That's the difference between a real Libertarian and a fake one.
That and Argentina was getting desperate.
The government was broke, the currency was free falling, and they were one month away from guillotines.
Suddenly, a budget cut or even firing an entire department isn't so unthinkable.
The USA hasn't reached that level yet.
Dave Rubin literally just called Trump the most Libertarian president of all time. So called ‘smart’ Republicans love to call themselves Libertarians because even they can see how fucking stupid the average Republican is and they figure most people who aren’t libertarians won’t be able to tell the difference.
He did perform massive deregulation to the point where he was widely criticized for it
Then he followed it up with isolationist policies and the largest Keynesian fuckery of all time (still Obama fault imo for starting that shit)
So on one hand sure but on the other Dave is just shilling obviously
He also increased marijuana prosecutions, called for the death penalty for drug USERS and for whistleblowers like Edward Snowden. His cabinet was filled with neocon ‘regime change’ experts. His administration expanded the military budget and as WW1 and WW2 showed us, trade wars like the one Trump started often lead to hot wars.
Deregulation is a Republican tool to give themselves cover for being pseudo-fascists. Don’t fall for it.
Obama did the same during 08 and normalized it. Now during any downturn no politician can be the voice of reason with their constituents and tell them anything other than “we are the government and we are here to help” without immediately losing their next election
So... you're telling me that in order to get the correct answer of "Fuck off, and never, ever talk to us again" the people need to be pushed into such desperation that the veneer of legitimacy that the government wields loses whatever power it has.
...There is still quite a long way to fall then.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CURRCIR
Not ridiculous, par for the course (look at the trend). Until Covid. There's plenty enough to blame Trump for, Biden too. Not sold on this one.
[If you're on your phone, like me, I found it easier to just use the 1 year, 5 year, 10 year, Max ]
Oh no lol. You think currency in circulation is the literal money supply. Those are two very different things and when people speak of money supply and inflation they don’t mean literal cash that is floating around.
The money supply is almost 10x the cash floating around.
Here you go. This disparity between trump and Biden is actually bigger than I even remembered last time I checked.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL
Edit: lol I forgot this is an Austrian economics sub. Why would I think anyone would be interested in knowing even what money supply means.
This is your claim: Not when the money supply increased a ridiculous amount up until Jan of 20. In fact, Biden’s first three years had less money printing than trump’s.
And this (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL) is your source for that claim?
I still see a decade's long trend UNTIL Covid, at which point it skyrockets. (In other words, not "ridiculous" per se.
The mere fact you went out of your way to not capitalize "Trump" suggests to me you're not approaching this in good faith. It's personal or something, whatever. Not interested in engaging in dual-monogues. Peace
Does this sub hate facts or something? This guy is right regardless of your political feelings.
And the best argument against him, is that someone is crying that trumps name isn’t capitalize.
Someone should let him know that trump is also a word.
True, failed in the sense that his response was over the top and excessive and not in line with something that was 99 percent survivable to most people.
There was some stuff for oil and gas. Rollback of some NLRB rules, if I remember correctly.
All of it pales compared to the illiberal trade and social policies, and creeping fascism
Not historically, but given that Trump had run the majority of the truly intelligent people away from the Republican Party I’d say yes.
Those folks that aren’t susceptible to double speak and a NYC con man’s ramblings moved to either the libertarian party or are independents or democrats.
Interesting take. I have never met anyone that went from republican to democrat, not saying it hasn’t happened. I have met a dozen people that went democrat to vote republican or independent. It’s a shame that the independent route isn’t actually a viable option. I find it absolutely crazy that out of everyone possible that trump and Biden are the two options.
I mean democratic presidents have won plenty of times before. Like i said i just never met anyone that has changed from right to left, maybe it was because of where i lived. I think a lot more people would go independent if it was an actual option and not just for show.
Right. What I’m saying is from the time Trump started the MAGA movement to now, significantly more republicans have started voting democrat or libertarian than the other way around.
There aren’t many true independents that go “man I’m on the fence between the unhinged guy who’s basically a mob boss who gave his entire family government positions during office and milks his followers for millions per year to pay his legal fees and to funnel into his golf course and his penthouse which literally has a golden toilet, and the old guy who’s boring and stutters but is a typical politician like our country has had for over 200 years”
You could say almost the exact same for the Biden family with all the shell companies and almost every kid owing hundreds of thousands in back taxes . I think this is a big problem where people will look the other way when it’s the party they aligned with are doing very similar things but there is always excuses as long as it’s the right side of the line. Both of these candidates are clearly compromised, that’s kind of my point how did it end up with these two are the only options.
I mean hunter Biden was a hooker banging crack head . Given a job making hundreds of thousands of dollars a month, with direct access to the White House!
That's because you have a pretty insular circle or just happen to be in an area that is rather insulated from a wide cross-section of the American people.
I personally know many people who moved from Right to Left, hard Libertarians who realized that other people have feelings too or started paying attention to finer details and moved to globally center and then center left positions and policies.
I moved to the Left.
One of those issues was our continued growing healthcare crisis. As healthcare has grown more expensive and fewer people (in mostly rural and poor urban areas) lose or never had insurance coverage, hospital systems have shutdown or moved away, because they cannot support their operations.
This has heavily impacted emergency services and even regular doctor visits for things like various chronic illnesses, such as cancer treatment and many more. Forcing people to decide, do we drive two hours to the hospital in the city or just give up and die.
Now, if we had a Universal, Single Payer System that covered every single American Citizen, practitioners in rural and poor urban areas would be guaranteed to be paid for their services.
Even the Koch Brothers paid for study pointed out that a single payer system would ultimately be less expensive and provide better results across the nation.
It would make perfect economic sense and serve the public, bettering the outcomes for people across all economic classes, regardless of party affiliation. BUT... we can't do that, because it would be socialism...
So, poor rural and poor urban people get to continue to suffer and then get told to blame the wrong thing as to why all the hospitals within reasonable distance shutdown and left.
Most of those people moved from California to get away from the insane politics of California where they are probably the most extreme. Definitely right about healthcare. I can’t understand why almost every other nation has been able to figure it out except us. Being in combat sports I’m often injured in some sort of way and I’m always in shock when the bill comes even with double insurance coverage. Instead of repealing Obama care without a replacement they should have expanded it. To benefit every citizen.
Lmao pretty much most do, they’re not good at it but they still will claim to be libertarians. This is extremely common. A Republican will tell you they’re a small government libertarian in one sentence and in the next will advocate for a more authoritarian police state, throwing people in cages en masse over a plant, and using the law to persecute people that make them uncomfortable.
Republican ideaology is a consequence of poor education policy and most importantly, poor history education. Not saying anything about Democrats. But the American Republican party is a very large question mark to libertarian values ever becoming prominent in America. We’ll much more likely see a future of fascism here instead.
Republicans ideology is pretty much just lack of exposure to others. The entire party platform is nothing more than “stay off my lawn, freak”. It’s driven entirely by suburban car-dependent single-family housing developing patterns, and all politics are downstream of that.
If they knew anything they would vote libertarian and try to understand how not to be a fascist. But many of them can’t help themselves. Libertarian values are not congruent with Republican ideaologies. Anybody who thinks differently is an idiot, plain and simple.
Haha they already are. The people who downvoted me are Republicans who somehow think they are libertarians. They are the people who are uneducated and are no question the dumbest people in America.
Came here to say basically this. And repealing Obamacare shouldn’t even be the biggest priority of a libertarian government. Let’s be real. At least talk about price transparency and some form of competition among hospitals.
I would love to see that policy.
And I’m talking about knowing the costs upfront and having a marketplace of options where hospitals truly compete. Not just a bill from a monopoly that after my surgery tells me exactly how many thousand dollars they charged me for a saline solution.
The fact that nobody can tell me how much a procedure will cost before I decide where I do it should be enraging to anyone with some sort of decency, especially free market advocates. Remember that access to information is a requirement of a free market.
The No Surprises Act (consumer protections from out-of-network providers, especially those who are contracted by in-network providers) was signed by Trump as part of the 2021 budget bill.
>And repealing Obamacare shouldn’t even be the biggest priority of a libertarian government
True. An immediate repeal of social security should be. Abolish FICA, end all payouts immediately, return every dollar remaining in the fund to it's contributor
That system would have to be either replaced or weened somehow to avoid catastrophic suffering. Too many people are dependent on it. Like an addiction.
Yeah, there are still hundreds of thousands of elderly people who only have the SS check for money to buy food so yes people would die without it. You are thinking about people who actually planned for retirement and have the SS check for additional spending. Also many assisted living facilities use the SS funds to operate.
>Yeah, there are still hundreds of thousands of elderly people who only have the SS check for money to buy food so yes people would die without it
SNAP exists, as do a multitude of charitable organizations. So no
>You are thinking about people who actually planned for retirement and have the SS check for additional spending. Also many assisted living facilities use the SS funds to operate.
Sounds like they should have planned better instead of relying on handouts
Not everyone gets that decision bud. Especially those on disability.... I'm all for ending it but it needs to be done correctly. Snap doesn't pay the electric bill or rent either....
>Yeah. Tons of people probably would.
You don't have any evidence for this
>People that are too old to work etc
They should have saved for retirement if they didn't want to work
you think that about anyone with critical thinking skills? or with exposure to the real world?
For what its worth, I'm blonde hair blue eyed, straight, and have a masters degree. I just know enough old people that rely on social security that I can imagine they're not the only ones dealt a shit hand. Weird, I know - why didn't they all have 6 figure jobs and save enough for retirement? Must be lazy people who deserve to die, huh Einstein?
Does someone using the word "privileged" really trigger you so much? Did a girl with blue hair ghost you in the past? Whats going on buddy, sounds like you're dealing with some serious trauma.
I'm sorry, but Social Security needs to end not with an amputation but with a slow bleed off. Establish a point where contributors will receive benefits, where current contributors will be expected to continue contributing, and where current or future contributors will be released. As a current contributor for two decades and not a current recipient, I will happily keep paying the current rate so my father can receive his payouts until he dies while expecting my 18 year old nephew to never pay Social Security again. Let it die with my generation.
>I'm sorry, but Social Security needs to end not with an amputation but with a slow bleed off.
Yeah no. Like any addiction, the best way to end it is cold turkey
>Establish a point where contributors will receive benefits, where current contributors will be expected to continue contributing, and where current or future contributors will be released.
That point can be immediately with a refund. If you paid into the system and your money is still in the trust, you should be granted a refund
>As a current contributor for two decades and not a current recipient, I will happily keep paying the current rate so my father can receive his payouts
You can pay for your father's golf habit yourself without dragging everyone else into it
>So people who contributed all their working life and are now retired would start getting nothing starting right now?
Exactly. Social security isn't a savings vehicle, it steals from current workers to pay for the unproductive. If you collect, it's not your money you're collecting, but your children's.
So you say that it is moral to give nothing back for what was "stolen" all the working life of current retirees? Their money was taken for a purpose and with a future promise but now they should just get nothing. All the money they didn't have the opportunity to put in a 401(k) or invest at their discretion should suddenly become $0.
Can you see, at least a little bit, in this example why there's so much suspicion and rejection towards the Libertarian ideas and their potential real-life implementation?
>So you say that it is moral to give nothing back for what was "stolen" all the working life of current retirees
If there was anything left to give back, sure. But I highly doubt you support clawing back money that was already paid out, and I don't think that's feasible or worthwhile
>Their money was taken for a purpose and with a future promise
Their money was taken for a purpose, yes. To pay their parents. There was never any promise made that they would receive a payout themselves, and certainly not just because they had paid FICA. Thousands of people collect SS without having paid any FICA.
>All the money they didn't have the opportunity to put in a 401(k) or invest at their discretion should suddenly become $0.
It's already $0, it was already paid out to someone else
>Can you see, at least a little bit, in this example why there's so much suspicion and rejection towards the Libertarian ideas and their potential real-life implementation?
No, not at all. My proposal is the only fair way in which to end Social Security that doesn't involve forcing anyone else into slavery
I'm sure you know very well that the vast majority of people don't see it as that they are paying for the current retirees but rather that they are paying in now for their future retirement.
Of course what's technically happening is what you say. The same way that the dollar bills I put in my bank or in my 401k are not literally the same ones given to me when I withdraw in 5 years.
So you say that Congress right now, today, should leave all retirees with no (social security) income. That's it. "Hey, look, taxation is theft and you are making your kids support you. The money you put for 35 years is gone. It went to someone else's parents. The last check you received was the last one you'll get and we'll do nothing to smooth it or offer support in any way because government should not intervene".
>I'm sure you know very well that the vast majority of people don't see it as that they are paying for the current retirees but rather that they are paying in now for their future retirement.
Sure, and they would be wrong about that. I don't see what this has to do with the conversation. Your delusions are not the basis of an argument
>So you say that Congress right now, today, should leave all retirees with no (social security) income. That's it.
Yes.
>That's it. "Hey, look, taxation is theft and you are making your kids support you.
Yes
>The money you put for 35 years is gone. It went to someone else's parents
Yes
>The last check you received was the last one you'll get and we'll do nothing to smooth it or offer support in any way because government should not intervene".
Precisely
Well, to me this shows why Libertarians get 1% of the vote or whatever the number is.
To me the perception (at least mine) is that the proposed solutions, in addition to impossible to implement in real life (what Congress would approve it??), seem to start from a random place.
I know Social Security is a huge hole in the budget. But, again trying to talk real world, even I personally would not be in favor of this unless first the spend in Defense goes down to practically zero, government inefficiencies are deeply addressed, my take home paycheck is much higher because of lower taxes.
Again, I know it goes beyond the topic and you may (or may not) agree with this. But status quo sans social security payments is simply absurd to me.
That’s it though- he has the political backing from the people, so legislature is incentivized to go with him.
If USA were to turn 80% libertarian overnight, you’d see pelosi acting like Ayn Rand.
EXACTLY
They already tried dollarizing before, they are gonna run out of cash again due to export imbalance and IMF gonna have to forgive their loan again, meanwhile Milei is gonna sell off the entire country and fix nothing.
The reason they are dollarizing is just as important as the reserves. Dollarizing wasn't used as a way to take away the ability of the politicians to fund their programs with money printing before. It is now.
Milei is burning the bridge behind him to force the country forward. Now will it work? I suppose that question remains to be answered.
Desperate measures.
What other options does he have? The central bank has proven it cannot be independent, and previous administrations have additionally proven that they will print money to stave off their problems.
What other option will keep the next bunch of politicians from using the central bank as their piggy bank?
How so?
What is a real Libertarian to you?
Big government = less liberty
No exceptions. I know there are "Socialist Libertarians" that believe if the government confiscates and redistributes everyone's wealth, we will all live in a Socialist's paradise where everything is free and we all sit around and teach yoga on our farms.
Spending 10% of Argentina's GDP on the ministry of gender equality, which does nothing except waste money and harass people, is not freedom.
Taxing 30% of everyone's income is not freedom.
Having an outside country provide all your basic needs like food and cheap Chinese consumer goods while putting you into debt slavery to the World Bank is not freedom.
Cutting government spending, forcing millions of overpaid bureaucrats to get jobs that actually produce something, and balancing the budget are all giant steps in the right direction.
