News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Enough with Basic Income by rayiner on Sunday September 11, 2016 @11:45AM (#12473891)
Libertarians intersect with liberals only on a handful of social issues: gay marriage, drugs, and abortion. Most of the social issues near-and-dear to the left are not compatible with libertarianism. There is nothing libertarian about the Civil Rights Act of 1964--which curtailed peoples' freedom to serve which customers they chose to serve or hire which employees they chose to hire. There is nothing libertarian about affirmative action, mandating equal pay for women, mandating family leave, and subsidizing child care. There is nothing libertarian about EPA and OSHA and their extensive regulatory codes. There is nothing libertarian about pushing more educational issues up to the federal level to redirect tax dollars to lower-income school districts.
Re:Enough with Basic Income by throwaway2016a on Sunday September 11, 2016 @07:48PM (#12476312)
"There is nothing libertarian about EPA and OSHA" is not 100% accurate. Care should be used when saying "nothing"

Many (not all, maybe not even most, but definitely a good amount) libertarians are environmentalist and see the EPA as a valuable tool to ensure that people's rights are violated.

However, in general the cause is the same but the approach is different. For example, just of those two causes should be handled by the courts (as a libertarian sees it at least) rather than through regulatory agencies.

To rephrase, Libertarian's generally agree people should be safe at work. They just disagree with the top down approach to solving that issue.

Re:Enough with Basic Income by rayiner on Sunday September 11, 2016 @08:39PM (#12476473)
> Many (not all, maybe not even most, but definitely a good amount) libertarians are environmentalist and see the EPA as a valuable tool to ensure that people's rights are violated.

In certain narrow situations where there is an identifiable property right at issue (e.g. dumping waste on private land). But there aren't a lot of libertarian theorists espousing a general "right" to untouched wilderness, preserving endangered species, or having clean rivers.

> To rephrase, Libertarian's generally agree people should be safe at work.

Libertarians generally believe that the level of safety in the workplace should be set by the market, rather than by a regulatory agency. I.e. if a workplace is known for being unsafe, it won't be able to hire employees (or will have to pay a premium for employees to take on the extra risk). Liberals in contrast believe that the government should impose a safety floor on all workplaces, irrespective of the market.

Re:Enough with Basic Income by erikpukinskis on Monday September 12, 2016 @10:52PM (#12485319)
> there aren't a lot of libertarian theorists espousing a general "right" to untouched wilderness, preserving endangered species, or having clean rivers.

To me, this is where the libertarian philosophy loses its internal consistency. For two reasons:

1) There is no such thing as a closed system, so land use is fundamentally social

2) For the most part, all existing property deeds were obtained by force, not through the voluntary agreeing to contracts, so no one who holds a deed really has any kind of moral claim on it.

Libertarians have to fall back on some other political system (manifest destiny, kraterocracy, democrasy, etc) to resolve the land use question. But to me land use is the foundation of all property law and the fact that Libertarianism has nothing to say about it makes it largely useless as a foundational political system. It's a nice thing to think about, but it can't be relied on to answer basic questions.

Re:Enough with Basic Income by xapata on Sunday September 11, 2016 @01:42PM (#12474546)
Depends on what your definition of "liberty" is and how you balance different kinds.
Re:Enough with Basic Income by xapata on Sunday September 11, 2016 @07:08PM (#12476184)
I guess the downvoters are saying there's only one obvious way.