how-to block ads
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
edit:
December 6th, @11:22AM
| reply to Steve
Re: Yeah, but what do you expect from a bunch of libertardians?
Eh, while you're painting an accurate picture of the Libertarian philosophy (albeit a little rosy), most of these think tanks simply use the Libertarian platform as a framework for the real agenda, which is to weaken government oversight, eliminate regulation, and increase revenue. Pretty much at any cost...
They really would be happy with no government and corporate control of everything. It's really pretty disingenuous to pretend this is a position that values liberty and independence, as they've simply bastardized the Libertarian philosophy for financial gain.
What kind of Libertarian wants the federal government passing federal laws (lobbied for by telcos) telling them their town can't vote? No, Big government is just fine with these folks provided it's creating better profit margins and doing what they tell it to.
Like the heartland Institute, who obfuscates their donors, and pretends to work the Libertarian agenda by calling claims that Tobacco smoking causes cancer "junk science" and pretending to be for "smoker's rights"....while getting funds from all the major tobacco companies.
Not that I don't find the "value liberty" schtick highly heart-warming, but it's paper god damn thin. Libertarianism in this particular incarnation is about greed. Nothing more. | |
Steve
ho ho ho dammit
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| said by Karl Bode  :Eh, while you're painting an accurate picture of the Libertarian philosophy (albeit a little rosy), most of these think tanks simply use the Libertarian platform as a framework for the real agenda, which is to weaken government oversight, eliminate regulation, and increase revenue. Pretty much at any cost... Oh, I believe that any honorable principle can be used as a cloak for an self-interested position, and I don't know enough about Heartland to comment, but I do know that the Reason Foundation has had a fully principled and consistent position for years. They're not a front for anybody.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| quote:
"As the new century begins, dominant assumptions about government, popular culture, and many social and business institutions are in transition. Some of these shifts reinforce traditional American ideas about liberty and limited government. But the backlash against free markets and increased choices is gaining ground in many quarters
.
from: »www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti···undation
If there is such a backlash against "free markets and increased choices", then what is their beef with municipal broadband?
1. It is another choice and competitor in the oh-so idealized "Free Market"
2. If the "free market" can't handle another competitor that either serves consumers better and/or where others will not, why is that bad for anyone?
The bottom line is that if the citizenry asks their municipal government (through a voter referendum) to provide municipal broadband, the idea that corporations can quash that request is an affront to the citizens liberty, the very thing this "thinktank" is supposedly protecting. | |
Steve
ho ho ho dammit
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA | There's a difference between having a view that you don't agree with, and claiming that view has been bought and paid for. Pick one. | |
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
 ·Packet8
 ·Cox HSI
| said by Steve :There's a difference between having a view that you don't agree with, and claiming that view has been bought and paid for. Pick one. Yeah, however, the grant or donation or contribution or bribe or gift of money, whatever it was, from ATT certainly can give the appearance of impropriety and conflict of interest. Whether or not it exists doesn't matter. The fact is that they took it and then released a "report" that falls right in line with ATT's agenda. This, frankly, hurts the credibility of their "findings."
--
Prove it... | |
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to Steve
said by Steve :... I do know that the Reason Foundation has had a fully principled and consistent position for years. They're not a front for anybody. Steve being consistent doesn't mean they are being straightforward and being principled doesn't mean they are right. Let them clearly and conspicuously state who they are working for (or where their funding comes from) and I don't care what philosophy or position they espouse.
Just don't pretend your position is for the common good when it only benefits your paymaster and it's widely known that paymaster has an agenda completely different from the common good. | |
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode :Eh, while you're painting an accurate picture of the Libertarian philosophy (albeit a little rosy), most of these think tanks simply use the Libertarian platform as a framework for the real agenda, which is to weaken government oversight, eliminate regulation, and increase revenue. Pretty much at any cost... Nonsense. You clearly have no clue what they stand for, yet have no problem making accusations and strawman arguments against them. Of course they're for limited goverment intrusion and believe that will increase revenue. "at any cost"? The Black Helocopters circling yet Karl? Better get your tinfoil.
They really would be happy with no government and corporate control of everything. It's really pretty disingenuous to pretend this is a position that values liberty and independence, as they've simply bastardized the Libertarian philosophy for financial gain. Yet another dishonest strawman argument... not that you've really proved capable of intellectual honesty in the first place. Please, show me where in the charter of the Heartland Institute, Cato, or any other such organization that they'd be happy with "no government".
