Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] liberatarians was: Re: John Lienhard on Absolutism, Evolution

I agree! The person in charge is supposed to monitor this. Who's in
charge???

This is a physics list. Nothing else should be discussed...


Phys-L@Phys-L.org writes:
What...what...what?

Is this a political or physics L/S? Let's get back to it - wasting our
time with political clap-trap - who cares - join another L/S if that is
your will. Or drop me off this one. Focus people!

John Caranci
OISE Physics Teaching Instructor

On 2013-07-11, at 8:09 PM, "LaMontagne, Bob" <RLAMONT@providence.edu>
wrote:

Marty,

I didn't use the word "interference" - although I might when it
involves purely social issues.

Food and safety issues can be handled through lawsuits.

Likewise for child labor and low wages, etc. The laws were basically
unnecessary because society had decided to change - the laws just
followed them. My father was beaten up by State Police during an attempt
to unionize a plant. Instead of helping, the government actually got in
the way and sided with the company. When people are fed up with something
and take mass action - things change - at that point lawsuits can do just
as much as legislation - with the added benefit of the victims getting
compensation.

People got aid before all the safety nets. Extended families stayed
intact because people had to help each other out. The huge government
"safety nets" made the extended family irrelevant. I agree it would be
difficult to turn things around in a short time, but society would easily
adapt in a generation.

Fairness is guaranteed by the Constitution. But that fairness is only
enacted if society sees a need for it. Insurance is the responsibility
of the individual. Again, people used to save and bail each other out
before disability insurance - and there were all kinds of private
charities that took up the slack. People had it hard because the
government in the past sided with the large companies - that's where the
payoffs came from. But much of that changed because of public outrage -
the legislation followed the outrage - never preceded it - but by that
time the problem was on the way taking care of itself.

Fairness does not mean every man for himself. Quite the contrary, it
requires compassion and cooperation between people. No responsible
Libertarian would advocate pulling the plug on all the government
programs with nothing to take their place. To remove the heavy had of
government from our lives requires an alternate structure to be built in
its place - please don't confuse Libertarian philosophy with Anarchy. We
would look to the judicial branch of government to provide the foundation
for the alternate structure - and have far less reliance on the
legislative branch. Legislatures are the epitome of unfairness - laws are
structured to cater to special interests. The courts are not perfect, but
they have a better track record of fairness in their rulings.

Finally, look what government "safety nets" have done to the black
race. Despite the abolishing of slavery and the way society was turned
inside out during the civil rights movement - government programs have
essentially crippled black society to the point it is not functional.
Where is the fairness in that?

By the way, your friend sounds more like a right wing survivalist than
a Libertarian. Libertarians would definitely have police forces, fire
departments, etc., but they would be private - not government run. And
yes - they would be paid for by taxation - but they would be more
accountable to the town councils that hired them because they could be
replaced. As a New England native, I am used to volunteer fire
departments and neighborhood watches - they do work - because they are
neighbor helping neighbor.

Libertarians basically want the same kind of world as you - we just
believe that people are capable of providing that world better than large
government can - and are capable of not being exploited by narrow
interests (unless those interests have government protection).

Regards -

Bob
________________________________________
From: Phys-l [phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] on behalf of Marty Weiss
[martweiss@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 7:03 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: [Phys-L] liberatarians was: Re: John Lienhard on
Absolutism, Evolution and Education, Engines of our Ingenuity
No.2132

You guys have a reputation that you had better start explaining rather
than just say you are against governmental "interference". Here's why:

If government shouldn't interfere then what does that say to regulation
of pure foods and safety of drugs and other manufactured goods? And,
should industries have the right to be free of governmental regulation of
clean air and water; or should we go back to the days when soot and oil
are discharged into the air and raw sewage and trash are released into
the water by unregulated industries?

What about the opportunities of workers to make a fair wage without 70
and 80 hour work weeks? Child labor? The old days of racial inequality
which had to be brought down by the government, often by force, against
those who didn't want the government to interfere with their "rights" to
hire who they wanted and admit who they wanted to "their" schools? Where
would we be without governmental interference when Jews and Blacks were
banned from joining organizations or from being hired, or were outright
shot, burned, and had crosses burned on lawns? Where do you draw the
line at governmental interference and the necessary laws from the feds
which caused the civil rights laws to have some teeth?

And of prime importance nowadays... the social safety net that working
people have enjoyed in the form of social security, medicare, and
medicaid? I was having this discussion with someone of your ilk last
week and he stated outright that social security and medicare should be
abolished and vouchers put in their place. How does that leave someone
when industry, unfettered by regulation, now raises prices and the health
care industry is able to inflate the cost of procedures and drugs well
out of the reach of the ordinary man to afford? Isn't it bad enough when
one aspirin in a hospital costs the price of a bottle of aspirin off the
shelf?

