Which US President since World War 2 was the most libertarian?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

A fetus is not an individual. And if you don't agree then you are a hypocrite because you agreed in a previous thread about school uniforms that most kids aren't individuals.

Let's get real here. Most kids aren't individuals. Most kids are enormous conformists, look at all the cliques with their own unofficial dress codes there are (or gangs..). In any case if your ability to be an individual is seriously effected by not being able to wear certain clothes you're pretty boring anyway.

Agreed.  This was one of my arguments when we discussed this about 4 years ago.


Most jobs require a "uniform" of some sort-  so you'll better get used to sublimating that individuality.

Really, when did I become patrick1?

An unborn child has the basic human right to life.

[Beet]

1. Volcker's anti inflation action started in 1979 right when he was appointed. And inflation did indeed peak in that year.

2. Raising interest rates to beat back inflation, in effect choosing unemployment as the lesser evil over inflation, which is what Volcker did, is not necessarily 'libertarian', although it was right-wing. Ironically, the discrediting of the 'Keynesian' Phillips Curve (which was in no way part of Keynes' actual work but an appendage added in 1959 that came to be associated with neoclassical Keynesians) by stagflation opened the way for essentially what was a movement along that curve.

3. Reagan was more libertarian than Carter because Reagan supported much larger tax cuts and had a much more oppositional view of government, which was reflected in his executive orders as well as Presidential budget initiatives, judicial appointments, and even foreign policy; this is even assuming that rhetoric and stated positions are not part of the equation, which is not really entirely right either. This is one of those matters that contemporaries saw most clearly, but will always be subject to whatever revisionism is the most convenient at various times of posterity.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

1. Volcker's anti inflation action started in 1979 right when he was appointed. And inflation did indeed peak in that year.

2. Raising interest rates to beat back inflation, in effect choosing unemployment as the lesser evil over inflation, which is what Volcker did, is not necessarily 'libertarian', although it was right-wing. Ironically, the discrediting of the 'Keynesian' Phillips Curve (which was in no way part of Keynes' actual work but an appendage added in 1959 that came to be associated with neoclassical Keynesians) by stagflation opened the way for essentially what was a movement along that curve.

3. Reagan was more libertarian than Carter because Reagan supported much larger tax cuts and had a much more oppositional view of government, which was reflected in his executive orders as well as Presidential budget initiatives, judicial appointments, and even foreign policy; this is even assuming that rhetoric and stated positions are not part of the equation, which is not really entirely right either. This is one of those matters that contemporaries saw most clearly, but will always be subject to whatever revisionism is the most convenient at various times of posterity.

Carter was more libertarian than Reagan....

[Bo]

1. Volcker's anti inflation action started in 1979 right when he was appointed. And inflation did indeed peak in that year.

2. Raising interest rates to beat back inflation, in effect choosing unemployment as the lesser evil over inflation, which is what Volcker did, is not necessarily 'libertarian', although it was right-wing. Ironically, the discrediting of the 'Keynesian' Phillips Curve (which was in no way part of Keynes' actual work but an appendage added in 1959 that came to be associated with neoclassical Keynesians) by stagflation opened the way for essentially what was a movement along that curve.

3. Reagan was more libertarian than Carter because Reagan supported much larger tax cuts and had a much more oppositional view of government, which was reflected in his executive orders as well as Presidential budget initiatives, judicial appointments, and even foreign policy; this is even assuming that rhetoric and stated positions are not part of the equation, which is not really entirely right either. This is one of those matters that contemporaries saw most clearly, but will always be subject to whatever revisionism is the most convenient at various times of posterity.

The inflation rate peaked in 1980, not 1979. I also said the inflation rate did not begin to significantly decrease until 1981. The inflation rate did slightly decrease in the second half of 1980, but the major reductions in inflation took place in 1981 and 1982.

[Phony Moderate]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

A fetus is not an individual. And if you don't agree then you are a hypocrite because you agreed in a previous thread about school uniforms that most kids aren't individuals.

Let's get real here. Most kids aren't individuals. Most kids are enormous conformists, look at all the cliques with their own unofficial dress codes there are (or gangs..). In any case if your ability to be an individual is seriously effected by not being able to wear certain clothes you're pretty boring anyway.

Agreed.  This was one of my arguments when we discussed this about 4 years ago.


Most jobs require a "uniform" of some sort-  so you'll better get used to sublimating that individuality.

Really, when did I become patrick1?

An unborn child has the basic human right to life.

....in your opinion.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

A fetus is not an individual. And if you don't agree then you are a hypocrite because you agreed in a previous thread about school uniforms that most kids aren't individuals.