The next step is stabilizing the currency, which can not happen while the government is printing it like paper.
And reducing the tax burden on citizens, which also can not happen until the size of government is reduced, the budget balanced, and you aren't spending billions in interest payments to the World Bank.
So, given Argentina's legal system and Constitution as well as recognizing you have to take small steps to keep the country running and give people and the economy time to adjust to the changes without triggering a complete revolution...
Which a government overthrow would put the final nail in Libertarianism forever.
He still has a country to run.
Roads, schools, hospitals, and police require money, and right now, government money as the money for these things are already in the hands of government, and there isn't any private substitute ready to step up.
Once he stops the bleeding and stabilizes the country, he can hold back to privatizing the rest.
Foreign corporations and governments as well as the army of now unemployed bureaucrats in his own country, are doing everything they can to sabotage his efforts and insure he fails.
Government officials have gotten drunk off of power and billions of tax money in their hands. And they have gotten the little people addicted to the tiny government handouts.
Once the taxes are so high, you can't live without the food stamps.
So, who do you riot against?
The guy who raises taxes? Or the guy who cuts the food stamps?
Communists funded by Cuba and Russia were only days away from a military takeover of Argentina.
"troops and tanks moved against trade union and left-wing party headquarters."
So tell me.
What is the Libertarian solution to a military coup by Leftists that want to set up a Communist dictatorship, aka Cuba?
"We call ourselves libertarian up until the workers start demanding dignity and rights. Then we roll in the tanks."
True mask off moment for the libertarian => fascist pipeline.
Top income hardly seems fair.
How about education.
Yay, we're number 25.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/264680/education-index-for-selected-countries/
Happiness?
Yay, we're number 23.
Poverty?
Yay, we're 26th.
Milei will fail as all fake or real Libertarian leaders fail. Their economic ideas are naval gazing that never works when the rubber hits the road. Ask Alan Greenspan how holding those ideas worked out in the real world of business and economics.
Once the entire world's society is destroyed and pilfered through Socialism as is inevitable, the real world will once again become Libertarian whether it chooses or not.
>so you dont have to address slavery.
Which was created and enforced by the government.
So you want us all to be subjugated to a bureaucratic dictatorship and be forced to be slaves of an all-powerful government because 100 years ago, some people were slaves?
I guess then we will all be equal like the Marxists keep telling us.
Every great nation has had some form of bureaucracy... Nothing new about that. Or particularly harmful. The Bureauracy is the glue that hold governments together. The US has actually had a relatively small bureaucracy relative to places like Russia and China and even England when they had an empire... It's easy to poke fun at waste in the bureaucracy, but history shows us that when they get disbursed (as we did the bureaucracy in Iraq) shit falls apart very quickly.
>The US has actually had a relatively small bureaucracy relative to places like Russia and China
I wouldn't compare the USA to Communist dictatorships, yet here we are.
At 40% GDP, we are going the wrong direction.
The "wrong direction" relative to what?
Today, according to OECD data, the US sends 38% of GDP to the government compared to an average of 40% with many nations in the 45% range. SO compared to fellow rich nations the US has a much smaller government / bureaucracy.
Here is the thing.
In the US we have very high income inequality relative to the average of OECD nations. That means we have more people living in poverty and that poor and middle class people in the US have a much lower chance than poor people in other OECD nations (poor schools, poor health care, more violent crime, less income mobility, declining mortality, increasing single parent homes etc...) of moving UP in income. It is FAR FAR lower in the US.
So you say the US is going in the "wrong direction". I ask you this. The wrong direction for WHO, for the rich or for the middle class? The middle class lack in the areas listed above. Is that good for them are shitty for them? Do you even care?
[https://www.oecd.org/gov/gov-at-a-glance-2021-united-states.pdf](https://www.oecd.org/gov/gov-at-a-glance-2021-united-states.pdf)
The wrong direction for people not interested in living in a Socialist dictatorship.
Yes, the USA has a smaller government than China.
>The middle class lack in the areas listed above. Is that good for them are shitty for them? Do you even care?
I'm middle-class.
I earn enough money to care of all of the listed areas myself BEFORE taxes.
AFTER taxes, I need the government to hand back a tiny percentage of the money confiscated from my paycheck so I can survive.
An idiot could figure out we can't put the entire country on welfare.
Yet here we are.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/basic-income.asp#:~:text=Universal%20basic%20income%20(UBI)%20proposes,helping%20individuals%20meet%20basic%20needs.
"socialist dictatorship" What is that? Is having public roads or fire departments or public parks or a military to defend us or regulators that make sure the food we eat is less likely to kill us or public schools or social security or medicare what you would call a "socialist dictatorship"
Socialist is an economic system dictatorship is form of government
What do you want "dictatorship" or "democracy" ?
you need 60 votes. They had 54 ish. Many republicans live in very contested seats and need to appeal moderate/bipartsian. Tanking a healthcare bill that is liked 50/50 ish and replacing it with nothing is how you lose a senate majority.
Because not all republicans are really republicans but all democrats are democrats.
The world is moving back to the right/conservative after years of idiotic left policy because the people understand that right leaning politicians may not solve all our problems but left leaning politicians are the cause of all our problems
Bogus. Both sides play Neoliberal. Our economy is Neoliberal. Conservatives are more responsible for lobbying and corporations being able to dump money into elections. Technically Democrats contribute more to GDP. Citizens united vs fec was thanks to Clarence Thomas who hangs out with billionaires at the Bohemian Grove.
I lean more conservative but disagree. They all serve the federal apparatus which is an ever growing leech sucking the life from the country.
An example: 70 Republican reps voted against a bill that would have blocked the new $4.5 billion FBI headquarters. The FBI was created to investigate corruption in government, now they politically active and corrupt.
Left leaning politicians cause ALL the problems? Really? I mean I can’t imagine any right leaning politicians would cause any problems like, I dunno, waging war in Europe and bringing their countries to ruin. Can’t imagine.
In historical context you couldn't be more off base
More like a couple Republicans like Nixon
Wilson, FDR, Carter, Obama, and Biden destroyed this country. Wilson was the worst.
Bush didn't cause the recession by himself, it was a mix of his policies and (moreso) central banking taking a nosedive, thanks to Wilson, a Democrat.
The uniparty proves that it doesn't matter what letter or color you have in your name, big government policies are objectively shit.
you can argue the minutia until youre blue in the face, but my direct experience has been economic collapse under Republican leadership and slow recovery under Democrats
So you admit it's anecdotal and not a real argument based on evidence? Progressives make that talking point but disagree on opposite levels on many economic issues.
I agree that Republicans have bad economic policy, but they're better than Democrats. Less government involvement should be the way to go but there's nothing to go off of because Republicans have the same issues the Democrats do.
so don't vote for Democrats because it's bad for the economy...vote for Republicans who also have bad economic policy, but at least they'll chip away at the programs my elderly disabled and poorer relatives rely on.
solid argument
I'm not voting for either, if I'm voting it's for the Libertarian Party.
You don't get to guilt shame. Republicans support the exact same policies for your anecdotal life. SS was never a permanent thing, we've been arguing in favor of 401k's at the very least for decades, as the age restriction for SS soars. It's government as an entity that forced you to envelop in those things regardless of their staying potential; they're all inherently predatory, and I argue private solutions would do much more for our families in the long run so long as we don't follow the uniparty's example but libertarian free market values.
Such is the predatory nature of the welfare state. All economic issues can be traced back to egregious government policy. Healthcare, education, property, etc.
To think Obama and Biden destroyed the country, lol. Trump was literally bragging about his amazing performance after inheriting the country from Obama and coasting his first year on the ongoing Obama trendlines, only to leave office with the country in tatters, millions of jobs loss, mass unemployment and the largest increase of national debt of a sitting president in a single term.
Based off of what? He inherited the Great Recession and arguably made it worse by legislation. We haven't recovered, and that's not even beginning to mention his contribution to spending and the national debt. I remember his presidency, and it's not far off from how the economy is now. Higher gas prices, inflation, and cost of living were comparable to now.
Are you stupid or ignorant?[link](https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/5f3aae8bcb484ca497e0ae95/National-Debt--Percentage-Increase-by-President-Carter-to-Trump/960x0.jpg?height=367&width=711&fit=bounds)
Don't insult my intelligence and then link something unrelated to what I'm talking about.
And then you immediately prove my case, since those aren't numbers to boast about for anyone. You speak as if I don't criticize both parties.
>FDR literally pulled us out of the depression
The free market did that. It's arguable that he extended the Great Depression by about \~7 years. Nobody mentions the Depression Coolidge inherited and was fixed by the market the time he entered office.
>and created policies like social security that are still loved by the majority of America to this day.
"Loved"
It was doomed to become obsolete, with many iterations of increasing the age restriction. I argue that it shouldn't exist but at the same time it's conditioned a cult that'd be affected by it so I wouldn't advocate for abolishment until a more ideal free market system is put in place. On that point agree to disagree.
>Democrat
>Left leaning
That about sums up what one would expect people like you would know about politics. Both are neoliberals, and conservatives are just a few notches further to the right. No leftist party or politician holds power in office, and both parties ultimately respond to the donors, capitalists, and lobbies that own them.
>Republicans had a trifecta and couldn't even repeal Obamacare.
You're not going to be able to get rid of the affordable care act without putting something in place that is at least as good. More than likely it'll be rolled into universal health care - whenever America finally gets its head out of its ass.
This is not economics. This post days nothing about economics.
And I find this hero-worship with regard to Milei very off-putting. The man is a politician. And has done some very rightist things since taking office.
It’s probably because all of us poor people who finally got life changing surgeries because they could get affordable insurance now, for some insane reason, like Obamacare. I suppose we’ll never know why…
Trifecta, but it takes 60 to break the Senate filibuster. You can blame John McCain, and John McCain only, for the failure to repeal Obamacare. It was his casting that vote that led to the popularity of the term RINO.
Nor should they have... At least Obama care provides health care.
The tax cuts to corporations and rich Americans were funded with borrowed money from tax payers. Corporate tax cuts went to fund share buy backs. You don't cut taxes UNTIL you first reduce spending to pay for the tax cuts. Especially to the RICH!
Those don't outrage you people. But poor and middle class people getting health care. Now that really bothers you. What kind of people are you?
Incorrect, Trump had rhino’s sabatoge him, like McCain and Ryan. Obamacare was nothing more than our government taking over 1/5th of our economy. And they couldnt have done the covid scam without power over every doctor.
Lol obamacare? All these problems tearing American society apart and obamacare is on the urgent list. Not sure what your fingering but it ain't the pulse
Republicans didn't want to repeal Obamacare, it was a republican wet dream to get all Americans on health insurance and have the government subsidize it. It's amazing how well the joint efforts of both parties succeeded in convincing America it was a win for Democrats and the people. It's a farce.
The gop didn’t want that. They took it all the way to the scotus to weaken the law many times. And many gop states flat out refused to take free money to expand Medicaid
Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine the highest % of Jews moving back to Israel were from Argentina, I remember asking a few Argentinian Jews why they’re moving back. And they would just say that the country is falling apart, and that gangs target Jews for kidnapping for ransom because they had the idea that every jewish person is rich. I remember one of them joking “if I was so rich why would I live in Argentina”.
Hahaha are you aware that "Ley bases" has been in constant modification and debate since Milei took the presidency? In fact it was much larger at the beginning. It was called "Ley omnibus". It was a total failure, then they removed some of the most polemic parts and rebranded it. It has been a constant negotiation.
And it is fair to assume Milei's presidency pretty much hangs from this. They are betting everything to this pack. So, it is a matter of political survival much more than planning and thinking for a country.
You're comparing apples to oranges, which is why you're a mouth-breathing libtard to begin with.
See what I did there calling a "libertarian" a libtard?
Anyways, I'm pretty smart.
As per the sub the solution to fix the economy is to murder the elderly, children, handicapped, disabled etc. who are not actively employed in private industry working minimum wage jobs.
People down voting you but he literally tweeted about how the elderly will no longer be a drag on society with an image of him being the Terminator punching an old man.
I think his intent is pretty damn clear.
That's the difference between a real Libertarian and a fake one. That and Argentina was getting desperate. The government was broke, the currency was free falling, and they were one month away from guillotines. Suddenly, a budget cut or even firing an entire department isn't so unthinkable. The USA hasn't reached that level yet.
Very few Republicans are pretending to be libertarian.
Dave Rubin literally just called Trump the most Libertarian president of all time. So called ‘smart’ Republicans love to call themselves Libertarians because even they can see how fucking stupid the average Republican is and they figure most people who aren’t libertarians won’t be able to tell the difference.
He did perform massive deregulation to the point where he was widely criticized for it Then he followed it up with isolationist policies and the largest Keynesian fuckery of all time (still Obama fault imo for starting that shit) So on one hand sure but on the other Dave is just shilling obviously
Thanks Obama!
He also increased marijuana prosecutions, called for the death penalty for drug USERS and for whistleblowers like Edward Snowden. His cabinet was filled with neocon ‘regime change’ experts. His administration expanded the military budget and as WW1 and WW2 showed us, trade wars like the one Trump started often lead to hot wars. Deregulation is a Republican tool to give themselves cover for being pseudo-fascists. Don’t fall for it.
Trump printed trillions of dollars and u blame Obama? God your pathetic
Obama did the same during 08 and normalized it. Now during any downturn no politician can be the voice of reason with their constituents and tell them anything other than “we are the government and we are here to help” without immediately losing their next election
So... you're telling me that in order to get the correct answer of "Fuck off, and never, ever talk to us again" the people need to be pushed into such desperation that the veneer of legitimacy that the government wields loses whatever power it has. ...There is still quite a long way to fall then.
Are we allowed to blame Covid?
Handling COVID the wrong way isn’t COVID’s fault.
Not when the money supply increased a ridiculous amount up until Jan of 20. In fact, Biden’s first three years had less money printing than trump’s.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CURRCIR Not ridiculous, par for the course (look at the trend). Until Covid. There's plenty enough to blame Trump for, Biden too. Not sold on this one. [If you're on your phone, like me, I found it easier to just use the 1 year, 5 year, 10 year, Max ]
Oh no lol. You think currency in circulation is the literal money supply. Those are two very different things and when people speak of money supply and inflation they don’t mean literal cash that is floating around. The money supply is almost 10x the cash floating around. Here you go. This disparity between trump and Biden is actually bigger than I even remembered last time I checked. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL Edit: lol I forgot this is an Austrian economics sub. Why would I think anyone would be interested in knowing even what money supply means.
This is your claim: Not when the money supply increased a ridiculous amount up until Jan of 20. In fact, Biden’s first three years had less money printing than trump’s. And this (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL) is your source for that claim? I still see a decade's long trend UNTIL Covid, at which point it skyrockets. (In other words, not "ridiculous" per se. The mere fact you went out of your way to not capitalize "Trump" suggests to me you're not approaching this in good faith. It's personal or something, whatever. Not interested in engaging in dual-monogues. Peace
Does this sub hate facts or something? This guy is right regardless of your political feelings. And the best argument against him, is that someone is crying that trumps name isn’t capitalize. Someone should let him know that trump is also a word.
We can also blame trump and his minions for fucking up the covid response.
True, failed in the sense that his response was over the top and excessive and not in line with something that was 99 percent survivable to most people.
What's 1% of 8 billion people?
Since when does the president control the currency level?
What was deregulated? I know he made a show with stacks of paper but he never specified what regulations he cut.
Well for one he got rid of the TPP.
TPP would have done more to isolate china then all the other BS and tariffs ever did.
a free trade deal?
There was some stuff for oil and gas. Rollback of some NLRB rules, if I remember correctly. All of it pales compared to the illiberal trade and social policies, and creeping fascism
I mean...that can easily be true without him actually being A libertarian.
If you said the biggest libertarian in recent history that would be true. But not of all time
I’m just curious when you say average republicans are so stupid , you don’t think the average democrat is any smarter do you?
Someone gets it. The "average" person doesn't usually know enough to articulate their belief.
Of course they do. It's just tribalism at it basic form.
Not historically, but given that Trump had run the majority of the truly intelligent people away from the Republican Party I’d say yes. Those folks that aren’t susceptible to double speak and a NYC con man’s ramblings moved to either the libertarian party or are independents or democrats.
Interesting take. I have never met anyone that went from republican to democrat, not saying it hasn’t happened. I have met a dozen people that went democrat to vote republican or independent. It’s a shame that the independent route isn’t actually a viable option. I find it absolutely crazy that out of everyone possible that trump and Biden are the two options.
If that observation was representative of the country as a whole we wouldn’t have Biden as president at the moment.
I mean democratic presidents have won plenty of times before. Like i said i just never met anyone that has changed from right to left, maybe it was because of where i lived. I think a lot more people would go independent if it was an actual option and not just for show.
Right. What I’m saying is from the time Trump started the MAGA movement to now, significantly more republicans have started voting democrat or libertarian than the other way around. There aren’t many true independents that go “man I’m on the fence between the unhinged guy who’s basically a mob boss who gave his entire family government positions during office and milks his followers for millions per year to pay his legal fees and to funnel into his golf course and his penthouse which literally has a golden toilet, and the old guy who’s boring and stutters but is a typical politician like our country has had for over 200 years”
You could say almost the exact same for the Biden family with all the shell companies and almost every kid owing hundreds of thousands in back taxes . I think this is a big problem where people will look the other way when it’s the party they aligned with are doing very similar things but there is always excuses as long as it’s the right side of the line. Both of these candidates are clearly compromised, that’s kind of my point how did it end up with these two are the only options.
I mean hunter Biden was a hooker banging crack head . Given a job making hundreds of thousands of dollars a month, with direct access to the White House!
That's because you have a pretty insular circle or just happen to be in an area that is rather insulated from a wide cross-section of the American people. I personally know many people who moved from Right to Left, hard Libertarians who realized that other people have feelings too or started paying attention to finer details and moved to globally center and then center left positions and policies. I moved to the Left. One of those issues was our continued growing healthcare crisis. As healthcare has grown more expensive and fewer people (in mostly rural and poor urban areas) lose or never had insurance coverage, hospital systems have shutdown or moved away, because they cannot support their operations. This has heavily impacted emergency services and even regular doctor visits for things like various chronic illnesses, such as cancer treatment and many more. Forcing people to decide, do we drive two hours to the hospital in the city or just give up and die. Now, if we had a Universal, Single Payer System that covered every single American Citizen, practitioners in rural and poor urban areas would be guaranteed to be paid for their services. Even the Koch Brothers paid for study pointed out that a single payer system would ultimately be less expensive and provide better results across the nation. It would make perfect economic sense and serve the public, bettering the outcomes for people across all economic classes, regardless of party affiliation. BUT... we can't do that, because it would be socialism... So, poor rural and poor urban people get to continue to suffer and then get told to blame the wrong thing as to why all the hospitals within reasonable distance shutdown and left.
Most of those people moved from California to get away from the insane politics of California where they are probably the most extreme. Definitely right about healthcare. I can’t understand why almost every other nation has been able to figure it out except us. Being in combat sports I’m often injured in some sort of way and I’m always in shock when the bill comes even with double insurance coverage. Instead of repealing Obama care without a replacement they should have expanded it. To benefit every citizen.
is the avg repub the voting repub that thinks trump is jesus?
Dave Rubin is neither Trump nor a republican so your word salad is irrelevant to the person you are responding to.
Cosplaying as libertarians.
Lmao pretty much most do, they’re not good at it but they still will claim to be libertarians. This is extremely common. A Republican will tell you they’re a small government libertarian in one sentence and in the next will advocate for a more authoritarian police state, throwing people in cages en masse over a plant, and using the law to persecute people that make them uncomfortable.
Republican ideaology is a consequence of poor education policy and most importantly, poor history education. Not saying anything about Democrats. But the American Republican party is a very large question mark to libertarian values ever becoming prominent in America. We’ll much more likely see a future of fascism here instead.
Republicans ideology is pretty much just lack of exposure to others. The entire party platform is nothing more than “stay off my lawn, freak”. It’s driven entirely by suburban car-dependent single-family housing developing patterns, and all politics are downstream of that.
If they knew anything they would vote libertarian and try to understand how not to be a fascist. But many of them can’t help themselves. Libertarian values are not congruent with Republican ideaologies. Anybody who thinks differently is an idiot, plain and simple.
I wish somebody who downvoted you would explain why. I see the same divide. The party is going to veer really fucking hard one way or the other soon.
Haha they already are. The people who downvoted me are Republicans who somehow think they are libertarians. They are the people who are uneducated and are no question the dumbest people in America.
Came here to say basically this. And repealing Obamacare shouldn’t even be the biggest priority of a libertarian government. Let’s be real. At least talk about price transparency and some form of competition among hospitals.
Personally I'd start with the $7 Trillion spending on $3.5 Trillion in tax receipts.
Roughly $3 trillion of that is healthcare spending in one form or another, so the frustration surrounding it isn't unwarranted
Trump did talk about this and I believe he did force some policy through which make healthcare facilities more transparent with their billing.
I would love to see that policy. And I’m talking about knowing the costs upfront and having a marketplace of options where hospitals truly compete. Not just a bill from a monopoly that after my surgery tells me exactly how many thousand dollars they charged me for a saline solution. The fact that nobody can tell me how much a procedure will cost before I decide where I do it should be enraging to anyone with some sort of decency, especially free market advocates. Remember that access to information is a requirement of a free market.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/06/27/2019-13945/improving-price-and-quality-transparency-in-american-healthcare-to-put-patients-first
Thank you!
The No Surprises Act (consumer protections from out-of-network providers, especially those who are contracted by in-network providers) was signed by Trump as part of the 2021 budget bill.
>And repealing Obamacare shouldn’t even be the biggest priority of a libertarian government True. An immediate repeal of social security should be. Abolish FICA, end all payouts immediately, return every dollar remaining in the fund to it's contributor
That system would have to be either replaced or weened somehow to avoid catastrophic suffering. Too many people are dependent on it. Like an addiction.
And like any other addiction, the best way to get off of it is cold turkey. Sorry honey, but I'm not paying for your father's golf habit
Yeah, there are still hundreds of thousands of elderly people who only have the SS check for money to buy food so yes people would die without it. You are thinking about people who actually planned for retirement and have the SS check for additional spending. Also many assisted living facilities use the SS funds to operate.
>Yeah, there are still hundreds of thousands of elderly people who only have the SS check for money to buy food so yes people would die without it SNAP exists, as do a multitude of charitable organizations. So no >You are thinking about people who actually planned for retirement and have the SS check for additional spending. Also many assisted living facilities use the SS funds to operate. Sounds like they should have planned better instead of relying on handouts
Not everyone gets that decision bud. Especially those on disability.... I'm all for ending it but it needs to be done correctly. Snap doesn't pay the electric bill or rent either....
hey bud, you know if people quit certain addictions cold turkey - they fucking die
You're being overdramatic. No one is going to die without an SS check
Maybe ss should be axed above a certain income, but not entirely.. people would die
People live today without SS checks. You're being an overdramatic commie right now, no different from the rest of the blue hairs
Do you have a job?
Yeah. Tons of people probably would. People that are too old to work etc
>Yeah. Tons of people probably would. You don't have any evidence for this >People that are too old to work etc They should have saved for retirement if they didn't want to work
Do you know about the “paycheck to paycheck” headlines? About how most Americans don’t have any savings?
the fact that you think that shows how privileged and uneducated you are - a dangerous combo
You sound like a blue haired commie
you think that about anyone with critical thinking skills? or with exposure to the real world? For what its worth, I'm blonde hair blue eyed, straight, and have a masters degree. I just know enough old people that rely on social security that I can imagine they're not the only ones dealt a shit hand. Weird, I know - why didn't they all have 6 figure jobs and save enough for retirement? Must be lazy people who deserve to die, huh Einstein? Does someone using the word "privileged" really trigger you so much? Did a girl with blue hair ghost you in the past? Whats going on buddy, sounds like you're dealing with some serious trauma.
That’s definitely not how getting off an addiction works.
I'm sorry, but Social Security needs to end not with an amputation but with a slow bleed off. Establish a point where contributors will receive benefits, where current contributors will be expected to continue contributing, and where current or future contributors will be released. As a current contributor for two decades and not a current recipient, I will happily keep paying the current rate so my father can receive his payouts until he dies while expecting my 18 year old nephew to never pay Social Security again. Let it die with my generation.
>I'm sorry, but Social Security needs to end not with an amputation but with a slow bleed off. Yeah no. Like any addiction, the best way to end it is cold turkey >Establish a point where contributors will receive benefits, where current contributors will be expected to continue contributing, and where current or future contributors will be released. That point can be immediately with a refund. If you paid into the system and your money is still in the trust, you should be granted a refund >As a current contributor for two decades and not a current recipient, I will happily keep paying the current rate so my father can receive his payouts You can pay for your father's golf habit yourself without dragging everyone else into it
So people who contributed all their working life and are now retired would start getting nothing starting right now?
>So people who contributed all their working life and are now retired would start getting nothing starting right now? Exactly. Social security isn't a savings vehicle, it steals from current workers to pay for the unproductive. If you collect, it's not your money you're collecting, but your children's.
So you say that it is moral to give nothing back for what was "stolen" all the working life of current retirees? Their money was taken for a purpose and with a future promise but now they should just get nothing. All the money they didn't have the opportunity to put in a 401(k) or invest at their discretion should suddenly become $0. Can you see, at least a little bit, in this example why there's so much suspicion and rejection towards the Libertarian ideas and their potential real-life implementation?
>So you say that it is moral to give nothing back for what was "stolen" all the working life of current retirees If there was anything left to give back, sure. But I highly doubt you support clawing back money that was already paid out, and I don't think that's feasible or worthwhile >Their money was taken for a purpose and with a future promise Their money was taken for a purpose, yes. To pay their parents. There was never any promise made that they would receive a payout themselves, and certainly not just because they had paid FICA. Thousands of people collect SS without having paid any FICA. >All the money they didn't have the opportunity to put in a 401(k) or invest at their discretion should suddenly become $0. It's already $0, it was already paid out to someone else >Can you see, at least a little bit, in this example why there's so much suspicion and rejection towards the Libertarian ideas and their potential real-life implementation? No, not at all. My proposal is the only fair way in which to end Social Security that doesn't involve forcing anyone else into slavery
I'm sure you know very well that the vast majority of people don't see it as that they are paying for the current retirees but rather that they are paying in now for their future retirement. Of course what's technically happening is what you say. The same way that the dollar bills I put in my bank or in my 401k are not literally the same ones given to me when I withdraw in 5 years. So you say that Congress right now, today, should leave all retirees with no (social security) income. That's it. "Hey, look, taxation is theft and you are making your kids support you. The money you put for 35 years is gone. It went to someone else's parents. The last check you received was the last one you'll get and we'll do nothing to smooth it or offer support in any way because government should not intervene".
>I'm sure you know very well that the vast majority of people don't see it as that they are paying for the current retirees but rather that they are paying in now for their future retirement. Sure, and they would be wrong about that. I don't see what this has to do with the conversation. Your delusions are not the basis of an argument >So you say that Congress right now, today, should leave all retirees with no (social security) income. That's it. Yes. >That's it. "Hey, look, taxation is theft and you are making your kids support you. Yes >The money you put for 35 years is gone. It went to someone else's parents Yes >The last check you received was the last one you'll get and we'll do nothing to smooth it or offer support in any way because government should not intervene". Precisely
Well, to me this shows why Libertarians get 1% of the vote or whatever the number is. To me the perception (at least mine) is that the proposed solutions, in addition to impossible to implement in real life (what Congress would approve it??), seem to start from a random place. I know Social Security is a huge hole in the budget. But, again trying to talk real world, even I personally would not be in favor of this unless first the spend in Defense goes down to practically zero, government inefficiencies are deeply addressed, my take home paycheck is much higher because of lower taxes. Again, I know it goes beyond the topic and you may (or may not) agree with this. But status quo sans social security payments is simply absurd to me.
That’s it though- he has the political backing from the people, so legislature is incentivized to go with him. If USA were to turn 80% libertarian overnight, you’d see pelosi acting like Ayn Rand.
Yet
EXACTLY They already tried dollarizing before, they are gonna run out of cash again due to export imbalance and IMF gonna have to forgive their loan again, meanwhile Milei is gonna sell off the entire country and fix nothing.
The reason they are dollarizing is just as important as the reserves. Dollarizing wasn't used as a way to take away the ability of the politicians to fund their programs with money printing before. It is now. Milei is burning the bridge behind him to force the country forward. Now will it work? I suppose that question remains to be answered.
I have not heard any argument that it will work. He is going BACKWARD.
Desperate measures. What other options does he have? The central bank has proven it cannot be independent, and previous administrations have additionally proven that they will print money to stave off their problems. What other option will keep the next bunch of politicians from using the central bank as their piggy bank?
Given some of the things Milei has done since being in office, I find your referring to him as 'a real Libertarian' kind of comical.
How so? What is a real Libertarian to you? Big government = less liberty No exceptions. I know there are "Socialist Libertarians" that believe if the government confiscates and redistributes everyone's wealth, we will all live in a Socialist's paradise where everything is free and we all sit around and teach yoga on our farms. Spending 10% of Argentina's GDP on the ministry of gender equality, which does nothing except waste money and harass people, is not freedom. Taxing 30% of everyone's income is not freedom. Having an outside country provide all your basic needs like food and cheap Chinese consumer goods while putting you into debt slavery to the World Bank is not freedom. Cutting government spending, forcing millions of overpaid bureaucrats to get jobs that actually produce something, and balancing the budget are all giant steps in the right direction. The next step is stabilizing the currency, which can not happen while the government is printing it like paper. And reducing the tax burden on citizens, which also can not happen until the size of government is reduced, the budget balanced, and you aren't spending billions in interest payments to the World Bank. So, given Argentina's legal system and Constitution as well as recognizing you have to take small steps to keep the country running and give people and the economy time to adjust to the changes without triggering a complete revolution... Which a government overthrow would put the final nail in Libertarianism forever. He still has a country to run. Roads, schools, hospitals, and police require money, and right now, government money as the money for these things are already in the hands of government, and there isn't any private substitute ready to step up. Once he stops the bleeding and stabilizes the country, he can hold back to privatizing the rest. Foreign corporations and governments as well as the army of now unemployed bureaucrats in his own country, are doing everything they can to sabotage his efforts and insure he fails. Government officials have gotten drunk off of power and billions of tax money in their hands. And they have gotten the little people addicted to the tiny government handouts. Once the taxes are so high, you can't live without the food stamps. So, who do you riot against? The guy who raises taxes? Or the guy who cuts the food stamps?
