That’s not the issue. We don’t even own our own houses or property, so it would be impossible to live at all under such an ideal.
The question is whether it is ok to take money from the state to buy something we want, not to utilize something already there.
What do you make of libertarians who have public sector jobs, such as through state funded universities?
LS I can see where you coming from, honestly. but I live in the UK, where private healthcare is even more expensive than in the UK, what about using the NHS?
*than the US
It’s not for me. First, it doesn’t interest me, I think the liberation by elite is an anachronistic idea and the private sector is the most dynamic part of the economy and second, I would never work in the public sector. It is everything I stand against.
If I was sick and had no other options, I would use the NHS. But that’s my choice, it’s not a principle, it’s how much I value my principles depending on circumstances.
I work very hard not to have to use welfare or much state services. I make sacrifices to be in that situation.
DMI1 - that would depend on how much you value your self-respect, and how much you’d value that postgraduate degree. Limited, mutually-exclusive options, balanced against desires - kinda like basic economics, in a way.
I understand the people who don’t feel that there’s a moral dilemna in taking government largess, and I understand (and agree with) the folks who believe that if it’s wrong to do, it’s wrong to participate voluntarily.
What they both seem to be missing is that it’s going to make you a looter or thief, depending on how you view your government’s actions is acquiring the resources to offer you such a bonus.
It’s sad, but true - unearned wealth very rarely benefits the recipient, even if they get rich off of it. The folks who see nothing wrong with such a gov’t program won’t take any damage to their self-respect, but it looks like you will.
How much is that degree worth to you? How much is not feeling like a leech or hypocrite worth?
I wouldn’t do it, but I wouldn’t curl my lip at you for doing it - actually, I may feel a twinge or two of sympathy. I’ve sold my self-respect in the past, and know how much fun that is to live with.
Would it help if I told you that doin’ it once will make the second time easier?
Great to see you Danno. Really great.
I’d normally hesitate about posting in this sort of topic, but it pains me to see people advising you to throw away a great opportunity. The reality with this sort of academic pass is that working to pay for the degree is not usually a viable option. By the time you’ve saved up enough to put yourself through these years of grad school you’ll have lost a great deal of competiveness that is required for you to get this grant. Forget the libertarian moralizing for a second here and just think carefully about what you want to do with your life.
Besides, on the margin you taking that money means nothing. Even if you come from the most economic backwater and go to the most expensive university that your government will pay you to go to, it’ll not make the slightest mark on the budget. Seriously, lets make the ridiculously generous assumption that the money you take is 0.01% of government expenditure. Then all these “taking money from thieves” analogies essentially amount to you taking 10 cents of a guy who just stole a grand. It’s jackshit in the grand scheme of things and I doubt any potential victim would give a damn about the 10 cents you borrowed (yes, borrowed, most math graduates tend to go on to be net contributors) to buy the train ticket.
Obviously someone does not understand the concept of principles. That’s a shocker.
A subsidy is a subsidy is a subsidy. We take subsidies every day. Your “principle” is a handicap for libertarians who wish to be taken at least moderately seriously when they say serious libertarian things in academia. Your “principle,” followed to its logical extent, prohibits life in most modern societies. Using subsidies to improve the human capital (I know, terrible term) of those within the libertarian movement is at least a good use… and it isn’t as if the state isn’t going to steal the money back.
@liberty student
I agree with most of what you say in other topics , but here, i have to disagree… being associated with Libertarianism doesn’t mean that we can’t use Government services in principle. If that were the case, we would all be anti-Libertarian because most of us have ids, use public roads, or use their fiat money! Or what would we say to Rothbard or Hoppe, who worked for a public university? It is government that is the horrid insitiution, not the student that wants to get his masters
@Matticus Rex - I believe that you are mistaken. By your logic, if drinking ten gallons of pure water daily would be fatal, then nobody should drink water at all - or everyone should drink as much as they can fit in, and just accept their fate.
Besides, the gummint services that I use willingly, I pay for, and more. The road I drive on isn’t a subsidy, my taxes pay for my use.
Looking back upon my experiences with academia, I’ll cheerfully admit that I don’t take most of the members there seriously - being taken seriously by them isn’t something I value much.
@liberty student - thanks for sayin’. I mostly lurk these days, but I’ll chime in now and again.
People can and will rationalize any position. Not stealing is a handicap to accumulating wealth. I agree. However, if you want to say serious libertarian things, I don’t think anyone is going to take you seriously if you take welfare. But I could be wrong.
Also, going into Academia is a choice, not a necessity. The notion that people have to get a post graduate degree and they have to accept welfare to do so is shaky. I can accept people will rationalize it, but don’t tell me that these are the necessities of life or being a libertarian, because that’s simply not true.
As far as a subsidy, I am a net tax producer. I am subsidizing people like you. With a gun to my head. You wouldn’t go to your neighbor’s house and demand money for school, why would you accept it when the state does that?
