Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Bob Gillanders]

Hey Bob,
Puns aside, what is indeed circular is Prime Minister Bob G's government responding to the stealing by bad guys (who either use the law or break the law to make their undeserved billions) by stealing from the good guys (as only the good guys pay tax, not the bad ones)

Hi Dilip,

Sure, but you must admit the circular pun was way too easy to resist. :)

But kidding aside, I found this primer youtube clip on Libertarianism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzPb...verInstitution

I was wondering if this was a fair representation of your concept of Libertarianism?

It focuses on economics, taxes in particular. So very relevant to my tax proposal.
There is no mention of your "circles within circles" government structures, so maybe we focus on taxes for now.

Just trying to understand Libertarianism. I am sure there are various versions?

[Bob Armstrong]

Wikipedia

Libertarianism (from French: libertaire, "libertarian"; from Latin: libertas, "freedom") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as a core value.^[1] Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom, and minimize the state; emphasizing free association, freedom of choice, individualism and voluntary association.^[2] Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power, but some libertarians diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing economic and political systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling for the restriction or dissolution of coercive social institutions. Different categorizations have been used to distinguish various forms of libertarianism.^[3][4] Scholars distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.^[5]

Libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,^[6] especially social anarchists,^[7] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.^[8][9] These libertarians seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.^[14]Left-libertarian^[20] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist and New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.^[24]

In the mid-20th century, right-libertarian^[27] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[8][28] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[29] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States,^[26] where it advocates civil liberties,^[30]natural law,^[31]free-market capitalism^[32][33] and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.^[34]

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Dilip,

Sure, but you must admit the circular pun was way too easy to resist. :)

But kidding aside, I found this primer youtube clip on Libertarianism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzPb...verInstitution

I was wondering if this was a fair representation of your concept of Libertarianism?

It focuses on economics, taxes in particular. So very relevant to my tax proposal.
There is no mention of your "circles within circles" government structures, so maybe we focus on taxes for now.

Just trying to understand Libertarianism. I am sure there are various versions?

Thank you for the link, Bob. I have a feeling that understanding notions like Libertarianism is a journey and as we undertake this journey, we evolve towards perfection. The part of it which attracts me is the central notion of respect for the right of every individual to seek his or her own path, without harming others....
Coming to taxes, Modi of India is trying to steer towards an economy in which all monetary transactions will be digitized (and hence no one be able to hide them), and even if there is a very low tax like 1% on every transaction, automatically deducted from the recipient's account, the revenue it would generate would be enormous as compared to the net generated by Income taxes, GST, PST, Wealth tax, Inheritance tax, etc. etc. combined, and everone would end up paying according to the benefit they derive from the security provided by this system (i.e the rich would pay much more than the not-so-rich)...

[Erik Malmsten]

Bob's billionaire tax could be weakened by putting ownership of wealth into the names of other family members, the more kids the better.

I've always liked the idea of some kind of tax on banking to pay off the interest on the government deficit. The Tobin Tax was proposed on money exchanges and was passed in Canada in 1999 but never implemented. In the 1980s Sweden tried a 0.5% tax on the sales of stocks, only .003% on bonds, and stock trading plummeted. England has a Stamp Duty of .005%, Australia, Hong Kong have a variation of that.

I like holding hands and dancing in a circle. It's a way of connecting with people. In Dilip's proposed Libertarian society there would be no federal army to protect from invasion. Murdering thieves can move from community to community without being pursued. Who owns the oil underground? If it goes to Oil Companies they will sell it for the highest price possible. Same with mining, farming and fishing. Mad Cow beef and Mercury fish taste so good. Going to a school (all private) or hospital (all private) requires expensive insurance or pay high admittance. Good luck raising money to go to university. There would be no medical research for cures as too expensive. Crossing any bridge has a toll like Uber rates, higher when busy. Have to pay for using a streetlight, or toilet. Everything (without taxes) would be more expensive and there will be a high rate of death to poverty, if they can't find any consumer scams or criminal ways to survive. But people would be free from government!

[Pargat Perrer]

Thank you for the link, Bob. I have a feeling that understanding notions like Libertarianism is a journey and as we undertake this journey, we evolve towards perfection. The part of it which attracts me is the central notion of respect for the right of every individual to seek his or her own path, without harming others....
Coming to taxes, Modi of India is trying to steer towards an economy in which all monetary transactions will be digitized (and hence no one be able to hide them), and even if there is a very low tax like 1% on every transaction, automatically deducted from the recipient's account, the revenue it would generate would be enormous as compared to the net generated by Income taxes, GST, PST, Wealth tax, Inheritance tax, etc. etc. combined, and everone would end up paying according to the benefit they derive from the security provided by this system (i.e the rich would pay much more than the not-so-rich)...

Dilip, I actually LIKE the fact that you ignore my replies to your posts. It means I am asking the HARD QUESTIONS that you have no answer for (not in this post because I realize you have no answers, but in previous posts).

