"How I Became a Libertarian": https://www.cato.org/policy-report/march/april-2021/how-i-became-libertarian too long to quote in its entirety, but here's an excerpt: How I Became a Libertarian The consequences of intervention are rarely what we expect or desire. MARCH/APRIL 2021 • POLICY REPORT By Meir Kohn I did not become a libertarian because I was persuaded by philosophical arguments — those of Ayn Rand or F. A. Hayek, for example. Rather, I became a libertarian because I was persuaded by my own experiences and observations of reality. There were three important lessons. The first lesson was my personal experience of socialism. The second was what I learned about the consequences of government intervention from teaching a course on financial intermediaries and markets. And the third lesson was what I learned about the origin and evolution of government from my research into the sources of economic progress in preindustrial Europe and China. Lesson 1. My Personal Experience of Socialism In my youth, I was a socialist. I know that is not unusual. But I not only talked the talk, I walked the walk. Growing up in England as a foreign‐born Jew, I did not feel I belonged. So, as a teenager, I decided to emigrate to Israel. To further my plan, I joined a Zionist youth movement. The movement I joined was not only Zionist: it was also socialist. So, to fit in, I became a socialist. Hey, I was a teenager! What do I mean by a socialist? I mean someone who believes that the principal source of human unhappiness is the struggle for money — “capitalism” — and that the solution is to organize society on a different principle — “from each according to his ability; to each according to his needs.” The Israeli kibbutz in the 1960s was such a society. The youth movement I joined in England sent groups of young people to Israel to settle on a kibbutz. When I was 18, I joined such a group going to settle on Kibbutz Amiad. A kibbutz is a commune of a few hundred adults, plus kids, engaged primarily in agriculture but also in light industry and tourism. Members work wherever they are assigned, although preferences are taken into account. Instead of receiving pay, members receive benefits in kind: they live in assigned housing, they eat in a communal dining hall, and their children are raised communally in children’s houses, and can visit with their parents for a few hours each day. Most property is communal except for personal items such as clothing and furniture, for which members receive a small budget. Because cigarettes were free, I soon began to smoke! Kibbutz is bottom‐up socialism on the scale of a small community. It thereby avoids the worst problems of state socialism: a planned economy and totalitarianism. The kibbutz, as a unit, is part of a market economy, and membership is voluntary: you can leave at any time. This is “socialism with a human face” — as good as it gets. Being a member of a kibbutz taught me two important facts about socialism. The first is that material equality does not bring happiness. The differences in our material circumstances were indeed minimal. Apartments, for example, if not identical, were very similar. Nonetheless, a member assigned to an apartment that was a little smaller or a little older than someone else’s would be highly resentful. Partly, this was because a person’s ability to discern differences grows as the differences become smaller. But largely it was because what we received was assigned rather than earned. It turns out that how you get stuff matters no less than what you get. The second thing I learned from my experience of socialism was that incentives matter. On a kibbutz, there is no material incentive for effort and not much incentive of any kind. There are two kinds of people who have no problem with this: deadbeats and saints. When a group joined a kibbutz, the deadbeats and saints tended to stay while the others eventually left. I left. In retrospect, I should have known right away, from my first day, that something was wrong with utopia. On my arrival, I was struck by the fact that the pantry of the communal kitchen was locked. more at the link
Libertarians are selfish - they want to live in a safe society they just don't want to pay for it. It is child like in it's beliefs. DD
It's like adults beliving in Santa Claus. It ignores the complexity of a civil society. It's an ideology of basing child like "common sense" to all aspects of society when society is far more complex than "common sense"
Again, we need to move away from the Socialism word because GOPers don't want to think, they just want to react to memes...... Call it "Responsible Capitalism" Got to do better on our slogans. DD
It took a financial meltdown, generational turning and looming insolvency for me to research the financial system in more detail, but there are pure legit issues against our transitioning to European-style socialism. He's right on the assumptions. The first is that we know how to improve society: “social science” provides us with a reliable basis for the necessary social engineering. The second critical assumption is that government is a suitable instrument for improving society. Social science, including his tenured field, has been louder than it has been provable, testable, and repeatable. If economists like him were so good, why couldn't he have predicted the GFC in 08? We're seeing a lot more progressive and redistributable measures/initiatives that seems to correct "past wrongs" yet most don't have a strong body of evidence or quantitative metrics to serve as goals or measures of progress. I'm not ashamed of my more progressive ideals, and it should deeply disturbing even for those who just want action. Without solid benchmarks, we're destroying for the sake of destroying while hoping for a better outcome. The second assumption is supported by Fed policies dating back to Greenspan when he intervened on Black Monday in 87. He pretty much made the Fed an ongoing case of moral hazard and guaranteed a put in stock markets that's resulted in the shitshow we have today. I don't agree with his assertions of subprime triggering the GFC, but his greater point to all of this is that government interventions spike volatility. I saw a great analogy about the quiet guy working in a pressure cooker environment. On the surface, he looks calm (low observed vol), but there's going to be some trigger point where he explodes. A less regulated capitalism than what we have today could in theory reduce overall volatility... The issue is that neither party supports that. Libertarians voting for the "lesser evil" triggers the same "net loss" for their ideology... if not worse in terms of their credibility. I think what we have to ask ourselves in our march towards Socialism is whether this is the height of human ingenuity and self driven success. I mean, if it's the cap then it should be fine to centralize outputs and capital to redistribute in a more equitable manner. But you can't have the best of both worlds at the same time. Europe is a good example at trying to do both. They've lagged in terms of economic progress with other industrialized nations while their costly unmeasurable programs for social progress is eating into their economic gains, which in turn stagnates their future prospects of paying off their own debt and pension liabilities. Every generation poses a different challenge, and I would be hesitant to think a Sanders or Warren would hold the answers that me or my children will face. On the surface, that prospect of centralizing/consolidating wealth doesn't make a lot of sense. But viscerally, what's driving people away from capitalism is seeing wealth inequality skyrocket while the Fed makes the rich richer and working class wages slip or stagnate. Talk all you want about theory in your Golden Years, but millennials and younger gens have been screwed for the past quarter century eating the front loaded lies of their elder leaders. If I were a cynic, I'd claim that old professor wants to be libertarian so the next generation won't take away his stocks and cheap real estate. That's also coming...probably triggered when the government backstops pension funds for the elderly.
These "debates" are cute. Until the United States is capable of moving beyond the leaving of millions without healthcare then maybe we can have a conversation about "socialists" and "libertarians". Otherwise I suppose Japan, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Holland etc etc etc are communists with helping the poor with medical issues that ALL humans have with their medical syststems. At this point the US is surrounded by the hordes of the unwashed from the south and the communists/socialists of the north. Scary times
France is more the popular example with higher taxes to pay for current spending/pension program and with social welfare, such as guaranteed stipends for the low income/unemployed and near permanent job guarantees (stricter rules to hire and fire). They're more open to controlling utilities (pre-90s era) and national companies with monopoly share ranging from transportation to consumable goods, though not permanently and likely on an ad hoc basis (for the sake of nationalism). Western Europe's labor market is stagnant and rigid, which is great for the employed but terrible for people looking in (a little similar to our healthcare problem wrt employer insurance). I would certainly love to have their quality of life but if I were an immigrant, I'd have to get in a queue and my prospective employer would need to check if there are unemployed citizens with my role to hire before I'd even get an office interview. If I were fresh out of Italian college, I'd probably be all in on Bitcoin and side posting government ponzi scheme conspiracy theories while surfing classifieds at the barista. There are pros/cons to every system. Pros that are imagined or promised should have a bit more due diligence in research and execution.
It's great to hide behind poor or murky messaging until the rubber hits the road. Reminds me of the Obama era Tea Party...
I'm not sure I understand this comment. Are you saying that it is socialism but it's just not labeled as socialism?
Sounds more like the French aren't taking any **** by having strong unions, which isn't new and I wouldn't mind having citizens in the US having jobs before immigrants in certain fields. I'm not worried about an illegal immigrant coming and taking my plant job but it's hard for a lot of folks right now. On your other comment watch out for China's digital currency...the US looks to be lost on it or so at least on the surface. Bitcoin may reach its heyday sooner than later...but we've fought wars for less...
Yep, thats just unionization and collective agreements creating better worker's rights. We would be in a very confusing time in American politics if we have large groups of people who consider these things to be negative (and socialism).
I'm saying what progressives or socialist-adjacents want for America should promise far more concrete/provable policies or hammer down its messaging. If they pull the same rationale you're pulling, they shouldn't say "it's like Europe but better" when cornered for more tangible evidence for results. It's a smell for the lack of substance and research. Debate over whatever the Tea Party is or was ultimately shitcanned when political power co-opted its name into the mess we see right now.