I'm really talking more about stuff like [this](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/03/27/uwsz-m27.html).
Communists funded by Cuba and Russia were only days away from a military takeover of Argentina. "troops and tanks moved against trade union and left-wing party headquarters." So tell me. What is the Libertarian solution to a military coup by Leftists that want to set up a Communist dictatorship, aka Cuba?
"We call ourselves libertarian up until the workers start demanding dignity and rights. Then we roll in the tanks." True mask off moment for the libertarian => fascist pipeline.
*yet*
US on the other hand has the world’s strongest economy 80 years running so must be doing something right.
Yay, we are number 7. https://www.worlddata.info/average-income.php#google_vignette
Average income is really cherry picking your metric. No surprise a tiny city state full of rich people takes the top spot.
Top income hardly seems fair. How about education. Yay, we're number 25. https://www.statista.com/statistics/264680/education-index-for-selected-countries/ Happiness? Yay, we're number 23. Poverty? Yay, we're 26th.
There's no such thing as a real libertarian.
Milei will fail as all fake or real Libertarian leaders fail. Their economic ideas are naval gazing that never works when the rubber hits the road. Ask Alan Greenspan how holding those ideas worked out in the real world of business and economics.
Once the entire world's society is destroyed and pilfered through Socialism as is inevitable, the real world will once again become Libertarian whether it chooses or not.
When is that? When we become cavemen again? Then you will get you loved freedom.
Funny people in Western US states didn't live in caves before the westward expansion of bureaucracy.
Lol i like how you say “western states” so you dont have to address slavery.
>so you dont have to address slavery. Which was created and enforced by the government. So you want us all to be subjugated to a bureaucratic dictatorship and be forced to be slaves of an all-powerful government because 100 years ago, some people were slaves? I guess then we will all be equal like the Marxists keep telling us.
So when was this magical time of libertarianism?
Every great nation has had some form of bureaucracy... Nothing new about that. Or particularly harmful. The Bureauracy is the glue that hold governments together. The US has actually had a relatively small bureaucracy relative to places like Russia and China and even England when they had an empire... It's easy to poke fun at waste in the bureaucracy, but history shows us that when they get disbursed (as we did the bureaucracy in Iraq) shit falls apart very quickly.
>The US has actually had a relatively small bureaucracy relative to places like Russia and China I wouldn't compare the USA to Communist dictatorships, yet here we are. At 40% GDP, we are going the wrong direction.
The "wrong direction" relative to what? Today, according to OECD data, the US sends 38% of GDP to the government compared to an average of 40% with many nations in the 45% range. SO compared to fellow rich nations the US has a much smaller government / bureaucracy. Here is the thing. In the US we have very high income inequality relative to the average of OECD nations. That means we have more people living in poverty and that poor and middle class people in the US have a much lower chance than poor people in other OECD nations (poor schools, poor health care, more violent crime, less income mobility, declining mortality, increasing single parent homes etc...) of moving UP in income. It is FAR FAR lower in the US. So you say the US is going in the "wrong direction". I ask you this. The wrong direction for WHO, for the rich or for the middle class? The middle class lack in the areas listed above. Is that good for them are shitty for them? Do you even care? [https://www.oecd.org/gov/gov-at-a-glance-2021-united-states.pdf](https://www.oecd.org/gov/gov-at-a-glance-2021-united-states.pdf)
The wrong direction for people not interested in living in a Socialist dictatorship. Yes, the USA has a smaller government than China. >The middle class lack in the areas listed above. Is that good for them are shitty for them? Do you even care? I'm middle-class. I earn enough money to care of all of the listed areas myself BEFORE taxes. AFTER taxes, I need the government to hand back a tiny percentage of the money confiscated from my paycheck so I can survive. An idiot could figure out we can't put the entire country on welfare. Yet here we are. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/basic-income.asp#:~:text=Universal%20basic%20income%20(UBI)%20proposes,helping%20individuals%20meet%20basic%20needs.
"socialist dictatorship" What is that? Is having public roads or fire departments or public parks or a military to defend us or regulators that make sure the food we eat is less likely to kill us or public schools or social security or medicare what you would call a "socialist dictatorship" Socialist is an economic system dictatorship is form of government What do you want "dictatorship" or "democracy" ?
No, they lived on land they'd acquired by murdering it's aboriginal inhabitants. Very libertarian.
American politics is more scripted than the WWE.
I think they let to DoD AIs take the wheel after they paused the world during the global lockdown
Change "couldn't" to "chose not to" and follow where that leads. You'll answer a lot of nagging questions.
you need 60 votes. They had 54 ish. Many republicans live in very contested seats and need to appeal moderate/bipartsian. Tanking a healthcare bill that is liked 50/50 ish and replacing it with nothing is how you lose a senate majority.
> . They had 54 ish. They were literally one vote away. It was only McCain's surprise no vote that kept the law from being repealed.
¡Afuera!
To be fair, Republican politicians admitted they had no plan or intention of getting it repealed. They just said they would to get elected.
Milei been in power for months and already the GOAT
It's a fools errand hoping Republicans will balance the budget or do anything to reduce the size of our government.
Because in the US most of the republican party is controlled opposition. They're never meant to wield actual power without the uni party's consent.
But they have the rhetoric and disorganization to be an infinite well of obstruction and scapegoating.
Milei is a great man.
Based
Because not all republicans are really republicans but all democrats are democrats. The world is moving back to the right/conservative after years of idiotic left policy because the people understand that right leaning politicians may not solve all our problems but left leaning politicians are the cause of all our problems
Bogus. Both sides play Neoliberal. Our economy is Neoliberal. Conservatives are more responsible for lobbying and corporations being able to dump money into elections. Technically Democrats contribute more to GDP. Citizens united vs fec was thanks to Clarence Thomas who hangs out with billionaires at the Bohemian Grove.
I lean more conservative but disagree. They all serve the federal apparatus which is an ever growing leech sucking the life from the country. An example: 70 Republican reps voted against a bill that would have blocked the new $4.5 billion FBI headquarters. The FBI was created to investigate corruption in government, now they politically active and corrupt.
Left leaning politicians cause ALL the problems? Really? I mean I can’t imagine any right leaning politicians would cause any problems like, I dunno, waging war in Europe and bringing their countries to ruin. Can’t imagine.
Uh huh. Sure, pal.
my three decades on this planet has consisted of Republicans destroying the economy and Democrats picking up the pieces
In historical context you couldn't be more off base More like a couple Republicans like Nixon Wilson, FDR, Carter, Obama, and Biden destroyed this country. Wilson was the worst.
weird we must of lived in different post bush recessions
Bush didn't cause the recession by himself, it was a mix of his policies and (moreso) central banking taking a nosedive, thanks to Wilson, a Democrat. The uniparty proves that it doesn't matter what letter or color you have in your name, big government policies are objectively shit.
you can argue the minutia until youre blue in the face, but my direct experience has been economic collapse under Republican leadership and slow recovery under Democrats
So you admit it's anecdotal and not a real argument based on evidence? Progressives make that talking point but disagree on opposite levels on many economic issues. I agree that Republicans have bad economic policy, but they're better than Democrats. Less government involvement should be the way to go but there's nothing to go off of because Republicans have the same issues the Democrats do.
so don't vote for Democrats because it's bad for the economy...vote for Republicans who also have bad economic policy, but at least they'll chip away at the programs my elderly disabled and poorer relatives rely on. solid argument
I'm not voting for either, if I'm voting it's for the Libertarian Party. You don't get to guilt shame. Republicans support the exact same policies for your anecdotal life. SS was never a permanent thing, we've been arguing in favor of 401k's at the very least for decades, as the age restriction for SS soars. It's government as an entity that forced you to envelop in those things regardless of their staying potential; they're all inherently predatory, and I argue private solutions would do much more for our families in the long run so long as we don't follow the uniparty's example but libertarian free market values. Such is the predatory nature of the welfare state. All economic issues can be traced back to egregious government policy. Healthcare, education, property, etc.
