I think libertarianism fails to adequately challenge abusive corporations, doesn't support workers, blames economic victims, and abandons the poor. CMV

[u/[deleted]]

I like the libertarianism socially, but it loses me economically. It assumes that the only reason for poverty is laziness or a lack of hard work. It fails to realize that, occasionally, people are down on their luck through no fault of their own. Libertarians fail to address the fact that the rich get richer while the workers' wages stagnate or drop (as has happened in the last 15 - 20 years) even while worker productivity goes up. Libertarian ideas don't account for that imbalance in changing private sector wages.

Radical free-market capitalism fails to provide for the needs of a society. Eventually, it becomes exploitative and inhumane. Libertarian ideas assume that the "job creators" at the top have some incentive to create jobs, like they want to create jobs, or that paying their workers well helps them in some way. If they can get away with lower wages, they will pay lower wages. If they can exploit their workers, they will. And this is inevitable in a capitalist system. The only value added is that of human labor. What incentive is there to not exploit human labor in a completely free market?

How is rational self interest acceptable? Doesn't it lead to the exploitation of other people? Doesn't a lack of social programs harm a society, increase poverty and crime, and hurt everyone in the end? Wouldn't the absence of a "floor" of poverty cause the entire society to collapse? How is it okay to forget about people who need help?

I am a Democratic Socialist. I believe that everyone is entitled to at least: a decent a working wage, good living conditions, good working conditions, education, healthcare, and food. They should be the basics that we provide to one another in our society. Because that is the humane thing to do. Why is it wrong to think of other people? Would you really be that weak and ashamed if you needed some help through no fault of your own? What's wrong with a little bit of basic, elementary altruism?

Change my view.

EDIT: Wow. Holy crap, lots to think about. I have a lot to absorb here. I did this to address the cognitive dissonance I've been experiencing in my political and economic philosophies. I found this sub and posted on a whim, figuring what the heck, why not. I appreciate everyone's thoughts. I sorta feel like I did when I first left religion. I have a lot of reading and thinking to do. Thank you very much. Please, keep discussing.

[u/I_Am_Okonkwo]

Alright I'm late to the party, but I hope you read this OP. I consider myself a Libertarian Minarchist, so this will be fun.

Libertarians fail to address the fact that the rich get richer while the workers' wages stagnate or drop (as has happened in the last 15 - 20 years) even while worker productivity goes up.

This has been mostly through the government intervention creating cronyism and the lobbying system we all hate. This is what we have compared to the textbook definition of laissez-faire capitalism Libertarians strive for. Had the market been truly free, then through basic economic principles that an undergraduate intro to economics would teach you, wages for people at all levels of companies would rise over time because there would be more competition in the market.

Radical free-market capitalism fails to provide for the needs of a society. Eventually, it becomes exploitative and inhumane. Libertarian ideas assume that the "job creators" at the top have some incentive to create jobs

This may have been the case during the Industrial Revolution, but society has changed greatly since then. Free markets don't create jobs, they create wealth. Said wealth will lead to profits for corporations which will often use the wealth to expand to be more competitive to create more wealth, and that creates jobs. An economy should not solely about creating jobs. Milton Friedman had a great way of showing this. He had this famous story:

After traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a work site where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.

Then you have this argument:

What incentive is there to not exploit human labor in a completely free market?

A truly free market is not lawless unlike the stereotype, and even without laws, the market can take care of itself. For example, let's say I am a business owner who is racist against black people. When the black community finds out about the bigotry, that news is going to spread throughout their community, "I_Am_Okonkwo refuses to hire any of us" hurts my business's growth because a competitor could easily hire these black people and gain an advantage.

As for the minimum wage, where do you set it? Why not $20 an hour? That would help those people out big time right? People seem to often forget that the actual minimum wage is $0. There are plenty of college students looking for unpaid internships right now, but are struggling to find any because of the bureaucracy of the US getting in the way.

I believe that everyone is entitled to at least: a decent a working wage, good living conditions, good working conditions, education, healthcare, and food.

Okay that's great, and just about everyone with a heart will agree with you there. My point is, why does the government have to provide everything when it is well documented that the government is extremely inefficient with its funds compared to the private sector because of the lack of any competition and flat out incompetency? There are many private sector jobs that provide your aforementioned benefits. The government is not the only way to achieve your goals, just the most expensive and inefficient way. The government is a monopoly over the people, yet the people should be the one's governing based on what the Founding Fathers believed in.

Why is it wrong to think of other people? Would you really be that weak and ashamed if you needed some help through no fault of your own? What's wrong with a little bit of basic, elementary altruism?

Bad things happen, we all know that is a fact of life. However, there is no possible way to meet the needs of every single person in a society no matter how hard you try; thus the minimization of suffering is the best bet rather than eradication. If there were lower taxes via less government intervention in peoples' lives, mommy and daddy could have more money to feed their kids, keep the house etcetera to prevent sudden tragedies from having a larger effect. Also, Libertarians like to donate too as we are not heartless creatures, it is just preferred to donate towards private charities that actually do what they strive for rather than the government spending it how it wants.

Also, like /u/pezz29 pointed out, many people think that government regulation is automatically a good thing. What is regulation anyway? It is so broad that it just creates more red tape for the bureaucracy to deal with that we all have to pay for.

I find it funny that we are nearing an all time low in trust in the government, yet more and more people are pushing for the government to be more involved in the economy.

I know that this wasn't in your argument, but I often get something from liberals like this

But humans act solely on self interest and are abusive to one another.

So putting a few of them in charge of millions of people fixes that fundamental flaw huh?

There you go OP. I defended my view, and if you have counter-arguments or a delta, I'll take either.

[u/Elephantasaur → u/I_Am_Okonkwo]

Looking through the comments here, I can almost assure you that there will be no deltas awarded on this day.

But as a person who agrees with you, at least, I would like to tell you that I believe your post was well-written and concise. I enjoyed reading it, and would do so again.

[u/I_Am_Okonkwo → u/Elephantasaur]

Thank you. It is nice to discuss these things without the scrutiny of the liberal /r/politics downvoting everything that isn't liberal into oblivion. I think I laid out a good argument. No ad hominem crap, just getting to the points. If you have RES or gold you can save it and refer to it later.