PDA

View Full Version : Success in a Libertarian society




eugenekop
12-01-2010, 03:40 PM
In a Libertarian society some people will be rewarded more than others. Smart and hard working people will be rewarded more in a Libertarian society than in any other kind of society. But no system is perfect, and I think some people who in my view should be highly rewarded might not be rewarded in a Libertarian society.

For example a person can be a genius but an autistic in interpersonal skills and understanding of reality. Perhaps this person will discover something great and contribute immensely to society, but his employer will pay him small money and that person will be too shy to ask for more.

Another example is an individual who is also very smart and hard working but a very gullible person. Every crook will be able to cheat him, so at the end he will become penniless despite his ingenuity and hard work.

I'd like to hear your opinion about this. Do you think its a real problem, can it be solved?

malkusm
12-01-2010, 03:46 PM
Sure it can. Every professional athlete hires an agent to represent them for contract negotiations. Every person who is accused of a crime hires a lawyer to defend them, if they don't feel capable of defending themselves. Insurance exists to prevent such abuse. Contracts exist to prevent such abuse.

eugenekop
12-01-2010, 03:54 PM
The people I am talking about will be cheated by these middle men. I am not talking about athletes who just don't have all the information, but are otherwise street wise, I am talking about all the awkward and autistic people out there.

malkusm
12-01-2010, 03:58 PM
The people I am talking about will be cheated by these middle men. I am not talking about athletes who just don't have all the information, but are otherwise street wise, I am talking about all the awkward and autistic people out there.

The legal system exists to handle cases of fraud, extortion, etc.

Acala
12-01-2010, 04:01 PM
I think some people who in my view should be highly rewarded might not be rewarded in a Libertarian society.



Since it is YOUR value system that the hypothetical free society is not meeting, then it is up to YOU to reward those people as you see fit.

moostraks
12-01-2010, 04:15 PM
The people I am talking about will be cheated by these middle men. I am not talking about athletes who just don't have all the information, but are otherwise street wise, I am talking about all the awkward and autistic people out there.

As champion of the weak and needy I suggest you pursue a career supporting these individuals. Demanding others fulfill your wishes through government might is greedy and manipulative. This thread seems like a rewrite of your other thread...

zade
12-01-2010, 04:30 PM
You bring up a valid point eugene, don't worry just cuz they don't want to hear it. Another group i would put in there would be artists. Now all you will say "well if art is worth saving the market will save it," but what if a lot of people really just didn't care about it enough to keep a demand up, does that mean it is unworthy of being around? Society needs art, but not everyone realizes it, some of the greatest artists of all time died poor (of course not in libertarian societies but you see the issue), is that just? Is it possible for the market to be dead wrong?

Note I'm not proposing state solutions, just trying to challenge you guys a little

Acala
12-01-2010, 04:33 PM
You bring up a valid point eugene, don't worry just cuz they don't want to hear it. Another group i would put in there would be artists. Now all you will say "well if art is worth saving the market will save it," but what if a lot of people really just didn't care about it enough to keep a demand up, does that mean it is unworthy of being around? Society needs art, but not everyone realizes it, some of the greatest artists of all time died poor (of course not in libertarian societies), is that just? Is it possible for the market to be dead wrong?

Note I'm not proposing state solutions, just trying to challenge you guys a little

Not much of a challenge. If people won't "vote" for the art with dollars, then the art isn't working. Too bad for the artist. The only place that art nobody likes gets support is when people get to pay for it with other people's money.

Tal
12-01-2010, 04:35 PM
You bring up a valid point eugene, don't worry just cuz they don't want to hear it. Another group i would put in there would be artists. Now all you will say "well if art is worth saving the market will save it," but what if a lot of people really just didn't care about it enough to keep a demand up, does that mean it is unworthy of being around? Society needs art, but not everyone realizes it, some of the greatest artists of all time died poor (of course not in libertarian societies but you see the issue), is that just?

Yes because someone's wealth in a capitalistic is linked to how much the service provided is valued by consumers, people vote with their money and if some artists cant earn a good living from doing art then its because the market for art is oversatuated.

If art was really useful for people then they would pay more for it, so to answer your question yes I consider the free market the best way to decide whether someone should be able to earn a living.

Skilled artists dont have anymore of a right to earn a living from doing art than I have from playing football, I love playing football also but I dont demand that others subsidize me via the government so I can continue doing it.

zade
12-01-2010, 04:37 PM
Yeah guys I know, of course I'm familiar with that answer, but it doesn't quite do it for me

pcosmar
12-01-2010, 04:39 PM
Note I'm not proposing state solutions, just trying to challenge you guys a little

It seems to me that art and artists have endured through the ages and many political systems and economic realities.

Add to this , everyone dies. and you take nothing with you when you go.

Words of a wise man,

2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
3 What profit hath a man of all his labor which he taketh under the sun?
4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
7 All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full: unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
8 All things are full of labor; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.
9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

p.s. wow 13,000 post

Acala
12-01-2010, 04:44 PM
Yeah guys I know, of course I'm familiar with that answer, but it doesn't quite do it for me

So you think other people should be forced to pay for art that YOU like?

moostraks
12-01-2010, 04:46 PM
Yeah guys I know, of course I'm familiar with that answer, but it doesn't quite do it for me

Art is something that has a soul quality. As such if an artist is undervalued in his time, then he should consider his time spent on artistic pursuits gifts to society and earn his money somewhere else imo.

Sucks that we can't all be given financial remuneration such as we see fit but it really is decided by society in one manner or another no matter what we pursue. We can give this over to an group of elites who will value those who lobby them or we can trust the market and if we fail it is on our own merits. Which would you prefer then?

Bruehound
12-01-2010, 05:16 PM
In a libertarian society we would be judged by our peers more for our honesty than for our economic status. This was the dominant subtext of Atlas Shrugged