CNN Commentary: "Libertarian ideas to boost economy"

[Jeremy]

It's on the front page of mobile CNN

or here: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2008/news/commentaries/index.html

Article link: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/05/miron.libertarian.stimulus/index.html

[tribute_13]

So many people in the comments talking shit. I don't understand how they're getting the "help the wealthy" message when it clearly states getting rid of tax obligations.

[RevolutionSD]

So many people in the comments talking shit. I don't understand how they're getting the "help the wealthy" message when it clearly states getting rid of tax obligations.

Because they've been taught this crap in government schools, and feel more strongly about making sure others "pay their fair share" rather than actually being able to not pay taxes themselves.

[BarryDonegan]

idk how that guy is supposed to be libertarian. carbon taxes?

[Malakai]

A libertarian advocating higher carbon taxes?

Yes get rid of the corp tax, but don't raise other taxes to compensate. Listen to RP people, CUT TAXES AND SPENDING.

As long as no one but our guy in gov will even entertain the idea of cutting spending there is no hope of fixing the mess.
The problem isn't the recession, it's that gov borrows and spends way to much, and has become an untenable financial burden on the economy.
No tax cut even will fix the problem if we are printing and borrowing trillions more a year to make up the difference!

[MGreen]

Man, those comments are horrible. It pains me to think there are people out there who honestly think they're making sense when they say things like:

"Whenever I hear a proposal to lower taxes on the poor corporations that are struggling, I would like to point out that this ideology is dangerous as history over the past thousand(s) of years of kings and monarchs has shown."

[TastyWheat]

idk how that guy is supposed to be libertarian. carbon taxes?
I thought that was odd for a libertarian. I also don't see how increasing H-1B Visas is supposed to help our economy. You don't have to hire a foreigner for dirt cheap, most Americans are just happy to have a job at this point.

[Knightskye]

Man, I got a good laugh from those comments equating libertarians with Republicans. Good lord.

"hey why dont we just roll back child labor laws while were at it?

Lmao. :D

[idiom]

Carbon Taxes are punishment for infringing on the property rights of others and used to make ammends.

If Global Warming is valid (big if - especially round here where the tinfoil protects our minds) then carbon taxes are perfectly libertarian. Just like tresspassing fines.

[AutoDas]

Pigovian taxes are not compatible in a libertarian society. It assumes that one (i.e. the Government) can properly levy the correct tax on a polluter as if this will counterbalance the effect it has. It's an externality problem that I think will solve itself when we are not subsidizing these huge petrol corporations.

[Xenophage]

Carbon Taxes are punishment for infringing on the property rights of others and used to make ammends.

If Global Warming is valid (big if - especially round here where the tinfoil protects our minds) then carbon taxes are perfectly libertarian. Just like tresspassing fines.

That's an interesting take I've never heard before. My initial reaction is "taxes bad," but I've always had trouble reconciling environmental concerns with my libertarianism. The air is a commons, and there is no means by which I can think of to privatize it. To avoid a tragedy of the commons, what do we do?

I remember posting a thread asking this same question, but I don't think anybody responded to it because I haven't seen it again.

[Knightskye]

Carbon Taxes are punishment for infringing on the property rights of others and used to make ammends.

The government would have to tax the Department of Defense.

[idiom]

Obviously you would remove subsidies generally as distortions. And the DoD if it continued to exist would have to pay to clean up its considerable messes.

Clean technologies are often more expensive because of a market distortion favouring polluting technologies. If the cost of clean up is not included then the market favours technologies that pollute unfairly. Not having a given pollution tax is a silent subsidy of whatever pollutes against other people.

Pollution outside of your property is an infringemnet upon the property rights of others. This is probably an argument for bans on smoking in public places also.


I am not a big Global Warming fan... however the libertarian school of thought needs to start thinking ahead for when the amount of CO2 recycling land starts to actually bump up against the population.

If persons dump toxic crap in the ocean they should have to cover the cost of cleaning it up. The same with the air or public land. They are both largely unrecognized but vital parts of the economic system.

[daviddee]

...

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

Man, those comments are horrible. It pains me to think there are people out there who honestly think they're making sense when they say things like:

"Whenever I hear a proposal to lower taxes on the poor corporations that are struggling, I would like to point out that this ideology is dangerous as history over the past thousand(s) of years of kings and monarchs has shown."
Haha what the fuck? there are least 3 completely different ideologies mashed into that one sentence

[american.swan]

Were some of you born yesterday? The fascist, socialist, neo-cons are trying to take over the libertarians and make sure some guy with real balls doesn't beat their chosen one to continue foreign policies and tax and spend. Come on, even Insane McCain has "suddenly" started talking about the dollar and bailouts.

ACTION POINT: we need a website RIGHT NOW saving every single lie and article and quotes showing that these GOP leaders are full of sewage.

[NYgs23]

Proposing a one-size-fits-all social engineering "carbon tax" is not the way to go, even assuming global warming. Even though certains matters pertaining to property and externalities may be difficult to deal with, that doesn't justify the use of a mandatory tax by some arbitrary bureaucrats. If those matters must be dealt with, they should be dealt with through judicial means and customary law, not top-down fiat from a governing elite.

[Knightskye]

Clean technologies are often more expensive because of a market distortion favouring polluting technologies. If the cost of clean up is not included then the market favours technologies that pollute unfairly. Not having a given pollution tax is a silent subsidy of whatever pollutes against other people.

Nonsense. The market favors technology that people buy.

Unless, of course, you'd like to name some specific examples...


Pollution outside of your property is an infringemnet upon the property rights of others. This is probably an argument for bans on smoking in public places also.

You're mincing words here. You're not allowed to dump garbage on your neighbor's lawn, and vice versa. Are you saying something different than that?



I am not a big Global Warming fan... however the libertarian school of thought needs to start thinking ahead for when the amount of CO2 recycling land starts to actually bump up against the population.

Well, people can think about global warming all they want, and they can fight it. Just not with tax dollars.

[idiom]

You are still working within the parameters that a strong Federal government needs to and will continue to exist.

The root of all evil in this country IS Washington.

So to accept that the DoD would have to pay is assuming it will even exist.

Lastly, Global Warming is a pile of shit. Just another scare tactic used to ram through flawed policies and hamper personal liberty.

Please refer to the book "Silent Spring"... Same shit, Same People, but a different Generation.

I was replying to someone else who was assuming the continued existence of the DoD.

Again, if you read what I write you will notice that all discussion of global warming is disclaimed as being hyopthetical.

The libertarian position as far as I am aware, is that the government is allowed to stop you messing with other people without consent.

If someones powerstation was belching radioactive gas into the upper atmosphere, who has the authority to complain, and who do they complain too?

[TastyWheat]

Pollution outside of your property is an infringemnet upon the property rights of others. This is probably an argument for bans on smoking in public places also.
Sorry, but I'm sick of the government doing things on my behalf. They ban smoking in places I'm free to stay away from. They arrest drunk drivers on an empty street in the middle of the night. They fine people for not buckling their seat belts. They tax homeowners to provide public education. I don't want the government taxing people to protect the air I breathe and use that money to "repair the damage" I don't notice or particularly care about. Individual citizens (combined) pollute way more than all the refineries or shipping trucks put together. Once again, the government is finding a problem and attacking the most insignificant sources.