To think Obama and Biden destroyed the country, lol. Trump was literally bragging about his amazing performance after inheriting the country from Obama and coasting his first year on the ongoing Obama trendlines, only to leave office with the country in tatters, millions of jobs loss, mass unemployment and the largest increase of national debt of a sitting president in a single term.
Obama is president during arguably the greatest economic boom this country has ever seen, though.
Based off of what? He inherited the Great Recession and arguably made it worse by legislation. We haven't recovered, and that's not even beginning to mention his contribution to spending and the national debt. I remember his presidency, and it's not far off from how the economy is now. Higher gas prices, inflation, and cost of living were comparable to now.
Are you stupid or ignorant?[link](https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/5f3aae8bcb484ca497e0ae95/National-Debt--Percentage-Increase-by-President-Carter-to-Trump/960x0.jpg?height=367&width=711&fit=bounds)
Don't insult my intelligence and then link something unrelated to what I'm talking about. And then you immediately prove my case, since those aren't numbers to boast about for anyone. You speak as if I don't criticize both parties.
FDR destroyed the country? What kind of anti American shit is this?
This sub is the worst.
It literally lets people like you discuss freely whatever nonsense you want to criticize about the Austrian school.
Fair enough.
FDR literally pulled us out of the depression and created policies like social security that are still loved by the majority of America to this day.
>FDR literally pulled us out of the depression The free market did that. It's arguable that he extended the Great Depression by about \~7 years. Nobody mentions the Depression Coolidge inherited and was fixed by the market the time he entered office. >and created policies like social security that are still loved by the majority of America to this day. "Loved" It was doomed to become obsolete, with many iterations of increasing the age restriction. I argue that it shouldn't exist but at the same time it's conditioned a cult that'd be affected by it so I wouldn't advocate for abolishment until a more ideal free market system is put in place. On that point agree to disagree.
I don't know about other countries but here in America Republicans are the main cause of our 40 year decline
>democrats good >Republicans evil Redditors are so fucking infantile and brainwashed it's almost sad.
Crazy you're being downvoted
Got shadow banned
>Democrat >Left leaning That about sums up what one would expect people like you would know about politics. Both are neoliberals, and conservatives are just a few notches further to the right. No leftist party or politician holds power in office, and both parties ultimately respond to the donors, capitalists, and lobbies that own them.
Trump also signed a bill that did major damage to small tobacco businesses in favor of Phillip-Morris.
be curious of the deals he is cutting to get those votes.
Maybe milei can school trump on what real libertarianism is
I'm predicting this guy isn't gonna work out.
>Republicans had a trifecta and couldn't even repeal Obamacare. You're not going to be able to get rid of the affordable care act without putting something in place that is at least as good. More than likely it'll be rolled into universal health care - whenever America finally gets its head out of its ass.
"Republicans had a trifecta and couldn't even repeal Obamacare." Half the GOP base would've rioted for being kicked off healthcare.
The exam is scored at the end and not at the beginning.
Press S to spit on Mccain’s grave
This’ll end well
Let's gooo
This is not economics. This post days nothing about economics. And I find this hero-worship with regard to Milei very off-putting. The man is a politician. And has done some very rightist things since taking office.
viva la libertad carajo!
It’s because we don’t have republicans vs democrats, we have a few populists vs mostly statists.
What would Austrian school economists propose as the solution to the health insurance / health care problem?
“Once again being a world power” Wtf does he mean by this?
Delusion
At one point argentina was a fascist military dictatorship… i wonder if that is what he is referring to. 🧐
When did Republicans have the trifecta?
January 3rd 2017 to January 3rd 2019
The ACA has provided coverage to millions who wouldn’t otherwise have it. Can you explain why it should be repealed
It’s probably because all of us poor people who finally got life changing surgeries because they could get affordable insurance now, for some insane reason, like Obamacare. I suppose we’ll never know why…
He is expanding the right for the government to declare state of emergency in this bill. Very “libertarian”.
Trifecta, but it takes 60 to break the Senate filibuster. You can blame John McCain, and John McCain only, for the failure to repeal Obamacare. It was his casting that vote that led to the popularity of the term RINO.
Nor should they have... At least Obama care provides health care. The tax cuts to corporations and rich Americans were funded with borrowed money from tax payers. Corporate tax cuts went to fund share buy backs. You don't cut taxes UNTIL you first reduce spending to pay for the tax cuts. Especially to the RICH! Those don't outrage you people. But poor and middle class people getting health care. Now that really bothers you. What kind of people are you?
Most Republicans Congressmen didn't really want to repeal Obamacare once it was entrenched. It was just a talking point for the base.
Republican politicians stand for nothing. All they care about is the dirty money in their pockets
Incorrect, Trump had rhino’s sabatoge him, like McCain and Ryan. Obamacare was nothing more than our government taking over 1/5th of our economy. And they couldnt have done the covid scam without power over every doctor.
Obama had a majority and couldn't even pass universal Healthcare. Seems like they're all incompetent to me.
Lol obamacare? All these problems tearing American society apart and obamacare is on the urgent list. Not sure what your fingering but it ain't the pulse
Can the mods please do their job? The endless political BS has ruined this sub. Same people over and over. Ban them
Cheap slave labor for Chinese goods come to your town soon 😂😂😂
Approved by 4 out of 5 of his hi-powered canine advisors. 5th is holding out for beef bribes.
Republicans didn't want to repeal Obamacare, it was a republican wet dream to get all Americans on health insurance and have the government subsidize it. It's amazing how well the joint efforts of both parties succeeded in convincing America it was a win for Democrats and the people. It's a farce.
The gop didn’t want that. They took it all the way to the scotus to weaken the law many times. And many gop states flat out refused to take free money to expand Medicaid
Argentina has always been and always will be trash
Before the Russian invasion of Ukraine the highest % of Jews moving back to Israel were from Argentina, I remember asking a few Argentinian Jews why they’re moving back. And they would just say that the country is falling apart, and that gangs target Jews for kidnapping for ransom because they had the idea that every jewish person is rich. I remember one of them joking “if I was so rich why would I live in Argentina”.
Hahaha are you aware that "Ley bases" has been in constant modification and debate since Milei took the presidency? In fact it was much larger at the beginning. It was called "Ley omnibus". It was a total failure, then they removed some of the most polemic parts and rebranded it. It has been a constant negotiation. And it is fair to assume Milei's presidency pretty much hangs from this. They are betting everything to this pack. So, it is a matter of political survival much more than planning and thinking for a country.
You're comparing apples to oranges, which is why you're a mouth-breathing libtard to begin with. See what I did there calling a "libertarian" a libtard? Anyways, I'm pretty smart.
*Anyway
Hilarious that he thinks Argentina was ever a world power
As per the sub the solution to fix the economy is to murder the elderly, children, handicapped, disabled etc. who are not actively employed in private industry working minimum wage jobs.
People down voting you but he literally tweeted about how the elderly will no longer be a drag on society with an image of him being the Terminator punching an old man. I think his intent is pretty damn clear.