Let's get real here. Most kids aren't individuals. Most kids are enormous conformists, look at all the cliques with their own unofficial dress codes there are (or gangs..). In any case if your ability to be an individual is seriously effected by not being able to wear certain clothes you're pretty boring anyway.

Agreed.  This was one of my arguments when we discussed this about 4 years ago.


Most jobs require a "uniform" of some sort-  so you'll better get used to sublimating that individuality.

Really, when did I become patrick1?

An unborn child has the basic human right to life.

....in your opinion.

No, as a statement of fact.

[Beet]

1. Volcker's anti inflation action started in 1979 right when he was appointed. And inflation did indeed peak in that year.

2. Raising interest rates to beat back inflation, in effect choosing unemployment as the lesser evil over inflation, which is what Volcker did, is not necessarily 'libertarian', although it was right-wing. Ironically, the discrediting of the 'Keynesian' Phillips Curve (which was in no way part of Keynes' actual work but an appendage added in 1959 that came to be associated with neoclassical Keynesians) by stagflation opened the way for essentially what was a movement along that curve.

3. Reagan was more libertarian than Carter because Reagan supported much larger tax cuts and had a much more oppositional view of government, which was reflected in his executive orders as well as Presidential budget initiatives, judicial appointments, and even foreign policy; this is even assuming that rhetoric and stated positions are not part of the equation, which is not really entirely right either. This is one of those matters that contemporaries saw most clearly, but will always be subject to whatever revisionism is the most convenient at various times of posterity.

The inflation rate peaked in 1980, not 1979. I also said the inflation rate did not begin to significantly decrease until 1981. The inflation rate did slightly decrease in the second half of 1980, but the major reductions in inflation took place in 1981 and 1982.

Corrected- The peak was in March 1980.

Also, it appears that the real interest rate move in 1981 was much bigger than in 1979-80, when Volcker quickly pulled back in response to the 1980 recession. This leads me to wonder whether or not he, as a Democrat, was influenced by partisan considerations to support Carter in an election year.

No, as a statement of fact.

There is no such thing as a "right" in fact. All "rights" are a matter of human assertion.

[Bo]

1. Volcker's anti inflation action started in 1979 right when he was appointed. And inflation did indeed peak in that year.

2. Raising interest rates to beat back inflation, in effect choosing unemployment as the lesser evil over inflation, which is what Volcker did, is not necessarily 'libertarian', although it was right-wing. Ironically, the discrediting of the 'Keynesian' Phillips Curve (which was in no way part of Keynes' actual work but an appendage added in 1959 that came to be associated with neoclassical Keynesians) by stagflation opened the way for essentially what was a movement along that curve.

3. Reagan was more libertarian than Carter because Reagan supported much larger tax cuts and had a much more oppositional view of government, which was reflected in his executive orders as well as Presidential budget initiatives, judicial appointments, and even foreign policy; this is even assuming that rhetoric and stated positions are not part of the equation, which is not really entirely right either. This is one of those matters that contemporaries saw most clearly, but will always be subject to whatever revisionism is the most convenient at various times of posterity.

The inflation rate peaked in 1980, not 1979. I also said the inflation rate did not begin to significantly decrease until 1981. The inflation rate did slightly decrease in the second half of 1980, but the major reductions in inflation took place in 1981 and 1982.

Corrected- The peak was in March 1980.

Also, it appears that the real interest rate move in 1981 was much bigger than in 1979-80, when Volcker quickly pulled back in response to the 1980 recession. This leads me to wonder whether or not he, as a Democrat, was influenced by partisan considerations to support Carter in an election year.

So I was correct. Anyway, I think that Volcker waited until 1981 to sharply increase interest rates since he wanted to help Carter get reelected, since he knew that it was a bad idea to lower interest rates (which he did for a time in 1980) while inflation was still high yet he did it anyway. There have been many other historical cases where politics might have influenced how the Fed acted before election time. Some examples (besides 1980) would be 1924, 1928, 1968, 2000, and 2004. There might be some examples that I am missing, but this gets the main point across--that even though the Fed is officially independent, politicians still have very large influence in the Fed and thus are able to manipulate the economy really well often in order to satisfy their own personal goals and ambitions.

[Conservative frontier]

Reagan

[k-onmmunist]

Reagan

LOL. 'The poor are homeless by choice' Reagan?

'Just Say No' Reagan?

I don't think so.

[Mechaman]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

Not all libertarians are against abortion, though. Many of them support abortions.

No.

People who support abortion are against women's rights are not libertarians.

Touche.

[k-onmmunist]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

Not all libertarians are against abortion, though. Many of them support abortions.

No.

People who support abortion are not libertarians.

Then I'm not a libertarian.

[Mechaman]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

Not all libertarians are against abortion, though. Many of them support abortions.

No.

People who support abortion are not libertarians.

