libertarianism (small L)

The ACA makes employers buy Insurance for people they generally wouldn't have to, and specifically selects coverage from specific companies small businesses cant afford. If you need modern examples of protectionism in America you probably should have done more research befor starting this discussion.

 

The only trouble with that idea is that mom and pop stores were done in by the big box stores long before Obama's ACA. They couldn't compete with the big box stores and it's ridiculous to blame it on anything else. Like as if a little hardwar store could compete with Home Depot! LOL

But the big laugh on you is that mom and pop stores, by definition, don't have to pay medical for mom and pop. Get a life before you go spewing your Obama hate where you are going to get called on it.

 

The Constitutionazis can put sugar in our Kool Aid, but that won't take the poison out.

 

It's still outside ownership, just like Capitalism. Both are totally controlled by heirheads, because they set the rules on class mobility and only get no-talent self-hating brown-noses out of their self-serving condescension to the unprivileged. Only employees should own stock, and it should be non-transferable. Outsiders don't know what is happening at the ground level of businesses they own or regulate and they make the real producers dance to their tune.

 

Are you kidding me, you asked for an example of modern protectionism that hurt small business, but protectionism is not new its older than popular sovernty. Smaller businesses can compete by being more innovative, not dolling out extra doe to meet the standards of the big boys.

Most Mom and Pop shops want to grow and make money, give people jobs, it has nothing to do with hating Obama, even though he is a protectionist crony warhawk, its about economics and ethics. If a little hardware store found a way to offer better or different services than Home Depot and grow to be bigger than Home Depot.

In the last 60-70 years in the technological revolution small businesses have become giants, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, some have toppled supergiants like America Online.

Regulations like Marijuana prohibition have even had unintended consequences like preventing American business from mass producing Hempcrete, which is the strongest most affordable building material for walls.

Big Pharma and the FDA have been known to try and issue pattents for vitamin e, monsato, who's former executive was just appointed as head of the FDA by Barrack Obama has been trying to sue small farmers for growing their genetically modified seeds by accident because seeds blow in the wind.

What do you think lobbyists are for?

 

To add a few points.
Smaller businesses are more flexible in competition with the giants. So a free market would align the position between giants and small ones, a regulated one can't provide.
Smaller businesses achieve higher standards of accessibility, which is in the interest of their Clients. That's why, the giants fear the working methods of a free market that poses a threat to their Status of corporatism and price Monopoly, the gov has granted them.
The way to Monopoly through Lobbying would be blocked and have consequences on Gov subsidies. One can't prevent businesses from growing and spreading influence, but from Fixing Prices by regulated markets. But the opponents of a free market society will never step off and get the Facts right, just consider the high idea of freedom for employees, which means we head straight to wealth distribution and suck up all the amount of capital.

 

Interesting post. I really don't know what to make of Libertarians. They remind me a lot of the intellectual hippies who were talking about how great communism was during the 60's. What they espouse sounds great, the only problem is that they can never name a time or place it ever worked well for the general populace (unless you don't count blacks, Asians, Latinos, gays, children and women: in which case they'll tell you that America was a great example until the 1900's or whatever).
Once a country gets big enough, a strong centralized government and federal regulation is necessary. The Free Market does not correct itself (as was demonstrated by the very era most commonly touted by many Libertarians as being a great example of Libertarianism). If a company mistreats its employees, people don't stop buying their products and it doesn't disappear. And so on.
If corporate executives could 100% of the time be trusted to be nice, ethical, moral people who would never put profits before people or the environment, Libertarianism would be workable. Unfortunately, history proves this is never the case in real life.

 

It's all pie in the sky make believe of course and you're right about it never working in any real application. If you want to discover how phony it is just ask one of them about any of their agenda items, and then ask another. No two are the same. As with Rand Paul and his racist daddy before him, they spew their nonsense and then need to backtrack on it the next day when half their following starts to curse them. Rand is anti-abortion and at the same time is pro-abortion. He's also in favour of a route to citizenship for illegals and then the next day he needs to be opposed to it all.

The only libertarian leader who can ever survive for a reasonable length of time is one that only hints at an agenda so he can deny it when he gets in trouble with the fanatical extremists who support him. Rand just hasn't learned to keep his stupid mouth shut yet.

 

Be honest and tell lockhart that he made a fool of himself when he said that mom and pop stores had to pay for medical coverage for their employees. And then maybe after you do that you could tell me how you'll have government fix it so mom and pop stores can compete with Home Depot and the other giants. Enlighten us on how the world is going to work in the new libertarian utopia where every American is going to have a chicken in their pot, or whatever you envision.