Instead you try soothing Bob G. with notions like "evolving towards perfection". You might be fooling Bob G., or you might not, but for SURE you aren't fooling anyone with common sense.

[Pargat Perrer]

I like holding hands and dancing in a circle. It's a way of connecting with people. In Dilip's proposed Libertarian society there would be no federal army to protect from invasion. Murdering thieves can move from community to community without being pursued. Who owns the oil underground? If it goes to Oil Companies they will sell it for the highest price possible. Same with mining, farming and fishing. Mad Cow beef and Mercury fish taste so good. Going to a school (all private) or hospital (all private) requires expensive insurance or pay high admittance. Good luck raising money to go to university. There would be no medical research for cures as too expensive. Crossing any bridge has a toll like Uber rates, higher when busy. Have to pay for using a streetlight, or toilet. Everything (without taxes) would be more expensive and there will be a high rate of death to poverty, if they can't find any consumer scams or criminal ways to survive. But people would be free from government!

Wow, that is the greatest put-down of Libertarianism I have ever read. Thanks Erik!

[Dilip Panjwani]

Bob's billionaire tax could be weakened by putting ownership of wealth into the names of other family members, the more kids the better.

I've always liked the idea of some kind of tax on banking to pay off the interest on the government deficit. The Tobin Tax was proposed on money exchanges and was passed in Canada in 1999 but never implemented. In the 1980s Sweden tried a 0.5% tax on the sales of stocks, only .003% on bonds, and stock trading plummeted. England has a Stamp Duty of .005%, Australia, Hong Kong have a variation of that.

I like holding hands and dancing in a circle. It's a way of connecting with people. In Dilip's proposed Libertarian society there would be no federal army to protect from invasion. Murdering thieves can move from community to community without being pursued. Who owns the oil underground? If it goes to Oil Companies they will sell it for the highest price possible. Same with mining, farming and fishing. Mad Cow beef and Mercury fish taste so good. Going to a school (all private) or hospital (all private) requires expensive insurance or pay high admittance. Good luck raising money to go to university. There would be no medical research for cures as too expensive. Crossing any bridge has a toll like Uber rates, higher when busy. Have to pay for using a streetlight, or toilet. Everything (without taxes) would be more expensive and there will be a high rate of death to poverty, if they can't find any consumer scams or criminal ways to survive. But people would be free from government!

Hi Erik,
Perhaps you can join Bob G. in learning the truth about Libertarianism. A strong 'police force' to deal with the issue of 'murdering thieves' or the other evils you allude to is part and parcel of Libertarianism. In terms of national borders and national armies, these are an offshoot of politicians who wish to 'rule' over whatever little or big piece of land they can manage to, and there will not be need for these in a libertarian world....thank God!

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Dilip:

Your concept of smaller political units is very interesting.

It is the platform of Democratic Marxism that nations be done away with, and the planet become a world of "villages". This sounds eerily similar to your concept of circles within circles.

The DM idea is that there can be no effective responsible government when the elected are so far away from the elector. They are so far away, they tell themselves that they are a law unto themselves with their own independent power, and can now set their own agendas (Not the agenda of the elector).

This can be remedied by all power being devolved down. Then, when a "Local Political Unit (LPU)" cannot do something they need, they coalition with nearby LPU's and create a temporary higher body to do the job for all coalition members. After the task is done, this higher body is dissolved.

It will not be perfect.......warlords can take over in small localities. The residents of that LPU will have to find a way to deal with this problem should it arise. But at least the particular warlord will have power over something very small!

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Erik Malmsten]

Hi Erik,
Perhaps you can join Bob G. in learning the truth about Libertarianism. A strong 'police force' to deal with the issue of 'murdering thieves' or the other evils you allude to is part and parcel of Libertarianism. In terms of national borders and national armies, these are an offshoot of politicians who wish to 'rule' over whatever little or big piece of land they can manage to, and there will not be need for these in a libertarian world....thank God!

Strong police force, stopping evils like pollution and poison. That sounds like having a government workforce & bureaucracy. Requires taxes to pay for them.

National armies protects resources from being stolen by armies in other areas that don't have those resources. Armies are offshoot of industries and those with capital to protect.

Leaders of circles who meet leaders of other circles who then meet the next circle up, then meet the next circle up will have to be paid for their time - they are politicans.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Dilip:

Your concept of smaller political units is very interesting.

It is the platform of Democratic Marxism that nations be done away with, and the planet become a world of "villages". This sounds eerily similar to your concept of circles within circles.

The DM idea is that there can be no effective responsible government when the elected are so far away from the elector. They are so far away, they tell themselves that they are a law unto themselves with their own independent power, and can now set their own agendas (Not the agenda of the elector).

This can be remedied by all power being devolved down. Then, when a "Local Political Unit (LPU)" cannot do something they need, they coalition with nearby LPU's and create a temporary higher body to do the job for all coalition members. After the task is done, this higher body is dissolved.

