Libertarian Diskanen

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 24211
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by JasonL » 08 Jan 2019, 23:13

Answers to the above questions would shed light.

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12479
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Ellie » 08 Jan 2019, 23:31

Warren wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 22:50
There is no consensus on what "pure" libertarianism looks like. I reject yours.
I dunno, I feel like the purest example of libertarianism IS one libertarian rejecting another libertarian's ideology :lol: :lol: :lol:
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13676
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Eric the .5b » 08 Jan 2019, 23:45

JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 22:43
For clarity I don’t subscribe to the avalanche metaphor. I’m more saying that in aggregate taken at their word on policy after policy what ideologically consistent and pure libertarianism looks like is burning it all down.
Then why do you associate with such monsters?
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 24211
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by JasonL » 09 Jan 2019, 09:32

Because I don't think they actually intend to have that effect. It's like - say there's some wonkish discussion about whether consumption taxes are better than income taxes liberty wise. Someone says taxation is theft all of it is immoral neither of these options is acceptable you are participants in an oppressive status quo. Okay. If I take that person at their word, their view of a moral world is a fairly extreme deviation from the current state and they would support on moral grounds, over any modification of taxation, burning down the ability of government to collect tax revenues at all. That's a position. If I think that person actually holds that position, the position is subject to analysis as if it is a serious view.

Or, I don't think that person actually would pursue that path knowing everything else we might anticipate would result - so, in that case that person is just being snarky and is not meaningfully contributing to the discussion - not as a beacon of morality or principle nor anything else, they are just saying things they don't actually believe.

I can digest that sentiment as something like "taxation is theft like, our choices here should to a very great extent respect the moral implications of seizing earned wealth", but man that isn't what is actually said there. So yeah, I share sentiments about liberty with lots of more ideological purist types, but I'm often forced not to take them very seriously when they draw these lines in the sand.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26989
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Warren » 09 Jan 2019, 09:57

I've lost patience with the "taxation is theft" true believers. I'm convinced they're sincere about it though. They have a consistent anarcho-capitalist vision of libertopia. I'm a big fan of the invisible hand, wisdom of crowds, and even a common law approach to judicial theory, but the whole anarcho-capitalism project breaks down quickly when you start talking about crime in my analysis. That said, I've been known to fight on the "taxation is theft" line when trying to make a point about individual rights and the proper role of government. As a way of "taking it back". Like the monocle.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 24211
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by JasonL » 09 Jan 2019, 10:01

That's a bit what I'm saying, except I think there are a number of issues like that that's a bit larger than the set of issues you'd probably accept as similarly problematic.

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15997
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Aresen » 09 Jan 2019, 10:08

Warren wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 09:57
I've lost patience with the "taxation is theft" true believers. I'm convinced they're sincere about it though. They have a consistent anarcho-capitalist vision of libertopia. I'm a big fan of the invisible hand, wisdom of crowds, and even a common law approach to judicial theory, but the whole anarcho-capitalism project breaks down quickly when you start talking about crime in my analysis. That said, I've been known to fight on the "taxation is theft" line when trying to make a point about individual rights and the proper role of government. As a way of "taking it back". Like the monocle.
Mostly, I agree with this.

WRT 'taxation is theft' I am most inclined to go that route with leftists who go on about tax reductions as a 'gift to the rich.'
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 24211
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by JasonL » 09 Jan 2019, 10:32

The memes are good tho.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26989
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Warren » 09 Jan 2019, 10:34

They give me glee
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17420
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by lunchstealer » 09 Jan 2019, 18:30

Warren wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 09:57
I've lost patience with the "taxation is theft" true believers. I'm convinced they're sincere about it though. They have a consistent anarcho-capitalist vision of libertopia. I'm a big fan of the invisible hand, wisdom of crowds, and even a common law approach to judicial theory, but the whole anarcho-capitalism project breaks down quickly when you start talking about crime in my analysis. That said, I've been known to fight on the "taxation is theft" line when trying to make a point about individual rights and the proper role of government. As a way of "taking it back". Like the monocle.
Mostly this.

I think you can be semi-serious about taxation as theft and still choose a better-or-worse taxation method and better-or-worse uses for taxes. If you accept that bad things happen in the world, then okay yes taxation is theft but we can't quite have a functional society without taxation so ... just understand that you're stealing to fund your pet project so make sure it's something worthwhile and have some goddamned shame about it.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24694
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Mo » 09 Jan 2019, 18:55

Team DAR
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13676
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Eric the .5b » 09 Jan 2019, 19:48

JasonL wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 09:32
Because I don't think they actually intend to have that effect. It's like - say there's some wonkish discussion about whether consumption taxes are better than income taxes liberty wise. Someone says taxation is theft all of it is immoral neither of these options is acceptable you are participants in an oppressive status quo. Okay. If I take that person at their word, their view of a moral world is a fairly extreme deviation from the current state and they would support on moral grounds, over any modification of taxation, burning down the ability of government to collect tax revenues at all. That's a position. If I think that person actually holds that position, the position is subject to analysis as if it is a serious view.
Sure. And even while you're treating such a stance seriously, you can blow it off as outside of the scope of what people are talking about. "That's fine, but we're talking about dealing with the current taxation regime." Even if it's ultimately as irrelevant to what will happen in the real world as the taxation-is-theft guy's stance, conversations have subjects. It's like blowing off someone who jumps into a libertarian discussion and demands a first-principles debate.

