Dems (and others on the left), do you prefer to "battle" Libertarians or Fundies

[Emsworth]

Libertarians who engage in so-called "good government" rhetoric and try to take away earmarks and so-called "pork projects" that revitalize communities ...

It is undeniable that pork barrel projects produce positive effects for some parts of the country. However, these effects are not produced for free. They cost money, which could hypothetically have been used elsewhere for some other purpose. For all we know, that other use could have been far more beneficial. The question then becomes whether the government or the market is better at determining which purpose is more important.

Some government expenditures are so obviously critical to society that sacrificing the hypothetical private alternatives is justified. Almost everyone would agree that defending the nation or maintaining a legal system falls into this category of absolutely imperative government expenditure; most would add public education and welfare to the list; some might even support universal healthcare. But to put a $70,000 appropriation for the Paper Industry Hall of Fame on the same plane simply revolts the intelligence.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Who is the government to determine what the nation's culture should be? The very notion sounds quite elitist to me.

[Emsworth]

I was first exposed to Charles Dickens by a made-for-TV adaptation of David Copperfield on PBS.  Without that, I might still not know who Mr. Micawber was.  I've seen some fairly incredible things on Masterpiece Theatre.  And all for free on the public airwaves, not on some premium HBO channel.

Free? Do you not pay taxes?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is true that there have been a number of cases in which a private corporation violates the law, causing great harm to the public. But there is an even greater number of cases in which a corporation operates perfectly legally, greatly improving the general welfare in the process. Needless to say, only the former type of situation makes the headlines. One should not focus on the scandals while ignoring all of the good work companies have done.

More importantly, though, consider the alternative. One cannot pretend that corporations are corrupt while governments are simply paragons of virtue. In truth, the government is likely to be far more corrupt than any corporation, simply because of the nature and extent of its power.

Consider, furthermore, that while corporations can cause harm, governments can cause even more harm. To my knowledge, no corporation in recent memory has caused the needless deaths of tens of thousands of people. Can you say the same about the government of the United States, guilty as it is of waging an utterly unjustified war in Iraq? Can you say the same about other governments across the world?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Libertarianism does not preclude collective action. In fact, if individuals want to act collectively to benefit mankind, a libertarian model would leave them perfectly free to do so.

[Emsworth]

Do you know the level of Tax evasion corporations commit everywhere (or are they fighting for freedom)?

If, by "tax evasion," you mean tax mitigation, then I do not see what the problem is. Everyone is entitled to arrange his affairs so that his taxes are as low as possible. If, by "tax evasion," you mean the crime of tax evasion, then I have not seen enough evidence to endorse your conclusion. Certainly, one does not regularly hear of corporations being prosecuted for tax evasion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do not presume to evaluate the harms or benefits of any particular company; , in the absence of anything even approaching perfect information, I cannot possibly do so. But I am quite sure that the free market system as a whole is preferable to any alternative of which I am aware.
 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will suppose, for the sake of argument, that oil and other companies lobbied for the war. Isn't it very telling that the government is so willing to subordinate the public interest to the interests of a narrow class? The war in Iraq is just one example; protectionist policies, farm subsidies, and "corporate welfare" are others.

Speaking of corporate welfare, I would note that I am not a fan of corporations or businesses as such. I also strongly support the existence and the activites of labor unions, and would oppose state interference with strikes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have no pressing objections to antitrust laws, or to the existence of public transport. These rather minor violations of liberty have, at the very least, plausible public policy justifications. But, strictly speaking, they are violations of liberty nevertheless.