Rand Paul - We Already Tried Economic Libertarianism - It Didn"t Work
Rand Paul has been under fire this last week for comments he made in regard to the flawed nature of the Civil Rights legislation-because it forces businesses not to discriminate.
While this is certainly regressive thinking and unfortunate, what is more dangerous are the economic libertarian views of Paul.
It seems that since the election of Obama, Libertarianism has been on the rise in the United States.
While some may see this as only reactionary (libertarianism seemed to be pretty low in the Bush years), it is starting to grow great support under groups like the Tea Party.
What I think these people don't realize is that we already had a near Libertarian system in the past.
This isn't some new or novel idea.
And guess what? Libertarianism was great for the top 2%, but not so great for the bottom 90%.
When I think of Libertarianism, I think of the days of the Industrial Revolution-where the government didn't get involved at all in regulation or the economy.
The Rockefellers and Carnegies made it big, but the average worker had to work up to 80 hours a week and still barely kept his family afloat.
Women and children were paid even lower wages.
Of course, if they get sick-tough luck.
There was no disability insurance or health subsidies.
I think of the days of Herbert Hoover, when the Great Depression hit he did barely anything, because he thought it wasn't the governments job to give support.
Of course, he got the shantytowns (Hoovervilles) named after his honor, and lost the Presidency in one of the biggest landslides in history (1932).
There are some aspects of Libertarianism that could be good for the country-decriminalizing drug users, legalization of marijuana, less military spending, etc.
However, the overall idea of little to no government in the economy is a recipe for a huge income disparity where a few have everything and the majority of people have nothing.
It is a plan for the rich.
Unfortunately, the middle class followers of Libertarianism would find themselves in an extremely tough situation if the reforms they are fighting for were actually passed.
While this is certainly regressive thinking and unfortunate, what is more dangerous are the economic libertarian views of Paul.
It seems that since the election of Obama, Libertarianism has been on the rise in the United States.
While some may see this as only reactionary (libertarianism seemed to be pretty low in the Bush years), it is starting to grow great support under groups like the Tea Party.
What I think these people don't realize is that we already had a near Libertarian system in the past.
This isn't some new or novel idea.
And guess what? Libertarianism was great for the top 2%, but not so great for the bottom 90%.
When I think of Libertarianism, I think of the days of the Industrial Revolution-where the government didn't get involved at all in regulation or the economy.
The Rockefellers and Carnegies made it big, but the average worker had to work up to 80 hours a week and still barely kept his family afloat.
Women and children were paid even lower wages.
Of course, if they get sick-tough luck.
There was no disability insurance or health subsidies.
I think of the days of Herbert Hoover, when the Great Depression hit he did barely anything, because he thought it wasn't the governments job to give support.
Of course, he got the shantytowns (Hoovervilles) named after his honor, and lost the Presidency in one of the biggest landslides in history (1932).
There are some aspects of Libertarianism that could be good for the country-decriminalizing drug users, legalization of marijuana, less military spending, etc.
However, the overall idea of little to no government in the economy is a recipe for a huge income disparity where a few have everything and the majority of people have nothing.
It is a plan for the rich.
Unfortunately, the middle class followers of Libertarianism would find themselves in an extremely tough situation if the reforms they are fighting for were actually passed.
Source...