36 votes

Rand Paul Interview on Jon Stewart's Daily Show (10/3/12)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Rand tries too hard to please

Rand tries too hard to please everyone.... that's his downfall..

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Stewart was Nicer This Time

Last time he was completely disrespectful. Stewart even treated Blogojovich better just prior to his trial. This time he disagreed, but was at least respectful about it.

What a joke.

Rand basically folded on a market regulated strictly by it's consumer i.e. a free market being able to take care of any problems while the government force never being able to by default.

No, Rand wants to manage regulations.

it seems to me like he really

it seems to me like he really only gave in on regulations that protect worker's safety. It's hard to argue that there should be NO regulation in that area...

Actually..

it's not hard to argue that at all.

Then

Then don't just say it, argue it, let's hear it. Tell us how there should be no regulations for worker safety.

You have to see the big picture

If there were no state regulating everything, workers would be scarce. People would be figuring out other ways to earn a living, have an income. They would work for themselves, save and invest, apprentice themselves to tradesmen, etc. Worker participation in the economy is gate-kept by government credentialling and licensing schemes all of which are tax and protectionist schems. They do not "protect" the common man, they protect the players who pay off the political class. Workers would be scarce, employers would have to treat them decently to attract them. Government schools were created to address this very problem. Industrialists wanted obedient, uniform, conforming WORKERS, not freethinking entrepreneurs. Schools have always taught kids to get good "jobs", to buy houses, to trust "experts" (credentials). This whole paradigm is passed off as beneficial to the masses when it actually has enslaved them. We have tainted meat with inspection stickers on it, chemical and hormone laden milk, we have people routinely killed by medical "experts", we have an ignorant population all credentialled with diplomas that certify they are "educated". It is all a lie. No, government regs do not protect workers.

With you

I'm with you for the most part on your assessment of the state of the world. I like your ideas about people finding alternate places to work if those protections were not in place. But what happens when a worker is hurt and cast aside? Fired after being injured and then unable to find work due to disability? What happens in these cases?

Private insurance

Private charities. "Workers", if they want to be workers, will have to find employers with good benefits or carry their own insurance...pretty much what is going on now. SS Disability is going to go away. Again, workers will be more sought after because they will be more scarce if people have unfettered access to participate in the economy. People will have to accept responsibility for their decisions and actions and not demand state thugs loot other people to support them because they were stupid or made bad decisions. There will be incentive to improve oneself and work hard, unlike now, when there is incentive to go off on disability.
The world will never be perfect. We know government promises to make the world fair are trojan horses to enslave us.

Which

Which it would be more easy to afford, were we to actually receive the fruits of our labor right? I see what you're saying. I wonder how this would in fact help us as far as our industry in comparison to the rest of the world where people will work for 50 cents an hour etc. Would we lose more of our industry to foreign markets? Sorry I'm asking so many questions, I'm not devil's advocating here, I'm trying to learn more about liberty.

No. Our economy,

wealth creation would grow massively. Take away the minimum wage, take away welfare which is simply paying people to not work and get rid of the licensing/credentialling gatekeeping system that prevents people from participating in the economy (or makes it very expensive and hard but does not guarantee quality) and our evil "justice system" stand back. We would GROW industry because our wealth would be ours to invest in what we wanted, not wars and mutual funds/stocks that we have little control over and insiders make money on first. If a farmer has his wealth tied up in his farm, his retirement is taxed away to pay for the retirements of teachers and the like. How is that fair? Property ownership is key. Mises.org has some great articles on practical applications of statelessness, how things could work.