What will happen when Joe Smith who worked for 40 years for Humongous
Steel Corp. gets hurt on the job and is put into bankrupcy because the
Rand Pauls of the world did away with disability insurance? Or what
about the secretary for Joshua Vanderbilt, the CEO of Humongous Steel
retires and cannot afford her health insurance any longer because the
government can no longer guarantee any retirement income because the
conservatives of the country voted out the safety net she counted on
along with her meager IRA savings from her miniscule paycheck after
making sure for 30 years that Joshua's' dalliances with his mistress
never reached the prying eyes of Mrs. Vanderbilt? Would the liberatarian
toss her into the trash heap along with all the other so-called middle
class workers because your idea of government is one where social
security and medicare do not exist and health care is up to the
individual?

My God, man... where does your philosophy end? How can you justify
these things in all good sense and sense of fairness? Oh, yes, my
liberatarian friend I mentioned before stated flatly that fairness
doesn't even have a place in his vocabulary! It's every man for
himself... take up arms and fight to protect your home because the police
are not there to do so... they get paid to investigate crime, not prevent
it. Direct from his mouth to your eyes and ears.

How does the liberatarian justify all of these things?

Marty


On Jul 11, 2013, at 4:27 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:

Marty,

I know this is a late response - I put it in my "later" folder and am
finally getting around to it.

Basically, we believe that government should be kept to the smallest
possible size that allows it to aid society in affording every individual
the opportunity to succeed and to live life with the maximum amount of
freedom with hurting others or being a burden on them. That usually
results in us opposing ant-drug laws, anti-prostitution laws, etc. We
believe in equality of opportunity, but not a guarantee of equality of
outcome. We encourage people to donate time and money to charitable
institutions to provide help to the needy, but we oppose the government
forcing us to give aid through taxation. We believe that contracts make
more sense than laws. We would not regulate businesses, but rather
provide anyone injured by a company's actions to have the right to take
the company to court to redress the issue.

We essentially believe that you have a right to live your life in any
fashion that you please, but that right ends at the tip of another
person's nose.

Bob LaMontagne

-----Original Message-----
From: Phys-l [mailto:phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] On Behalf Of Marty
Weiss
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:04 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] John Lienhard on Absolutism, Evolution and
Education,
Engines of our Ingenuity No.2132

Since we are on the subject, which is way off physics anyway, let me
ask this
directly. Exactly what do Libertarians stand for anyhow?
On Jun 11, 2013, at 12:34 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:


________________________________________
From: Phys-l [phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] on behalf of John Clement
[clement@hal-pc.org] John,

If you are going to continue this endless bloviation about
conservatives and
conservatism, I suggest you educate yourself about the terms really
mean.
There is a whole spectrum of ideas and opinions that are included in
the
conservative viewpoint - not just the straw man religious-right that
you seem
narrowly fixated on. I am a Libertarian, but I have many conservative
friends
who are neither Republican, nor religious, nor in favor of small
government.

Bob at PC

Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:30 AM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] John Lienhard on Absolutism, Evolution and
Education, Engines of our Ingenuity No.2132

A possible solution to the problem of "empire dissolution" is to have
a well educated populace with even better educated intelligent
leaders. The platitude "The meek will inherit the earth" can mean
that we have to understand the problems and respond to them without
letting our inflated egos get in the way. The conservative point of
view that we have done alright means we will continue to do so is
very
antiscientific. Past history is only a guide to what might happen in
the future. (Remember that conservative can mean just adhering to
traditional norms, and thinking that the past will continue forever.
One can be a liberal traditionalist, or a conservative radical.)

The idea that we are the most powerful nation ergo we will continue
to
do so is a very absolutist idea, and historically has not held up.
If
the current anti-science trend on one side of the aisle continues,
science and invention in our country is likely to stagnate. Notice
that this idea that education has worked well in the past, so it is
OK
is also an absolutist idea. But the opposite side of the coin,
saying
that education is not longer working well is also not accurate. In
reality education may be working as well as it did in the past, but
that is not adequate. It needs to be modified ala PER and other
research
based innovations.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



Our wealth is because we were able to exploit vigin land. But now
others are catching up. Remember the Romans probably felt the same
way, and where are they now???


You mean as an empire? The Athenians did the same ... had
to wall their city and the road to the harbor where their ships left
to plunder the planet as they knew it.

More recently the Brits. and then us. (and the NAZIs)

bc thinks history doesn't bode well for us.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l