Then I'm not a libertarian.

Don't let what Libertas interpretations on what is or isn't libertarian change what is really libertarian: The Non Agression Principle.

While Libertas likes to argue that a mass of cells somehow constitutes life and that aborting it is coersion, I (and many other libertarians) argue that the act of putting a gun to a woman's head and forcing her to have a baby she doesn't want to have is also coersion. The difference between the two positions? My position (which isn't even that radically pro-choice to begin with besides what I think of fetuses, pretty much just leave it up to the states and abolish taxation regarding abortion) doesn't require the coersive arm of the state to enforce my views on others. That is the essence of the "pro-choice" position, as opposed to the so-called "pro-life" position, it is all about choice, the government doesn't walk into those women's houses and tell them they have to have an abortion, a "pro-life" person would have the government bust open abortion clinics and throw women and doctors by the hundreds of thousands into jail thus making our prison problem way worse than it already is and other women seeking abortions would be forced into the back alleys with "doctors" who specialize in this sort of matter with unsafe equipment to do it. ABORTION WOULD NOT STOP IF IT'S ILLEGAL, JUST LIKE DRUGS DIDN'T GO AWAY WITH THE WAR ON DRUGS OR ALCOHOL DIDN'T GO AWAY WITH PROHIBITION, IT'S ALL THE SAME THING.

But Libertas insists that only prolifers can be libertarians because somehow a woman aborting a mass of cells is taking away another individual's right to life. Well fine then Libertas, if you believe in the words of the bible you can't be a libertarian because the bible is filled with big government propaganda.

See what happens when you engage in purist dogma?

[President Mitt]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

Not all libertarians are against abortion, though. Many of them support abortions.

No.

People who support abortion are not libertarians.

Wait a minute. What?

[Vepres]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

[Vepres]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

Is a liberal Republican liberal in any sense?

Ford ended Vietnam and pardoned Nixon.

Clinton reformed welfare, one of the most libertarian bills in a long time.

[President Mitt]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

Is a liberal Republican liberal in any sense?

Ford ended Vietnam and pardoned Nixon.

Clinton reformed welfare, one of the most libertarian bills in a long time.

Ford did not end Vietnam. Ford actually wanted to escalate the war in Vietnam, but Congress wouldn't allot him the funds, and he was forced to withdraw.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

Is a liberal Republican liberal in any sense?

In the same sense that a liberal Democrat is, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ford didn't actively work to end Vietnam, it just happened despite Ford. And pardoning Nixon was not a libertarian thing to do.

Clinton signed a Republican bill that barely put a dent in the welfare system.

[Vepres]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

Is a liberal Republican liberal in any sense?

Ford ended Vietnam and pardoned Nixon.

Clinton reformed welfare, one of the most libertarian bills in a long time.

Ford did not end Vietnam. Ford actually wanted to escalate the war in Vietnam, but Congress wouldn't allot him the funds, and he was forced to withdraw.

I'm talking about what they did, not their personal views.

Libertas, look at the alternatives.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

Is a liberal Republican liberal in any sense?

Ford ended Vietnam and pardoned Nixon.

Clinton reformed welfare, one of the most libertarian bills in a long time.

Ford did not end Vietnam. Ford actually wanted to escalate the war in Vietnam, but Congress wouldn't allot him the funds, and he was forced to withdraw.

I'm talking about what they did, not their personal views.

Libertas, look at the alternatives.

The alternatives were no worse then they were.

[President Mitt]

Ford. He ended Vietnam, did what was best for the country despite what the polls said. Of course, I'd call him a libertarian-leaning moderate.

Probably Clinton post-94 would be the second most.

Neither of them were anything approaching "libertarian."

In the relative sense. It's the same as saying somebody is a liberal Republican, they're obviously not liberal, but for their party they are.

Except they weren't libertarian in any sense. They were big government authoritarians.

Is a liberal Republican liberal in any sense?

Ford ended Vietnam and pardoned Nixon.

Clinton reformed welfare, one of the most libertarian bills in a long time.

Ford did not end Vietnam. Ford actually wanted to escalate the war in Vietnam, but Congress wouldn't allot him the funds, and he was forced to withdraw.

I'm talking about what they did, not their personal views.

Libertas, look at the alternatives.

But Ford did not end Vietnam. Congress did. Ford asked for $500 Million dollars to keep the Vietcong out of South Vietnam, but Congress did not allow it.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Reagan.  (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)

He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say.  Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.

Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.

Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.

Not all libertarians are against abortion, though. Many of them support abortions.

No.

People who support abortion are not libertarians.

Wait a minute. What?

     I think that that is more or less an appropriate response. Supporting abortion rights being an anti-libertarian position is definitely a new one from where I'm standing.