Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 03: "FREE TO CHOOSE"

ART ONE: FREE TO CHOOSE

Sandel introduces the libertarian conception of individual rights, according to which only a minimal state is justified. Libertarians argue that government shouldnt have the power to enact laws that 1) protect people from themselves, such as seat belt laws, 2) impose some peoples moral values on society as a whole, or 3) redistribute income from the rich to the poor. Sandel explains the libertarian notion that redistributive taxation is akin to forced labor with references to Bill Gates and Michael Jordan.

PART TWO: WHO OWNS ME?

Libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick makes the case that taxing the wealthy—to pay for housing, health care, and education for the poor—is a form of coercion. Students first discuss the arguments behind redistributive taxation. Dont most poor people need the social services they receive in order to survive? If you live in a society that has a system of progressive taxation, arent you obligated to pay your taxes? Dont many rich people often acquire their wealth through sheer luck or family fortune? A group of students dubbed Team Libertarian volunteers to defend the libertarian philosophy against these objections.

• Category

  Education

[EndureUno]

"If you think about it"

[raininbows]

They wouldn't make roads unless they could squeeze as much money out of the customer as they possibly could.

If you want to talk about coercion think about Salem fire company for how every live-saving service would work under a truly Libertarian government. If you don't want to pay / can't afford to pay, your house burns down.

That sure sounds much better than paying a share into a society who will provide that for everybody.

[lurrodrigo]

Of course nobody would make roads except the government.

[dick kosisaka]

So many student loan !!! XD

[Allswell Akrong]

Interesting reasoning however, taxation is generally for the public good. You are not deprived of the benefit because when you drive your car you have the benefit of driving on asphalt instead of dirt.

[Hunky Chunky]

moral superiority? Now, is that more prevalent in a society of freemen deciding to act for themselves, or in a society where the gvt imposes a fixed, "accepted" order for all its citizens to act? Is it more harmful for a community of freemen to decide for themselves whether/not to annihilate a class of people, or for the gvt to coerce all into acting that way? Free choice focuses decisions on personal responsibility. Maybe it is too much to ask for kids these days, but is that more harmful?

[Hunky Chunky]

Anyway, you misguidedly categorised me into a libertarian, but not to worry. My whole point was about the strength of those three counter-arguments. If you have watched the whole video, you'd realise I deliberately omitted 47:58 . If you wonder why, I'll just guide, but not necessary coerce you in my train of thought: that counter-argument was intelligent.

[PaonSol]

The thing people like you never seem to get is that it's not about me—and it's certainly not about you.

Your ideology over reality spiel is harmful to society regardless of how much you claim moral superiority from your silly and simplified system.

The world is a whole lot more complex than libertarians seem to grasp, and you sorely need some psychology classes and real-world experience.

[Hunky Chunky]

Belief? It appears that I was wrong in overestimating your progress in reasoning...