Conservative transgender

[oZma]

libertarian here... almost anarcho cap... just haven't learned enough to make the switch yet

both democrats and republicans cans suck my... ha ~ you know

[michelle gee]

I am a proud lifelong liberal democrat and always will be ymmv.
Unfortunately I live in a god-awful conservative bible thumpin' assbackwards state that I hate and hopefully I can move to a blue state in near furure.

[oZma]

we all know monopolies are Bad! why do we give big gov monopolies on things like

police
education
currency
roads
etc...

all monopolies do is screw it up and are terribly inefficient in the process... its time we privatize and add competition!

[Kevin Peña]

Govt. healthcare isn't crap, but TG care is. Not many countries are as liberal about it as the US is. Govt. healthcare places priorities. Transgender healthcare is actually pretty simple by comparison to other medical care and can be taken care of easily, but there are people out there that are in power and don't want to make that happen. It's like gay marriage in the sense that it's so easy and that there are no significant detriments, but people don't want to let it happen. Those people happen to be conservative. Government healthcare is actually better. Remember that A LOT of people can't afford health insurance. Even those that do don't get coverage on a lot of things due to the rules of private insurance companies.

Note that I'm neither liberal nor conservative. Both sides are stupid. You can't pick as side before you hear an issue, or you'll be forced to defend things you don't believe in. I prefer to look at issues individually.

we all know monopolies are Bad! why do we give big gov monopolies on things like

police
education
currency
roads
etc...

all monopolies do is screw it up and are terribly inefficient in the process... its time we privatize and add competition!

What?! As someone who has been on fire department and private ambulances, I can say that there are things that you should NEVER privatize. EVER!

[oZma]

because big gov cares about you? LOL right

gov shouldn't do ANYTHING except protect my rights

private fire fighters? if there is a demand for something, someone will supply it :-) and with supply comes competition (unless you're gov) and competition brings prosperity! :-)

gov cannot supply prosperous services because you need competition to make things better! gov is anti competition

a little article by one of my libertarian heros, John Stossel, questioning why US forest services don't use the best flame suppressant when fighting fires... hmmm maybe because there isn't any competition? why make things better? if its not broke, don't fix it? I say we let the free market decide the best way to fight fires!


http://www.geltechsolutions.com/fox-business-networks-john-stossel-interviews-gelt

don't be scared John is on fox... I know you democrats love to hate fox and while I understand the disdain, Stossel is the man!

[Kevin Peña]

Okay. I'm not a democrat, mind you. 

You talk as though private companies use the best material possible. That's far from the truth. Apple can afford to sell their stuff for a lot less and it has the technology to make much better gadgets, but it progresses its gadget lines slowly to dupe the masses into buying new gadgets every few months and to milk this I-Phone thing for as much as it's got. Not to mention that the little logo somehow makes the product twice as expensive as others without a big name, which do the same exact thing. 

The motivation behind a completely free market economy is money, and that's no good. There have been several inadequacies in products, leading to many lawsuits simply because private businesses want to save money. Not to mention that the govt. is responsible for most businesses. Private companies often need bailouts and people need loans to start them, often from the government. Roads, highways, bridges, and maintenance of public facilities rely on govt. Private businesses could never afford what a country can. You can't just take the benefits and then disregard govt.

Govt. regulations protect people from contaminated water supplies, since many business owners would dump their garbage in the cheapest, yet most hazardous, way possible in order to save money. Not to mention that businesses have not proven to be adaptable to use better products. That's what the US car industry has shown us, and is why Japanese cars were receiving better sales.

Let's also not forget that private business that went about without govt. has brought on the Great Depression.

[Kayla]

Ozma, I'm not trying to get into an argument about anything, since I just left another forum because of their penchant for arguments. That said, even Adam Smith the found of economic liberalism has said that "there are some tasks so monumental only the government can do them." I don't think competition is necessary everywhere, especially on things like fire departments, police, or education in which those who can pay reap the benefits and those who can't are up the river. Let alone the private market's drive for maximizing profits could very well come via cutting services provided.

For what little it's worth, I consider myself a left leaning libertarian. I just don't believe that the government is some boogey man that can't do anything right and I will defer to the government when there is evidence the government can do better than the private sector.

[oZma]

Okay. I'm not a democrat, mind you. 

You talk as though private companies use the best material possible. That's far from the truth. Apple can afford to sell their stuff for a lot less and it has the technology to make much better gadgets, but it progresses its gadget lines slowly to dupe the masses into buying new gadgets every few months and to milk this I-Phone thing for as much as it's got. Not to mention that the little logo somehow makes the product twice as expensive as others without a big name, which do the same exact thing. 

The motivation behind a completely free market economy is money, and that's no good. There have been several inadequacies in products, leading to many lawsuits simply because private businesses want to save money. Not to mention that the govt. is responsible for most businesses. Private companies often need bailouts and people need loans to start them, often from the government. Roads, highways, bridges, and maintenance of public facilities rely on govt. Private businesses could never afford what a country can. You can't just take the benefits and then disregard govt.

Govt. regulations protect people from contaminated water supplies, since many business owners would dump their garbage in the cheapest, yet most hazardous, way possible in order to save money. Not to mention that businesses have not proven to be adaptable to use better products. That's what the US car industry has shown us, and is why Japanese cars were receiving better sales.

Let's also not forget that private business that went about without govt. has brought on the Great Depression.

let private businesses fail... better ones will replace them

gov regulation is a waste of money and has created an industry of people just to understand and comply with all the rules... these people could have productive jobs! the fact you need to hire lawyers and waste capital to start a business just to UNDERSTAND the rules?! messed up. that capital could be better used by the person starting the business! you like that money going to big gov to make more rules?!

gov DID protect us, I won't argue... but now they aren't needed.  after gov solves a problem, they should go away and let private industries take over.

roads? ugh... id rather not pay taxes and pay every time I drove... leave it to people to WANT GOOD roads instead of bad roads so when a road starts to suck, I can take my driving to another.  competition. 

eBay, Amazon, paypal all exist without gov regulation... how come they don't screw the customers? as consumers, we have choices! don't forget that!

you give gov too much credit... great depression was caused by fed reserve... maybe not entirely but by no means by private industry.  did you read that out of one of your government text books? I would do your own research... maybe read this? maybe you believe it, maybe you don't? but the CATO institute is a great think tank :-)

http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0508-25.pdf

[oZma]

Ozma, I'm not trying to get into an argument about anything, since I just left another forum because of their penchant for arguments. That said, even Adam Smith the found of economic liberalism has said that "there are some tasks so monumental only the government can do them." I don't think competition is necessary everywhere, especially on things like fire departments, police, or education in which those who can pay reap the benefits and those who can't are up the river. Let alone the private market's drive for maximizing profits could very well come via cutting services provided.

For what little it's worth, I consider myself a left leaning libertarian. I just don't believe that the government is some boogey man that can't do anything right and I will defer to the government when there is evidence the government can do better than the private sector.

I agree... I'm not an anarchist yet LOL

I simply refer to many of these things as they exist now.  education would be better without tenure teachers... if we had school choice instead of it based geographically

the gov has its hand in too many cookie jars and we need to point out how inefficient they are so we CAN scale down the size and get the gov to do things it ought to. 

id be OK with gov if it were BOTTOM UP planning, not TOP DOWN central planning :-)

[Kevin Peña]

You see failed companies as a sign the private sector doesn't work... it shows me it does work. Lousy companies fail, and good ones succeed. Most companies have a life cycle, this is because the larger it becomes the more beaurocratic it becomes (kind of like a mini-government) and is slow to change to the market. It either adapts or it changes and succeeds. Government agencies don't go thru this, they grow bigger and more wasteful and less useful.

I don't see failed companies as a reason why the private sector doesn't work. I'm just saying that private businesses, even the best American car companies, fail because of the same reasons Ozma claimed that govt. doesn't work. Govt. agencies are not wasteful, by the way. I've volunteered on govt. ambulances, and they are very picky about materials. Waste is not an option. Private ambulances rush their jobs because their bosses are breathing down their necks due to the fact that time spent on one call is time not on another, so they make ridiculous time limit regulations for the sake of money.

And bad businesses don't always fail. American cars and banks are just two examples of crappy systems that keep on trucking because they're "too big to fail." Even operating with terrorists doesn't get bank executives arrested. HSBC.

gov regulation is a waste of money and has created an industry of people just to understand and comply with all the rules... these people could have productive jobs! the fact you need to hire lawyers and waste capital to start a business just to UNDERSTAND the rules?! messed up. that capital could be better used by the person starting the business! you like that money going to big gov to make more rules?!

gov DID protect us, I won't argue... but now they aren't needed.  after gov solves a problem, they should go away and let private industries take over.

roads? ugh... id rather not pay taxes and pay every time I drove... leave it to people to WANT GOOD roads instead of bad roads so when a road starts to suck, I can take my driving to another.  competition. 

eBay, Amazon, paypal all exist without gov regulation... how come they don't screw the customers? as consumers, we have choices! don't forget that!

Ebay does screw over customers a lot. You only need some fine print disclaimer, and someone can sell you a picture of an i-pad for $200. I've seen it happen. The great depression was caused by excessive loans from private banks. I read that in a textbook from a PRIVATE COMPANY, by the way. 

Rules are important. Without them, private businesses will sacrifice for the sake of money. Not to mention that your road analogy is terrible. There are some routes that people must take. Private companies can't afford to maintain the system, so just letting roads go to shambles and using the ones that aren't broken would lead to excess traffic on the good roads, people arriving late to their jobs, and chaos when food deliveries were needed at a specific times, leading to understocked supermarkets.