It will not be perfect.......warlords can take over in small localities. The residents of that LPU will have to find a way to deal with this problem should it arise. But at least the particular warlord will have power over something very small!

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

Agree, Bob A.
Goes to show that the differences between the left wingers and the right wingers are very superficial. Deep inside, most humans want the same... less bother from so called authorities, more freedom to pursue their interests, and peace and friendship with others...

[Dilip Panjwani]

1. Strong police force, stopping evils like pollution and poison. That sounds like having a government workforce & bureaucracy. Requires taxes to pay for them.

---

2. National armies protects resources from being stolen by armies in other areas that don't have those resources. Armies are offshoot of industries and those with capital to protect.

---

3. Leaders of circles who meet leaders of other circles who then meet the next circle up, then meet the next circle up will have to be paid for their time - they are politicans.

1. Ofcourse...but without a bureaucracy of ten for the work of one... this would form the bulk of a Libertarian minimal governmental work, with penalties from the offenders providing the revenue...

2. It's high time to get rid of National armies... enough of world war III threats already... (agree with a 'one world of many villages'... as in Bob's post above)

3. No. Everyone would chip in/rotate, with none belonging to an elite political class making fools of the commoners...

[Bob Armstrong]

Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

The Poles (The Air Conditioners of the Planet)

For the first time since satellites began observing Antarctica nearly half a century ago, an ice shelf has collapsed on the eastern part of the continent, scientists said.

The collapse of the 450-square-mile Conger ice shelf in a part of the continent called Wilkes Land occurred in mid-March.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/25/c...mid=tw-nytimes

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Gillanders]

[B]Wikipedia

In the mid-20th century, right-libertarian^[27] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[8][28] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[29] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States,^[26] where it advocates civil liberties,^[30]natural law,^[31]free-market capitalism^[32][33] and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.^[34]

Thanks Bob A. I found this very useful in understanding the apparent dichotomy of some elements from both the left and right claiming the term.

I believe Dilip is approaching it from the right with his reference to natural law, but he can correct me if I am wrong.

In any case, I don't see Libertarianism as a practical solution in the current world. As others have pointed out, we expect government to do certain things and taxation is necessary. Capitalism has clearly run amok with out of control wealth inequality. My billionaire tax is my solution to steer the world back to sanity. More is needed, this is just a first step.

[Dilip Panjwani]

Thanks Bob A. I found this very useful in understanding the apparent dichotomy of some elements from both the left and right claiming the term.

I believe Dilip is approaching it from the right with his reference to natural law, but he can correct me if I am wrong.

In any case, I don't see Libertarianism as a practical solution in the current world. As others have pointed out, we expect government to do certain things and taxation is necessary. Capitalism has clearly run amok with out of control wealth inequality. My billionaire tax is my solution to steer the world back to sanity. More is needed, this is just a first step.

Bob G, what you are suggesting is just a different way of dividing the pie we currently have; would it not be better to think of ways to enlarge our pie, by rechanneling the energy of the population to more productive endeavours and reduce the wasteful activity generated by tons of bureaucratic rules and regulations which also block us from moving ahead? Is not a government which enables each one to be able to bake a pie for themselves better than a government which acts as a referee for everyone trying to snatch a bigger slice of the common pie?

[Pargat Perrer]

Bob G, what you are suggesting is just a different way of dividing the pie we currently have; would it not be better to think of ways to enlarge our pie, by rechanneling the energy of the population to more productive endeavours and reduce the wasteful activity generated by tons of bureaucratic rules and regulations which also block us from moving ahead? Is not a government which enables each one to be able to bake a pie for themselves better than a government which acts as a referee for everyone trying to snatch a bigger slice of the common pie?

I thought Bob A. started a separate thread for this discussion of political systems?

Meanwhile, I find it so amusing that Dilip still tries getting Bob G., who is very obviously an avowed environmentalist, to think about "ways to enlarge our pie." Yeah, that's what the world needs, humans enlarging their pie. Let's burn down the ENTIRE Amazon rainforest, dammit! More steak dinners for everyone!

Dilip wants to "rechannel the energy of the population" towards "baking a pie for themselves". He fails to realize that greed motivates each such pie baker to steal ingredients from other pie bakers, and to force slave labor to do all the baking in slave factories, thus ensuring that THEIR pie gets ever bigger and bigger.

Dilip not only doesn't know anything about human behavior, he also doesn't even know WHO he's talking to.

Bob G. has already come out in favor of rules and regulations, for the sensible reason that they are needed to stop corporate thugs from running roughshod over both people and the environment. If progress ... aka "enlarging our pie" ... is slowed down in the process, that is a good thing. Progress needs to be evaluated in terms of its social effects. We have more "smart" devices than ever before -- smartphones, tablets, drones, computers, etc. -- and we have more MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES than ever before to go along with them.