You'd be surprised at how fast I can read. The point is the man has no frigging idea what "conservative nanny state" means, and simply redefines it as "any government interference in the private sector on behalf of the rich."
I define conservatism/libertarianism as "no government interference on behalf of anybody."
I've heard his ideas on copyright and patents before. "Why should Rearden be the only one permitted to manufacture Rearden Metal?" His solution is simply to "publicly finance" pharmaceuticals, software, you name it. Bingo, no more problems! For some weird reason, only "creative" arts seem to worry him as far as a government czar running everything.
The man is an economic imbecile, and nobody who advocates the level of centralized authority Baker does on every issue can call himself a "libertarian" on any level.
Flame » in reply to The Conservative Nanny State
Re: Re: Re: The Conservative Nanny State
The whole thread (22 posts)
- The Conservative Nanny State
- Re: Re: The Conservative Nanny State
- Re: Re: Re: Re: The Conservative Nanny State
- Re: The Conservative Nanny State
- Re: Re: Re: The Conservative Nanny State
- Re: Re: The Conservative Nanny State
- Re: The Conservative Nanny State
