You are incorrect. The Ludwig von Mises Institute is one of the largest libertarian think tanks I can think of. They specifically say this on their FAQ page….

“How are you funded?

We are funded by the private donations of individuals, businesses, and foundations. We accept no government funds (yes, the funds have been offered) and we tend to be eschewed by large foundations and corporations (we accept no contract work). However, these strictures place a rather severe limit on our resources and growth potential.”

- I’m not going to waste too much time on the Kool-Aiders because it’s boring and they never address the horrors of libertarianism itself, just try to nitpick points where they think they can score something. The beauty of a private think tank is that they don’t have to tell you where their money comes from. They can say nothing. They can lie. There’s nothing anyone can do about that.

This statement is bullshit intended for consumption by the true believers and nothing more. How do I know? Because some people actually brag about their funding of these think tanks, that’s why. Just because the libertarians are ashamed of their whoring for the corporations and the super rich doesn’t mean the people who fund them are ashamed.

Libertarians want you to think they are for the average Joe. More accurately, they are for the average David and the average Charles… Koch that is; billionaire funders and FOUNDERS of Libertarian think tanks (Cato institute was founded by Charles Koch, the 8th richest man in America according to Forbes, and his uber rich buddy Edward Crane) – when they talk about a lot of their money coming from “individuals” these would be the individuals they are talking about. In fact, when you look at admitted funders of these think tanks, not one of them is less than a multi-milionaire and most are billionaires. You can look at some sources here: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Reason_Foundation just as one example.

One can understand why these shills for the corporations and the super-rich would want to characterize themselves as grass roots – there aren’t enough votes available from just the super-rich; to sway voters they have to pretend to be on the side of regular people – but the fact is they they advocate for polices that help ONLY the most elite and richest citizens while harming average Americans. And that is something they can’t hide.

David Black

Not a frat boy, which sounds more like your world – just an entertainer. And I’ll decide to grow up when you decide to develop human empathy.

By the way, Bob, my family were conservative Jews who built up a clothing manufacturing business for over forty years in Manhattan and sold it for eight figures in the 1980s.

Not once did their hearts bleed for anyone but their own flesh and blood. So suck on that, bubbie.

David Black

Ah, so your parents were selfish, self-centered assholes and you’ve grown up to be just like them. Congratulations. Too bad they reproduced, though; the last thing the world needs is more people like that.

Why are all you libs looking for a handout to get you through life?

DB

Ever heard of “preexisting condition,” lame ass? No, probably not. You don’t know enough to make comments like this. Private for-profit health insurance will do NOTHING. Zero. They’re in the business of making a lot of money not helping sick people. You’ll find out for yourself someday. Make sure they put on your head stone “But I thought pay or die health insurance would work for ME.”

If we only had universal health care for major medical (hospitalization), and completely outlawed all other forms of healthcare (other than those in need on welfare), the system would fix itself.

Doctors would need to lower prices to remain competitive, drug companies would have to lower prices so that those that need the drugs would be able to buy them–which also means not pumping billions of dollars into R&D for drugs that don’t do a majority of the population anything as most don’t work in that many people.

For those that cry “then there wouldn’t be enough money spent in the system to keep technology moving forward while prices remain low” I say fucking bullshit–look at LASIK surgery. LASIK has not been covered by insurance, yet the technology continues to improve, and the prices continue to drop.

Bottom line, this is the only system that has a chance to work. In addition to lower prices, people will once again be allowed to make their own decisions about their healthcare.

I’m very familiar with libertarianism, Jacob. I quote from Reason from time to time whenever they have something interesting to say. As far as libertarianism in general, I’ve always found it to be a very attractive although naive ideology. It’s sweet and I wish the world worked that way. However, it does not.

Separating the good ideas of libertarianism from the ideological trash of objectivism would take more than a comment reply or even a post; it would be a least a book. So we’re not going to do that here. I will simply say that for most of human history the masses of humanity (like you and me) were slaves to the rich and powerful. The king was the richest and most powerful guy of all. Civil democratic government was created for the purpose of freeing us from being enslaved by the rich. American government has been hijacked from that purpose, it is true, but it has been hijacked by the same super rich who then tell you that government is evil so you’ll work to destroy it. Then serfdom can return and we’ll all be “free” of government. Hurray…. or something.

Libertarians can have good ideas. I’m pretty sure that the libertarian movement has been hijacked by the same super-rich big business people that have hijacked government, however. Has the fact that libertarian think tanks are funded by billionaires and giant corporations never given you a moment to pause and reconsider?

If one could separate the idea of having the government basically stay out of our lives from the ideological extension that government needs to stay out of corporation’s lives, too (corporations are a legal fiction – they are not people, no matter what free marketers have told you) then you’d have something. But I see that it isn’t working that way: Typical of human overreaching, libertarians take an idea that is good in one arena and try to apply it to everything, guaranteeing disaster. I suspect this is part of that corporate-funding, poisoning the well. But I will agree that they have good ideas on personal freedom.

You can be pro-oligarchy without realizing it, of course. Yes, of course big business hates the idea of a free market. And? You understand, then, that in the absence of government regulation, the biggest businesses with sufficient leverage eliminate competition and control the market. So you want to eliminate government regulation in order to have a free market, yet by your own admission you’ll have an illusion of a “free market” for about a microsecond before everything is controlled by a handful of super corporations. This is an excellent argument FOR government regulation, although I’m fairly sure that is not the argument you intended to make.
You are incorrect on the other point, too. Sorry. A free market is often defined today as one that is not regulated by government and this definition has slowly seeped even into some textbooks, but that is an ideological definition not an economic one. From a standpoint of economics a market is ALSO not free if supply is artificially limited (one of several encumbrances other than government regulation), which is the wet dream of big business of course. You also missed the part about how free market ideals are theoretical models that work in a vacuum: In the real world, free markets seldom exist and that has less to do with government than with natural human greed. Refer to the argument with which you began this comment as an example.

So, Bob, are you on the air, or what? WGPA could use some ‘fresh air’. Otherwise, guess you are thrilled about corpoprate radio, as we all are.

Johnny

I’ll be in touch via e-mail.

The one and only! WAEB and all of that.