make congress use them instead of their fat cushy pensions and health packages.

posted by Linecrosser on Feb 26, 2008 at 01:31:10 pm     #  

Or fix real wages and tie them to productive gains, so people make more over the course of their lifetimes, making forced savings and insurance obsolete. Also allow older people to resume working, but shorter hours. It seems like a lot of people's health goes to the poopyard quickly when they have to transition from full-time to no-time.

But voting is a form of apathy. Just ask people who do vote despite their reservations against the talking head.

posted by charlatan on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:06:54 pm     #  

In my experience, self-proclaimed libertarians are either a) rich assholes who talk the talk but don't walk the walk or, b) college students who just finished reading Ayn Rand's "Fountainhead."

posted by Ace_Face on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:39:44 pm     #  

Billy, it is more speculation than anything about "the elderly (along with other voting segments) are too lazy to vote". Sometimes I write to get a "rise" out of people. But would it be in the elderly's interest to do away with Medi-Care. It would certainly seem to be in the interest of society at large.

Charlatan, I am a little uneasy about tying wages to productive gains. If a person is producing x number of product one year, and is required to do x + .10% the next year, and continue this progression (unless it is less than population gains) wouldn't he eventually begin to see the people on either side of him disappear from their employment because they aren't needed. Certainly he does better, but what about them? If all the goods and services are being produced to keep everyone alive what is wrong with divvying it up? I know this runs counter to capitalism, or libertarianism, but why would we condemn a portion of our society to poverty if we have the means not to? I know that the sacred cow of "capitalism" wants us all to slave, and compete for positions, or invent new ones, but is that what really happens. If this were true then why isn't it succeeding? When you have little or no "economy" to begin with isn't it easier to have gains of 10%, 15%, or even 25% a year? And when an "economy" matures then is it so bad that we have productivity gains of 5% a year or less? If a ountry builds 100,000 cars in 1967, and 200,000 in 1968 (100% increase) while we build 1,000,000 cars in 1967, and 1,150,000 the next year (15%) we look to have worse "productivity" but we've out-produced the former "miracle" by 50,000 units. Any country starting out feels better "morale" as it begins to see things happening. We've lost production (probably to these "miracles" like the PRC, and Thailand), but a "poor" person in this country is better off than the "poor" in Thailand (though they probably don't feel it). Of course, there are those who want to do away with social services and let everyone "sink or swim". And it may come to that. Certainly Medicare is a large expense (especially to keep a non-productive portion of the population consuming only a small propotion of the economy, except for medical needs). We may have to "ration" medical care (deciding what services are cost-effective for the elderly), or have a private system but requiring the insurance companies to insure everyone. The former system allows those to stay alive who don't need massive intervention (like a heart transplant) while allowing the others to die off. The second alternative might bankrupt the insurance carriers since they wouldn't be able to disallow those with catastrophic illness from their roles.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 26, 2008 at 02:58:37 pm     #  

Login or create an account to post a comment.