Do you want to repeal the child labor laws, the 40 hour work week and the minimum wage?
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 7:27
Nope. Child labor laws should stay as they are. They're fine. However minimum age of employment should be lowered from 14 to 7. There's no reason to restrict children from working. Minimum age for unlimited labor should be 16 as it's nowadays.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 7:38
Child labor laws are fine. They preserve justice by preventing slavery. 40 hour work week and minimum wage laws really depend on the voters.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 7:43
>>3
They are fine, but minimum age of employment should be removed or lowered. I mean there are lot of poor kids who have to work illegally or even resort to crime. Why not allow them to work legally with legal protection and limits?
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 8:05
>>4
Because then they don't go to school and become your happy new underclass
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 9:16
Believe it or not, sometimes government does know what's best for you.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 12:18
javascript:quote(6,"post1169724380");
6
keyword her is "sometimes"
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 13:26
libertarians are just grown up children who, instead of wanting to be independent from mom and dad, now want to be independent from big pa government.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 14:48
>>7
lol fail >>8
No, they aren't children, because they want to be treated like an adult.
Anarchists are grown up children(most anarchists are pot smoking,skateboarding,angst teenagers anyways)
and there is a fine line between Libertarian and Anarchy, but Libertarianism actually can work
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 14:54
>>9
Libertarianism has worked. Take a look at US when it was still land of free. Only difference between classical liberalism and libertarianism is that libertarianism is more economy oriented.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 15:16
Only difference between classical liberalism and libertarianism is that libertarianism is more economy oriented.
Why is that a good thing?
What do you mean it is more economy oriented? If anything, I think it (libertarianism) is more geared toward protecting personal freedoms than the older classical-liberalism. I doubt if most of the old classical-liberals advocated prostitution-legalization, for example.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 16:48
>>13
Hint: prostitution was legal in most of old west. Those who banned it were not liberals, but Temperance Unions. That's where the downhill began. Old west was true free America.
Libertarianism seems to be much more free market doctrine oriented while classical-liberals are more about liberty, freedom and constitution.
>>14
Allright, I see what you are saying (I think), but I still can't see critisizing the libertarians. The libertarians support all liberties... personal as well as economic (is there really a difference anyway?)
Economic liberty = personal liberty.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 17:30
Economic liberty = personal liberty
While I agree with the rest of your post, I think you need to provide a bit more proof for the above.
What is liberty to begin with? Does the freedom to engage in the economic rat race have any bearing on (for example) the ability to engage in homosexual orgies? What does economics have to do with who you do or do not worship? And does the ratrace actually give freedom or enslavement (don't forget inflation here)?
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 19:22
>>16
He's right guys, the freedom to have corporations hold monopolies and freedom from government regulations is vital to the preservation of civil liberties.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 19:53
>>17
I see 'economic liberty' on purely personal terms when I say that. For example, in an economically free society, I have the "personal freedom" to engage in private, voluntary transactions with people (such as purchasing things) without government intervention.
To me, that IS a personal freedom. That was just an example.
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-25 20:00
But are you really free in such a society?
Let's assume you work 40 hours a week for $50k a year. Along comes someone with similar ability who will work 45 hours a week for $40k. Either you drop your price, or work more, or get replaced. Now consider that happening repeatedly across the entire market.
After a while you end up with many people working unhealthy hours for little wage, since there is always someone desperate prepared to replace them. You could decline, but then you'd have nothing to eat. Is that freedom?
this can only be prevented by putting quotas on the population and on the education of the population. But since it's a free society, that's not allowed .
Name:
Anonymous2007-01-26 9:59
>>18 >>20 >>21 >>22
Freedom is just the freedom to exploit workers, so we should shouldn't let it get in our way in our fight against evil capitalists who's spies are everywhere amirite comrades!