• kava@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    I consider myself a libertarian and I believe in free healthcare. I think certain industries should not be run for profit. It creates perverse incentives that harm the common man. For example healthcare.

    If there’s a profit incentive in bealthcare, there is incentive for drug companies or hospitals to raise their prices. This would mean less people getting treatment or more people in medical debt.

    Another industry I think shouldn’t be for profit is education. We want an educated population. It should be encouraged, so it should be free for anyone who wants it.

    In my view, libertarianism is a perspective that the government should interfere with the personal liberties of the individual as little as possible.

    Every single government action should be heavily scrutinized and challenged. Some actions are justified. For example regulating healthcare I think is justified. You are taking away the liberty of starting a hospital - but the benefits outweigh the costs.

    I believe that cooperatives should be encouraged if not explicitly mandated for large companies.

    I think to Chomsky’s conception of anarchism. Look at all hierarchies of power and challenge them. Some are justified - the power a father has over his child. Some are not - the power a cash advance place has over their customer base.

    I think governments often make mistakes and through heavy handed actions end up screwing the average person. By dramatically limiting government action, you help prevent this.

    Remember the government is not your friend.

    • nifty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Remember the government is not your friend.

      The government is working out just fine for people in Nordic and other EU counties

      • kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        There are benevolent kings every once in a while. Doesn’t mean monarchy is a good system in the long term. Nordic countries have some of the highest wealth inequalities in the world. They keep the working class content with the programs and benefits. They have been able to afford it up to now, but the system is straining.

        In the long term they cannot sustain this and we see it with their indicators slowly falling over time to match other Western European countries.

        French & UK citizens are not fans of their government.

        Less power the government has unnecessarily, the better. Doesn’t mean the government shouldn’t have power, just we need a mentality that we always need to be trimming the fat.

      • banana_lama@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s examples that swing both ways of a government being benevolent and self serving. The more likely outcome is the government being self serving. I personally anticipate every government to eventually go that route. For instance Agustus and a few following Roman emperor’s had set a good example. But once corruption had set its teeth within the government it became incredibly difficult to be a “good” emperor. Not impossible but discouraged.

        So yeah. Just because there’s good examples doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be cautious even in their cases. Enjoy the prosperity and encourage it but do have a Killswitch of sorts just in case

    • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I think certain industries should not be run for profit. It creates perverse incentives that harm the common man. For example healthcare.

      I agree. The way that I generally look at it is that a lot of healthcare results in leonine contracts which cannot be fairly consented to. The free market requires conscious and uncoerced consent to be given by all parties involved.

      Another industry I think shouldn’t be for profit is education. We want an educated population. It should be encouraged, so it should be free for anyone who wants it.

      Personally, I would argue that it’s a bit more complicated — it depends on the type, and manner of education. But, in a general sense, I would be inclined to agree.

      In my view, libertarianism is a perspective that the government should interfere with the personal liberties of the individual as little as possible.

      I agree.

      Every single government action should be heavily scrutinized and challenged. Some actions are justified. For example regulating healthcare I think is justified.

      I agree.

      I believe that cooperatives should be encouraged if not explicitly mandated for large companies.

      I have no issue with a large company/organization, so long as it is acting competitively. I personally think that the best place for cooperatives is where intrinsic monopolies appear, e.g. utilities.

      Look at all hierarchies of power and challenge them.

      I agree.

      I think governments often make mistakes and through heavy handed actions end up screwing the average person. By dramatically limiting government action, you help prevent this.

      I agree.

      Remember the government is not your friend.

      At the very least, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The feedback loop does seem to trend towards large government and overreach.

    • Cybermonk_Taiji@r.nf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      So you think you should have access to all the benefits of our society without bearing any burden of the responsibility that comes with it?

      Foolish mentality of a child.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      You just described a somewhat progressive leaning liberal.

      You believe that the government should stay our of our homes, socially. Progressives have been leading that charge for decades, and moderates have been on board for a while now.

      You believe in universal Healthcare and income. Those are very progressive ideals. Those are about as anti libertarian as it gets, because they take away a lot of “individual” freedom, because to fund that, roughly half of your income will need to go to taxes. Maybe more, I haven’t looked at the numbers in a long time, but plenty of current examples to pick from.

      You believe in industrial regulation to combat bad actors when necessary. That is a general liberal ideal.

      Nothing besides keeping the government away from your personal life is even marginally libertarian. And that’s pretty much the only overlap between libertarianism and liberalism.

      This is all from a U.S. point of view.

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You just described a somewhat progressive leaning liberal.

        There is, indeed, a lot of overlap, but, imo, the differences usually tend to revolve around one’s mentality — how they rationalize their arguments.

        Those are about as anti libertarian as it gets, because they take away a lot of “individual” freedom

        You are half right — universal healthcare isn’t classically liberatarian because it is an example of positive liberty, whereas libertarianism tends to align more with negative liberty.