4 ms·

Basic income is supported by the libertarian party. http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-case-basic-income http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/li

by deelowe 11y ago

Basic income is supported by the libertarian party. http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-case-basic-income http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-case-basic...

mladenkovacevic 11y ago
Ah OK gotcha.. I need to do some more reading on this it seems. Thank you.
- deelowe 11y ago
  No problem.
vlunkr 11y ago
I don't think that officially says the libertarian party supports it. Just that it may be compatible with their principles. I'm quite certain many libertarians would not go along with that at all.
- deelowe 11y ago
  Well, there's no true scottsman after all. Maybe I should have said "by many members of the libertarian party."
  - JWLong 11y ago
    Doesn't help that when it comes to Libertarians, some of them are Irish. ~"If two libertarians ever find themselves in agreement on a particular issue, they know that one of them has sold out."
  - chimeracoder 11y ago
    > Well, there's no true scottsman after all. This isn't a no true Scotsman fallacy, because parties do have official, stated platforms. And to my knowledge, this is not part of the Libertarian party platform. Being able to find some members of the party who support an idea is not the same as saying that "many members" support it. And frankly, I'd be very skeptical of the notion that this idea has widespread support within the Libertarian party, given the rest of their platform and values.
winstonewert 11y ago
That's a view put forward by some libertarians (as far as I know a minority), not a party policy.
paulddraper 11y ago
It's controversial: http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/04/libertarians-on-basic-income-guarantee http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/04/libertarians-on-basic-inco... The case for it is basically that we should choose something terrible over something awful.
- aninhumer 11y ago
  I think there are also quite a few libertarians who recognise the necessity of wealth redistribution as a guard against creeping inequality, and would prefer that it be done in a market compatible way, instead of via government services.
  - paulddraper 11y ago
    > quite a few libertarians who recognise the necessity of wealth redistribution as a guard against creeping inequality Forced wealth redistribution is antithesis of libertarianism. If it's not, I have been calling myself a libertarian incorrectly.
    - aninhumer 11y ago
      That depends whether you think the point of libertarianism is preferring market solutions to economic problems, or the protection of pure property rights. The latter is perhaps more ideologically pure, but I think the former tends to lead to much more sensible arguments.
      - paulddraper 11y ago
        Property rights, social liberties, etc. I don't even know what to call the first thing you mentioned. "preferring market solutions to economic problems" Capitalism?
        over 11y ago
        I think the point of that one is small government.

by deelowe 11y ago

Basic income is supported by the libertarian party. http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-case-basic-income http://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-case-basic...

mladenkovacevic 11y ago

Ah OK gotcha.. I need to do some more reading on this it seems. Thank you.

deelowe 11y ago
No problem.

vlunkr 11y ago

I don't think that officially says the libertarian party supports it. Just that it may be compatible with their principles. I'm quite certain many libertarians would not go along with that at all.

deelowe 11y ago
Well, there's no true scottsman after all. Maybe I should have said "by many members of the libertarian party."
- JWLong 11y ago
  Doesn't help that when it comes to Libertarians, some of them are Irish. ~"If two libertarians ever find themselves in agreement on a particular issue, they know that one of them has sold out."
- chimeracoder 11y ago
  > Well, there's no true scottsman after all. This isn't a no true Scotsman fallacy, because parties do have official, stated platforms. And to my knowledge, this is not part of the Libertarian party platform. Being able to find some members of the party who support an idea is not the same as saying that "many members" support it. And frankly, I'd be very skeptical of the notion that this idea has widespread support within the Libertarian party, given the rest of their platform and values.

winstonewert 11y ago

That's a view put forward by some libertarians (as far as I know a minority), not a party policy.

paulddraper 11y ago

It's controversial: http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/04/libertarians-on-basic-income-guarantee http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/04/libertarians-on-basic-inco... The case for it is basically that we should choose something terrible over something awful.

aninhumer 11y ago
I think there are also quite a few libertarians who recognise the necessity of wealth redistribution as a guard against creeping inequality, and would prefer that it be done in a market compatible way, instead of via government services.
- paulddraper 11y ago
  > quite a few libertarians who recognise the necessity of wealth redistribution as a guard against creeping inequality Forced wealth redistribution is antithesis of libertarianism. If it's not, I have been calling myself a libertarian incorrectly.
  - aninhumer 11y ago
    That depends whether you think the point of libertarianism is preferring market solutions to economic problems, or the protection of pure property rights. The latter is perhaps more ideologically pure, but I think the former tends to lead to much more sensible arguments.
    - paulddraper 11y ago
      Property rights, social liberties, etc. I don't even know what to call the first thing you mentioned. "preferring market solutions to economic problems" Capitalism?
      - over 11y ago
        I think the point of that one is small government.