What percentage of machinists are conservative?

Read on in the thread. I caught it. d8-)

i don't see this much in other newsgroups, but a few people here do it a LOT....

Without government collusion, monopolies get driven out of business by leaner, quicker competitors.

Cheers! Rich

Then explain Standard Oil, International Harvester, and the sugar trust.

I think you're behind the curve on libertarian/anarcho-capitalist thinking here, Rich. Their pitch now is that these monopolies were *good* for the economy. In the case of Standard Oil, the pro-monopolist extreme capitalists even say that competition was bad for the environment. Fortunately for libertarian theory and for the US economy, they never got a chance to see their ideas put into action.

There are different kind of monopolies, and I'm not talking about natural monopolies, like water or electrical utilities. The monopolies in question break down into coercive and non-coercive. If a monopoly is non-coercive, there is a strong possibility that new entrants in a market will break the monopoly down with competition. This is the case with Microsoft, in the opinion of those extreme capitalists, although we continue to wait for results.

Those monopolies I listed at the top were coercive, and had to be broken up with the Sherman Anti-Trust law. US Steel collapsed of its own weight, but not until it had screwed up the steel market in the US. If they had been smarter, and under libertarian policy, we could still be under their thumb. When the cost of entry is high or the cost of building a distribution network is prohibitive in a competitive market, forget it.

But today, the bigger issue is that large monopolies have coercive power over *government*. We're already on the verge of an oligarchy.

Likewise, there would be a lot of dead people resulting from libertarian policies on food and drugs. The finance industry has provided the model for any business operating with little or no regulation: Once the executives and original investors have set themselves up with good parachutes, they hardly care whether the business goes belly-up. Nor do they care how much damage they do.

Hmm, so you're complaining that people are taking our many off-topic threads and sending them further off-topic, or what, Doug? ;)

Funny, innit?

-- Remember, in an emergency, dial 1911.

I've noticed you usually read what you reply to, why not this time?

I don't speak for those who "call themselves libertarian", just myself.

I'd be surprised if you could find two left libertarians who would agree enough on much to be able to say there really are any positions. Authoritarians have it so much easier since they have leaders to tell what their positions should be.

David

Well, you're calling *yourself* libertarian, so the question is what you mean by that.

It sounds like your views are like those that used to be called "civil libertarians." Maybe you guys need a new description that distinguishes you from Libertarians. d8-)

You've left it unclear how "authoritarian" you would be about economic issues. If you don't care, that's one thing. If you oppose all regulation, then you're close to what you're calling a "right" libertarian, or a Libertarian. If you favor some regulation, then you're closer to the center, with a strong civil-liberties interest.

That makes it hard to identify what someone means when he says "libertarian." Maybe the Libertarians will set up a sub-category for you guys...

But what then if they also happen to be cross-dressers ?

I think Ron Paul is the standardbearer for what a "real" Libertarian is:

They'd be easier to identify on the street, unless they were really good at it.

You have to have some sympathy for those liberals, like David, though. All the good names have been co-opted, even "liberal," which is most accurate, but the meaning of which has taken a real beating. But choosing "libertarian" was not a good idea. They've lumped themselves in with the housebroken anarchists, like Rich, who also call themselves "libertarian."

Have you ever looked up some of these ideological descriptions on Wikipedia? Holy cow. Every variation and mutation has its own entry now. It's like a rat's nest of entangled philosophies, and you can hardly pick them apart with pliers and a crowbar.

If there was world enough and time, it would be interesting to write an historical account of the philosophical origins of these Libertarian/libertarians, tracing them to their real roots. They think they're following the philosophies of the Founding Fathers. Not. Actually, they're dead-nuts followers of the American intellectual anarchists, who started the whole thing in the 1830s and 1840s.

Wait a minute. David has just made clear that there are left libertarians and right libertarians. How can there be one type of libertarian in light of what he's said?

Yes, I've quoted a couple of entries from their platform in this thread. It sounds like a fast, greasy slide into social and economic collapse.

Still looking for someone to accept you? :)

You, repairman. Me, writer. Cheeta, conservative candidate for President...

Sorry to hear you don't feel good about what you are doing

But what is really unfortunate is you think you need to feel bad in order to be useful Only in America

How about "libertarian"? Or those other guys could more accurately identify themselves as "Right Libertarians".

This is one reason I usually avoid this type of issue, the descriptions I come up with are best summarized with just my name.

How about anarcho-syndicalist, modeled on those in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"? Although I tend to take the whole thing less seriously than they do.

I'm sure they'll get right on that! :^)

David

Ooooh...you *are* far out there. I wouldn't have guessed. d8-)

Watch out for the Great Crullers...

If I meet someone who owns and frequently uses a mill or metal lathe, I can be almost certain that he is a conservative.

Yet on rec.crafts.metalworking, there are a number of liberal metalworkers making flaming posts.

Why do the few liberal metalworkers come here?

Why causes that?

I did not tell you anything. But since you asked I will now. You (for some unknown reasons) announced you were not like the people who make things to feel good about what they are doing.

You made it crystal clear that you thought that "feel good about what they are doing" was incompatible with "doing useful work"

that is what is know as the "Puritan ethic" The Puritan ethic is unique to the USA

Feel free to inquire, if you need additional assistance

-jim

I haven't run into many liberal machinists. Not very many liberal engineers either.

Well there was one engineer that was all over the board. Listened to NPR religously, home schooled his kids, wore a bunch of I care bracelets, rode a bike to work, was an arborist in his spare time and left my place of work during the most recent collapse the the economy to work for SIGarms. I really liked that guy, he was interesting!

Wes