No, a strawman of my principle would. You are shifting the debate to make your position seem logical. It’s not. Based on your rationale, libertarians should be lobbying for protectionism (they are going to make laws anyway). After it is all said and done, what is left of libertarianism?
Look, you don’t own anything in this society. Not a damn thing. You can never own land, you can never own money and you don’t own your own body. By your strawman of my principle, we can never be libertarians, we can’t even control ourselves. That’s NOT my position. I believe free will exists, and I believe we can make better choices on the margin, and I believe that the center shifts to the margin when enough people make those choices. Every time someone passes up the opportunity to say no, that’s one less step towards a peaceful society.
Do you owe it to anyone to take a principled stand? No. But if you claim to be a libertarian, at what point are you willing to act consistently with that idea? After you have a good job, social standing, credentials and a high wage?
The former is a value judgment and the latter is just more rationalizing. The issue isn’t only the money. It’s using the state in a manner we all know is immoral and inefficient because it is easy.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
I agree with most of what you say in other topics , but here, i have to disagree… being associated with Libertarianism doesn’t mean that we can’t use Government services in principle.
[/quote]
If you’re a consequentialist, then I can see that, although I don’t regard consequentialists as libertarians. It’s free market liberalism.
If you hate the state as Rothbard said, then I don’t see how you can take welfare and be able to look another libertarian in the eye.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
If that were the case, we would all be anti-Libertarian because most of us have ids, use public roads, or use their fiat money!
[/quote]
See my last post. That’s not my position. I pay my way. You should pay yours. Free riding doesn’t get us closer to a free society.
I don’t care about your ideas or your motives. I care about your actions because that is what affects the world. You can have the best intentions, but at the end of the day, you’re still taking welfare.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
Or what would we say to Rothbard or Hoppe, who worked for a public university?
[/quote]
Is this an appeal to authority? Do we really believe that Rothbard and Hoppe couldn’t make an impact in the private sphere? Isn’t LvMI in the private sphere? Hasn’t it given all of those guys a platform academia never did?
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
It is government that is the horrid insitiution, not the student that wants to get his masters
[/quote]
Then why do people want to do business with a horrid institution? I’m not blaming the student, what I am saying, is that Libertarians in academe in particular, like to rationalize how it is ok to take from the state. Well, I am a producer. Those guys are living off me. And while I like lots of Libertarians in academe for their ideas and work, I still don’t want my money going to them unless I choose to give it. When you start earning your own income in the private sphere, you will understand how hard it is to bootstrap yourself, and then you have to pay other people to take the easy way out, and they have the gall as “Libertarians” to tell me they are entitled to the money, or that my being stolen from is inevitable and doesn’t really matter in any way.
I can… Its taking money from the government. Every dollar you take from the government is better off for the people and less for the government. Of course Statism is more than how much money the State has. The abolishment of the state has to also come by educating the people about the negativity of the state. What better way to do that than people with Masters and PhDs lecturing on freedom…
The idea of using government issued IDs or public roads or other public servicesis not just an ideal but it can also be an action… you have a choice to refuse to use the public road…yet you still do…
From what I understand, are you justifying Rothbard or Hoppe working at a public university because they educate people about the negativity of the state? So it is ok to use Government money just as long as you make an impact to educate people on the state… That is a pretty consquentialist statement there, if I understand your statement.
You always do business with the State, simply by walking on their public roads. Again, you always have a choice whether to walk on the road
What he’s saying is he personally paid for use of the road. His road usage is not being subsidized.
I hate to say it, but I agree with LS here. If you’re against welfare, you shouldn’t take it. You only prove through your actions, regardless of intentions, that welfare is good and beneficial… in short, if you take the scholarship, you prove that welfare works.
@EIK
My point is that he did not pay for the whole entire public road system… Government still used the money from others to produce the road… the roads are still funded by stolen money, either way…
Anyway, how did he pay for such usage? By government fiat money?!
after searching on this topic on google, I found a Walter Block article on this issue…
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
I can… Its taking money from the government. Every dollar you take from the government is better off for the people and less for the government. Of course Statism is more than how much money the State has. The abolishment of the state has to also come by educating the people about the negativity of the state. What better way to do that than people with Masters and PhDs lecturing on freedom…
[/quote]
I have addressed all of this up thread already. It’s just rationalizing and a mistaken premise about where government get’s its loot.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
The idea of using government issued IDs or public roads or other public servicesis not just an ideal but it can also be an action… you have a choice to refuse to use the public road…yet you still do…
[/quote]
I have also addressed this, and by trying to make the argument about me personally, is a bullshit way to debate. You don’t know me.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
From what I understand, are you justifying Rothbard or Hoppe working at a public university because they educate people about the negativity of the state? So it is ok to use Government money just as long as you make an impact to educate people on the state… That is a pretty consquentialist statement there, if I understand your statement.
[/quote]
No, re-read what I wrote.
[quote=“Isaac “Izzy” Marmolejo”]
You always do business with the State, simply by walking on their public roads. Again, you always have a choice whether to walk on the road
[/quote]
Again, I have addressed this strawman already. Please read my previous responses.