Ultimately, it's just like those guys who respond to an ought-argument by squinting at the speaker and trying to primly correct their entirely accurate understanding of the status quo. Doesn't matter if they're sincere or not, it's not useful to the conversation in that case.

It seems like a narrow complaint, though.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 18058
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Hugh Akston » 09 Jan 2019, 23:57

JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 16:01
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 15:44
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 11:02
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 10:54
Think of it more as being in the Friend Zone with the status quo. Once you show them how reasonable and level-headed you are by going along with whatever they do, they're bound to start respecting your views.
Are you actually willing to burn it all down? If not, you're right in there too. If so ... the costs of revolution are high.
It doesn't matter what I'm willing to do, it matters what I'm able to do. Not much, as it turns out. So why not be a radical?
Thin soup. You aren't a radical if you won't even stake out a position. What do you want to happen to healthcare, go crazy say whatever you want to happen.
Off the top of my head: End the tax structures that incentivize employer-provided health insurance, change the FDA mandate to testing drugs for safety rather than safety+efficacy, eliminate certificate of need laws, break Bane-style the AMA licensing cartel, allow NPs and PAs to open clinics and write prescriptions without an attending physician, lower the requirements of the insurance mandate so real catastrophic insurance can be a thing, lift insurance-style cost-controlling regulations on non-insurance setups like pre-paid group practices or mutual aid societies.

There's probably more, but basically anything that breaks the regulatory-capturing, market-distorting power of the AMA and Big Insurance companies would be big steps in the right direction.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26989
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Warren » 11 Jan 2019, 09:36

Hugh Akston wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 23:57
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 16:01
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 15:44
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 11:02
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 10:54
Think of it more as being in the Friend Zone with the status quo. Once you show them how reasonable and level-headed you are by going along with whatever they do, they're bound to start respecting your views.
Are you actually willing to burn it all down? If not, you're right in there too. If so ... the costs of revolution are high.
It doesn't matter what I'm willing to do, it matters what I'm able to do. Not much, as it turns out. So why not be a radical?
Thin soup. You aren't a radical if you won't even stake out a position. What do you want to happen to healthcare, go crazy say whatever you want to happen.
Off the top of my head: End the tax structures that incentivize employer-provided health insurance, change the FDA mandate to testing drugs for safety rather than safety+efficacy, eliminate certificate of need laws, break Bane-style the AMA licensing cartel, allow NPs and PAs to open clinics and write prescriptions without an attending physician, lower the requirements of the insurance mandate so real catastrophic insurance can be a thing, lift insurance-style cost-controlling regulations on non-insurance setups like pre-paid group practices or mutual aid societies.

There's probably more, but basically anything that breaks the regulatory-capturing, market-distorting power of the AMA and Big Insurance companies would be big steps in the right direction.
HUGH 2024
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24370
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Jennifer » 11 Jan 2019, 14:12

Hugh Akston wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 23:57
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 16:01
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 15:44
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 11:02
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 10:54
Think of it more as being in the Friend Zone with the status quo. Once you show them how reasonable and level-headed you are by going along with whatever they do, they're bound to start respecting your views.
Are you actually willing to burn it all down? If not, you're right in there too. If so ... the costs of revolution are high.
It doesn't matter what I'm willing to do, it matters what I'm able to do. Not much, as it turns out. So why not be a radical?
Thin soup. You aren't a radical if you won't even stake out a position. What do you want to happen to healthcare, go crazy say whatever you want to happen.
Off the top of my head: End the tax structures that incentivize employer-provided health insurance, change the FDA mandate to testing drugs for safety rather than safety+efficacy, eliminate certificate of need laws, break Bane-style the AMA licensing cartel, allow NPs and PAs to open clinics and write prescriptions without an attending physician, lower the requirements of the insurance mandate so real catastrophic insurance can be a thing, lift insurance-style cost-controlling regulations on non-insurance setups like pre-paid group practices or mutual aid societies.

There's probably more, but basically anything that breaks the regulatory-capturing, market-distorting power of the AMA and Big Insurance companies would be big steps in the right direction.


