Libertarian policy around the world

Discussion in 'Markets & Economies' started by mmm....shiney!, Jun 16, 2016.

  1. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    Hmm. No similarity to a certain thread in the member's section at all :p

    Anyway, bit toward the end for those who CBF'd listening:
     
  2. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    It's a shame he didn't cite any particular published works of Hayek to back his claim. :/
     
  3. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    I think he's disputing the above.

    http://hayekcenter.org/?p=1690
     
  4. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    The IOC's decision to uphold the individual rights of Russian athletes, rather than do what USADA wants and impose collective sanctions based solely upon nationality.

    That's libertarianism in action!!
     
  5. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Portugal's libertarian style of legislation on drug use seems to be making inroads:

    http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/portugal-winning-war-drugs
     
  6. Bargain Hunter

    Bargain Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    mmm....shiney! The reality is that although there may be some bits and pieces of libertarian ideas enacted in some countries, a fully or even highly libertarian government is unlikely in any country for the foreseeable future. The reason is simple, there are too many vested interests who will stop it form occurring, not to mention that the general population is often very short-sighted and misinformed.

    According to this article only 40% of Australians pay more in tax then they receive in government benefits and subsidies.
    https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-a-bludger-if-you-pay-no-net-tax-in-australia

    On top of this you have to look at second order effects. For example let's say Peter works and pays $25,000 per annum in taxes. His mum is a pensioner with health problems, who on top of getting a pension makes frequent visits to her bulk billing G.P. and the public hospital and uses lot's of prescription medicine and his brother is unemployed (and receiving unemployment benefits).

    Now in his case let's say hypothetically he pays taxes of $25,000 but only receives $10,000 in government benefits/services. He is therefore contributing net tax of $15,000. However his brother is getting $14,000 per year in unemployment benefits and his mum is getting $14,000 in pension payments plus she is getting healthcare subsidies worth around $7000 per year from the government. Altogether his mum and brother are getting $35,000 a year in benefits from the government which he would otherwise pay (let's assume he is a nice guy who looks after his family) out of his own pocket. So, indirectly he is getting $35,000 worth of benefits by paying $15,000 in net tax.

    When you count people like Peter than the people who are net contributors to the tax system is even less than the estimated 40%.

    mmm....shiney! You can discuss a libertarian economy until the cows come home, but it just is not going to happen in your lifetime. Like it or not, the welfare-warfare state is here to stay. You might as well talk about how cool it would be to have unicorns and rainbows in your backyard.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2017
  7. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Care to cite the source data for your hypothetical situation?
     
  8. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    The problem with hypotheticals based upon statistics that may not actually be correct is that you can arrive at incorrect conclusions from your line of reasoning.

    For the FYE 2015 total revenue for the Federal government alone stood at $380.7 billion, whereas expenditure was $417.9 billion. These figures do not include state and local governments.

    Clearly:
    1. some Australians are benefitting at the expense of others
    2. future generations are being saddled with debt because the claims placed upon government revenue by current generations exceeds the capacity to pay
    3. there is a funding shortfall, and it is widening.

    As far as The Guardian (the fountain of all that is just plain wrong) article goes, citing data that is 15 years old in order to debunk current financial statistics and policy is hardly good journalism. This is an update, there is a later one around, I can't find it.

    6824_net_tax_payable.png

    As of 2012, families earning up to $116 636/annum were net beneficiaries of taxation. According to the data above, 80% of households are net beneficiaries, in other words, the benefits they receive come at the expense of someone else.
     
  9. Bargain Hunter

    Bargain Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    "According to the data above, 80% of households are net beneficiaries, in other words, the benefits they receive come at the expense of someone else."

    You proved my point even more!! Do you really think the 80% of households who are net beneficiaries of the system are going to want a free market where they lose their perks and privileges? Not too mention all the crony oligopoly big businesses like banks, airports, etc.
     
  10. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    I'm not even sure what your point is.

    This is a thread on how libertarian style policies have been enacted in various legislatures around the world.
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2017
  11. Bargain Hunter

    Bargain Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    My point is that yes there may be snippets of Libertarian style policies enacted, but in most (especially Australia) if not all countries there are too many vested interests and the masses are not interested in Libertarian policy for it to gain much traction. The "bread and circuses" system of the Roman's continues to this day.

    My point is that you are getting excited over minor wins by libertarians when overall Libertarians are losing the war by a long shot. You always talk about free market principles as if everyone will suddenly look at the examples and have a eureka moment and rush forth to topple the government. You discussing these things makes no difference to anybody.
     
  12. BuggedOut

    BuggedOut Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes Received:
    482
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New South Wales
    That sounds very negative and defeatist.

    I think that gradually people realise that governments don't solve the problems and they increasingly become irrelevant over time.

    With decentralised tech like blockchain reforming democracy and business and taking power and wealth away from centralised structures it could just be a natural evolution that we self govern within a framework that may well look libertarian-ish.
     
    mmm....shiney! likes this.
  13. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    @ BH, And again, your point is lost on me. Is it an attempt to discredit libertarianism? Is it an attempt to discredit Statism? Or is it an attempt to discredit my position?

    You won't find me disagreeing with anything you've said there.

    Liberty lost the 20th century. I'm optimistic as all libertarians are that we will win the future.

    Do I?

    Really? I'm sure others would disagree.

    So what is your point again? :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2017
  14. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Precisely.
     
  15. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
  16. Bargain Hunter

    Bargain Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    mmm....shiney, I am not trying to discredit Libertarianism. It's a good system and it makes sound economic sense, the problem is that it just isn't marketable to the masses. People love free handouts and living at the expense of others. Also from what I have seen in history there is a cyclical element to market based reforms which goes something like this:

    1)A country's economy/government collapses (or comes near enough too it that people become fearful) under the weight of too much socialism/communism e.g. Russia at the time communism collapsed, Chile before Pinochet seized power, Brazil's economy most recently, Argentina, Asian countries during the Asian currency crisis, etc
    2)This leads to some crunch event such as capital markets (e.g. government bond buyers) and or the IMF (or very occasionally the voting public), etc forcing fiscal and monetary discipline upon the government of that country. The country/government then makes a number of market based reforms. Gradually some semblance of prosperity returns to the country as increased economic freedom creates more economic growth. After a period of time as the country slowly gets richer, the public gradually forgets about the last crisis and starts demanding more free handouts again.
    3) After a long period of time of gradually rising socialism, the country again becomes burdened with too much debt and socialism and the cycle continues, looping back to point one.

    p.s. While it is positive to see what they are doing, Lichtenstein is a tiny and irrelevant country. They are too small to have an impact on the world.
     
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2017
  17. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    19,819
    Likes Received:
    2,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    So what strategy would you suggest in order to agitate for change?
     
  18. BuggedOut

    BuggedOut Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes Received:
    482
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New South Wales
    Bargain Hunter, you are mostly correct in your comments about the cycle.

    However, the only way to break from that is to learn from history and educate people about the flaws in said cycle. To my eye that is exactly what shiney does with his libertarian rantings. He is chipping away at the old way of thinking and the folk economics of average joe and maybe he's not as effective as he'd like but it's better than apathy.

    Without education and awareness of the problem how can we evolve past it?
     
    mmm....shiney! likes this.
  19. Bargain Hunter

    Bargain Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    mmm....shiney! and BuggedOut you are both tilting against windmills so to speak. It is a lost cause. I personally would suggest refocusing your time and mental energy on things that are achievable, however if you enjoy arguing/lecturing others on free market economics then each to his own.

    mmm....shiney! as implied by the above paragraph I do not have a strategy to agitate for change, I simply accept it is one of many things in the world that I cannot change.
     
  20. Roswell Crash Survivor

    Roswell Crash Survivor Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    319
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Zeta Reticuli

Share This Page