What kind of Libertarian wants the federal government passing federal laws (lobbied for by telcos) telling them their town can't vote? No, Big government is just fine with these folks provided it's creating better profit margins and doing what they tell it to. They're obviously (well, to anyone with any degree of objectivity) not against the right of a town to vote, but rather against taxpayer funded competition with the private sector.Like the heartland Institute, who obfuscates their donors, and pretends to work the Libertarian agenda by calling claims that Tobacco smoking causes cancer "junk science" and pretending to be for "smoker's rights"....while getting funds from all the major tobacco companies.
And they're getting funds from ALL the major tobacco companies? So what if they were? Why wouldn't they support an organization that benefits them? Opposition to smoking bans in places like bars is perfectly in line with libertarian principles, which would have consumers and business owners make that decision for themselves. No different than gun manufacturers supporting the NRA.Not that I don't find the "value liberty" schtick highly heart-warming, but it's paper god damn thin. Libertarianism in this particular incarnation is about greed. Nothing more.
Socialist much? Because of course there couldn't possibly have anything to do with the free market principles they stand for being violated now could it? 
Do you even try to be taken seriously in your commentary? Pointing out that an organization took donations from AT&T is perfectly valid, but your baseless accusations, straw man arguments and absurd claims go well beyond crossing the line. | |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Socialist, black helicopters, yadda yadda yadda.... | |
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
 ·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to dynodb
Wow, you've fallen for their beliefs, hook line and sinker.
"They don't claim that tobacco smoking causes cancer". Umm, it's a SCIENTIFIC FACT that smoking causes cancer. PERIOD. The claim that it's ONLY 100,000 is smoke and mirrors. It doesn't matter if it's one person, or 1 Million people. Smoking causes cancer. As a former smoker, I recognize the fact, and fully support the ban of smoking everywhere.
They are against the taxpayer funded competition? Umm, yes, they are. And to DO that, they are against the RIGHT of the taxpayer to VOTE FOR a muni project. Your arguments is fallacious, you can't have it both ways. Either they support the rights of the taxpayer, or they don't (they obviously don't).
"Because of course there couldn't possibly have anything to do with the free market principles they stand for being violated now could it?"
Umm, they don't stand for free markets. They stand for the rights of the megacorps to rape the customer. That's not libertarian, that's just plain lies.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 10mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
slim
Premium
join:2001-02-13
Arlington, VA
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode :Socialist, black helicopters, yadda yadda yadda....  | |
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx :Wow, you've fallen for their beliefs, hook line and sinker. "They don't claim that tobacco smoking causes cancer". Umm, it's a SCIENTIFIC FACT that smoking causes cancer. PERIOD. The claim that it's ONLY 100,000 is smoke and mirrors. It doesn't matter if it's one person, or 1 Million people. Smoking causes cancer. As a former smoker, I recognize the fact, and fully support the ban of smoking everywhere. The point is that they aren't stating that smoking doesn't cause cancer. That would be ridiculous,though Karl falsely represented them as making that claim. People should make choices based on the facts, but if the Health Nazi Nanny Brigade is making exaggerated claims then passing laws based on those false claims, the public is not well served. How very elitist that you'd make decisions for others- why am I not at all suprised? What else would you ban because it's bad for you, Komrade?They are against the taxpayer funded competition? Umm, yes, they are. And to DO that, they are against the RIGHT of the taxpayer to VOTE FOR a muni project. Your arguments is fallacious, you can't have it both ways. Either they support the rights of the taxpayer, or they don't (they obviously don't). And if they're against a town passing a law requiring that every adult under 5'2" tall pay double taxes, does that mean they're against the "RIGHT" of the taxpayer to "VOTE FOR" such a law? After all, the majority would benefit. "Because of course there couldn't possibly have anything to do with the free market principles they stand for being violated now could it?" Umm, they don't stand for free markets. They stand for the rights of the megacorps to rape the customer. That's not libertarian, that's just plain lies.
Don't you have a Wal-Mart protest to prepare for or something? Maybe watch "Supersize Me" for the 8th time? | |
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode :Socialist, black helicopters, yadda yadda yadda.... Just for record, I find your continued assertions that vaccines cause autism to be in the same sort of lunatic fringe that the black helicopter / tinfoil hat folks live. Just like those kooks who claim Wi-Fi and cell phones cause cancer. And where have I read articles about those last two issues lately? Why RIGHT HERE, written by you, Karl.
--
Those who complain the loudest about their loss of rights under the Patriot Act seem to be the first ones to try to take away others rights under the Second Amendment. | |
bentman78
Bentley
join:2004-04-16
Arlington, VA | reply to dynodb
that is possible the funniest thing I have read on BBR... | |
|