I agree... I'm not an anarchist yet LOL

I simply refer to many of these things as they exist now.  education would be better without tenure teachers... if we had school choice instead of it based geographically

the gov has its hand in too many cookie jars and we need to point out how inefficient they are so we CAN scale down the size and get the gov to do things it ought to. 

id be OK with gov if it were BOTTOM UP planning, not TOP DOWN central planning :-)

You can choose schools. I go to school 5 miles from my house. It's not mandated by geography. I would like teacher tenure revoked too, but even private businesses have tenures. Not to mention anyone who's a friend to the boss gets favored.

I won't argue this anymore, simply because I have more important things to do and this takes too much time. Plus, I have volunteered at govt-backed agencies, so I know from experience that govt. is alright. 


PS--> Ask any fire department ambulance worker, and they will tell you to start on a private ambulance company. The fire department doesn't just take anyone. You need experience, or you just go on the waiting list. Private companies take anybody with a certification. Not exactly encouraging. 

[oZma]

too big to fail is a gov term and an excuse to bail out

I take it you won't read my Cato institute pdf on the great depression? if you tell me the book that says private investments caused it, I would love to read it and learn your perspective :-)


and not all gov programs are wasteful... but I think most are.  you can't plan everything top down... most everything should be bottom up! states rights! LOL

[Kevin Peña]

Most school textbooks are private. Campbell, Halliday/Resnick/Walker, etc.

states rights! LOL

States are govt...   

[oZma]

Most school textbooks are private. Campbell, Halliday/Resnick/Walker, etc.


States are govt...   

yes, but keep in mind I speak mostly against BIG gov meaning  the federal gov.  states are a little better, a step in the right direction... but I think we could do without a lot of their 'services' :-)

I thought you said it was a private book, not a government school book?

I guess I figured you actual read a book specifically about it instead of regurgitating history from a high school book

you think gov schools are going to teach their students that gov screws things up? hell no! indoctrination facilities if you ask me LOL

[Kevin Peña]

That textbook is used in schools, but it was made privately.

That textbook acknowledged the screw-ups of Andrew Jackson, the US govt. in the US-Mexican War, things like the Patriot Act and the Alien and Sedition Acts, etc.

Technically, though, you're also regurgitating information. In fact, any information stated by anyone is simply a regurgitation of what taught it to him/her. Besides, the author of that story may be indoctrinating you. 

Oh yeah, and I did read it. Next time the banks fail, and you get a guaranteed $250,000 security, you can just keep on dissing the New Deal.

Before you chastise govt, try working with it. Also, try reading the book before you criticize it. 

[oZma]

LOL, I do work with gov... I work for a private company contacted by state gov :-)

I'll check out the book, you should check out the pdf! :-)
.

and let me guess Andrew Jacksons screw ups... his opposition to central banks maybe?

[Kevin Peña]

I'll check out the book, you should check out the pdf! :-)

and let me guess Andrew Jacksons screw ups... his opposition to central banks maybe?

I did read it, and the book emphasized his belief in his right to defy the Supreme Court and his sponsoring of killing Native Americans against said court.

[oZma]

and you don't believe anything the Cato institute says? still just think private industries are to blame? not the fed? not gov? not a combination? hmmmmm I wonder what it means when you have nothing to say about it?  maybe it should have been toilet paper?

[Kevin Peña]

Oh yeah, and I did read it. Next time the banks fail, and you get a guaranteed $250,000 security, you can just keep on dissing the New Deal.

That was what I had to say about it. The article said that the New Deal was bad. I say it improved consumer security, regulation of private business that prevents compromise of service for money, and improved working conditions/pay. Of course, WWII pushed America into the black more than the New Deal, but that's to be expected when some of the biggest nations in the world come to a weapon-loving country for product.

[oZma]

you're 'entitled to your opinion but to think that people can control and steer the economy is silly... what's that F A Hayek quote?

"the curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they know about what they imagine they can design"

the economy is organic... people can't 'fix' it and the only control we have is that we can make it worse by trying to make it better :-)

so there we have it... you think gov can control the economy with things like the 'new deal' while I say things like the 'new deal' made things worse

what's the point of protecting consumers if they don't have any money to buy anything because the gov won't let you hire people below an arbitrary 'minimum wage' and then coerced you into high prices and destroying excess output at the point of a gun? 

you can't force people to act, buy, trade, be nice, not do drugs, not speed if they don't want to.  the new deal was coercion, violence, forcing people to act against their will... and you say it was a good thing?  do ends justify means? no

[Kevin Peña]

Minimum wage was set to meet a living standard; it wasn't arbitrary.

Well, I say it was worth it. Whether or not you believe that or not is irrelevant, unless you lead a completely private life.