I'd also add: ALL drugs except for antibiotics should be available sans prescription and over the counter. (I make an exception for antibiotics because misuse of those can lead to the growth of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which is a legitimate commons issue worthy of regulation. And there might be similar rules for anti-fungal medications, I don't know. But for any other non-antibiotic drug, misuse only harms the user, nobody else, and thus should not be the government's business.)
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 18058
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Hugh Akston » 11 Jan 2019, 15:58

I'd be down with that too.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman

User avatar
Tuco
Posts: 272
Joined: 18 Feb 2017, 21:00

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Tuco » 12 Jan 2019, 06:55

Warren wrote:
11 Jan 2019, 09:36
Hugh Akston wrote:
09 Jan 2019, 23:57
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 16:01
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 15:44
JasonL wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 11:02
Hugh Akston wrote:
08 Jan 2019, 10:54
Think of it more as being in the Friend Zone with the status quo. Once you show them how reasonable and level-headed you are by going along with whatever they do, they're bound to start respecting your views.
Are you actually willing to burn it all down? If not, you're right in there too. If so ... the costs of revolution are high.
It doesn't matter what I'm willing to do, it matters what I'm able to do. Not much, as it turns out. So why not be a radical?
Thin soup. You aren't a radical if you won't even stake out a position. What do you want to happen to healthcare, go crazy say whatever you want to happen.
Off the top of my head: End the tax structures that incentivize employer-provided health insurance, change the FDA mandate to testing drugs for safety rather than safety+efficacy, eliminate certificate of need laws, break Bane-style the AMA licensing cartel, allow NPs and PAs to open clinics and write prescriptions without an attending physician, lower the requirements of the insurance mandate so real catastrophic insurance can be a thing, lift insurance-style cost-controlling regulations on non-insurance setups like pre-paid group practices or mutual aid societies.

There's probably more, but basically anything that breaks the regulatory-capturing, market-distorting power of the AMA and Big Insurance companies would be big steps in the right direction.
HUGH 2024
I'd go for that.

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 18834
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 12 Jan 2019, 13:08

I'd add permitting health insurance plans to compete nationwide and automatically approve any drugs that have already been vetted by Germany, but that's an otherwise excellent list.

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 24211
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by JasonL » 12 Jan 2019, 14:10

I too like that list a lot. I suspect universal provision for catastrophic care will also ultimately be needed. It's the niskanen plan.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26989
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Warren » 12 Jan 2019, 14:29

But what is really needed put market forces to work in health care is to eliminate 3rd party payer. Even if you could stick it into some omnibus bill, I'm not sure how to craft it. I'm absolutely sure nobody wants to hear that. Any attempt to so much as mumble it out loud would be political suicide.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 18058
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Hugh Akston » 12 Jan 2019, 15:01

I think eliminating employer-provided coverage would go a long way toward doing that. People will be much more aware of the cost/service curve when they have to shop for themselves. And I suspect that doctors would offer cash discounts for routine procedures, up to the point where the only time you deal with your insurance company is when you're facing an acute or debilitating condition.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26989
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Warren » 12 Jan 2019, 15:14

Hugh Akston wrote:
12 Jan 2019, 15:01
I think eliminating employer-provided coverage would go a long way toward doing that. People will be much more aware of the cost/service curve when they have to shop for themselves. And I suspect that doctors would offer cash discounts for routine procedures, up to the point where the only time you deal with your insurance company is when you're facing an acute or debilitating condition.
No, that would represent a complete overhaul of the current regime. Even with high deductible plans, your care provider bills the insurance company, the insurance company says "No you can't charge $600 for an x-Ray" and you get a bill for 80 bucks. No doctor's office will tell you how much anything costs. They don't even know themselves. All they know how to interface with the bureaucracy. If you spent a thousand hours trying to get a straight answer on how much getting a mole removed is going to cost you, it would be a thousand hours wasted.

I really don't think it would even be possible for a doctor to offer "cash discounts" without scrapping medical regulations entire.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 18834
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 12 Jan 2019, 16:05

Warren wrote:
12 Jan 2019, 15:14

I really don't think it would even be possible for a doctor to offer "cash discounts" without scrapping medical regulations entire.
My physician's medical practice does offer a discount for cash but only for non-insured patients. I believe it is illegal for medical practices and hospitals to discuss insurance negotiated prices otherwise, but I may be wrong about that.

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26989
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Warren » 12 Jan 2019, 16:25

D.A. Ridgely wrote:
12 Jan 2019, 16:05
Warren wrote:
12 Jan 2019, 15:14

I really don't think it would even be possible for a doctor to offer "cash discounts" without scrapping medical regulations entire.
My physician's medical practice does offer a discount for cash but only for non-insured patients.
No shit? That actually gives me a seed of hope.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24694
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Libertarian Diskanen

Post by Mo » 13 Jan 2019, 10:26

Warren wrote:But what is really needed put market forces to work in health care is to eliminate 3rd party payer. Even if you could stick it into some omnibus bill, I'm not sure how to craft it. I'm absolutely sure nobody wants to hear that. Any attempt to so much as mumble it out loud would be political suicide.
As long as their are medical treatments that cost multiples of people’s houses, you’ll need 3rd party payer.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests