Libertarian Caller: Minimum Wage, Child Labor Laws Fault of Freedom-Hating Americans!

Mike is a Libertarian candidate out in California who calls into the show to debate Sam Seder on libertarianism. A debate on the minimum wage, worker safety, and child labor laws...
This clip from the Majority Report, live M-F at 12 noon EST and via daily podcast at Majority.FM
Subscribe to us on KZbin: / samseder

[@UnrelatedUsername]

"I'm a libertarian and I don't think the other people you've spoken to are real libertarians, also my reception is breaking up." Just discovered these and can't stop watching.

[@herethere2091]

🤣🤣🤣 “I’m not much of a constitution guy, I stopped at the declaration of independence for my knowledge of American government”

[@SeanLaMontagne]

Followed by: *repeats the question back to Sam before saying libertarians debate things*

[@toyotoyo6888]

I've just discovered these and have been bingeing them

[@victorvanvolt8425]

Majority report has a playlist with the libertarians almost 200 videos. So it's almost 80 hours of these kind of content.

[@rsr789]

@@herethere2091 That's more reading than most Libertardians or Coverservatards or Q- Anoidiots have done.

[@MatthewBorn88]

Anyone notice how Libertarians have conveniently shitty cell phone service? "WHAT? I'm taking an elevator in a tunnel. I didn't hear that last point which destroyed my argument."

[@jonathanwpressman]

Well, yes, they are exercising their freedom. The freedom to use a 2006 track phone.

[@PR--un4ub]

@@jonathanwpressman They should switch to Morse code.

[@jonathanwpressman]

@@PR--un4ub you win

[@Seattle-2017]

12:12 Libertarian: "No, I'm NOT buying time while I ignore your last point and think of my next irrelevant rhetorical question. It's that you haven't given me time to speak, and also my phone connection.

[@steveyuhas9278]

"Sorry I'm in a snowstorm in the middle of Antarctica, can we move on to the next point?"

[@michellej1372]

Developing countries show that with lack of regulations people don't have the luxury to turn down shitty dangerous jobs.

[@420gma]

I agree ! And we see in the news all the time that not only do they stiil live in poverty but they die by the hundreds do to unsafe working conditions !!

[@GReid-ol5gk]

+Benjamin S it's both

[@bmortloff]

Michelle Size It's not just developing nations. This is true in Australia where we have strong oh&s regulations that are constantly ignored due to unrealistic productivity targets devised by management. I'd bet the same is true in every country, just not to the same degree as the developing world.

[@nosuchthing8]

Yes the two go hand in hand

[@bengee1040]

Well, developing countries and the sates of florida and texas

[@RocketCityRocker]

This caller walked right into the "government says you can't marry your sister" argument. I was listening live and was screaming at my phone, "what if he wants to marry his dog!!" I love the long ass pause and then weaksauce backpedal "Well I was actually referring to the other thing, but you're going too deep down the rabbithole."

[@BoomSkwad47]

Everything is a "rabbit hole" with these clowns. The ideological equivalent of vaporware

[@Seattle-2017]

Libertarianism is all encompassing, except for this situation, this situation, this situation....

[@ThePsycoDolphin]

Every libertarian conversation ever starts with "I think libertarianism is just freedom and the right to own your own body and stuff" and then ends with them turning into spitting semi-fascist lunatics opposed to every base tennet that marks a civilised society. Almost without exception it's the norm.

[@rsr789]

You know whose thinking these guys remind me of? Hermann Goering.

[@Iandar1]

That’s basically all libertarianism is

[@Stikibits]

It's a primary role of government to protect people from exploitation.

[@WeDeserveBetterNow]

"Only legitimate role of government is to enforce contracts" So in other words, the only legitimate role of government is to be hired guns that work for the private sector? Last time I checked, the merger of state and corporate power had a name, and that name is fascism.

[@SteveGellerMusic]

Yes. That is, in a nutshell, what they believe. That the government should be nothing but a facilitator for private enterprise, as though the public good either doesn't exist or encompasses the exact same thing as the private sector. But what protections are there for the powerless, the ones that don't have the resources to wield government influence to facilitate their business interests? "Let them find ways to get richer, or starve."

[@DanRyzESPUK]

+We Deserve Better That is exactly how Marx described the nature of capitalist state, and the nature of any state (the supremacy of the ruling class over the others, in our case, the capitalists).

[@cypresshill09able]

+Steve G So I guess they hate freedom then ? hahahaha

[@DanRyzESPUK]

Mike Lopez If freedom gets in their way to make more money, Yeah!

[@BChan1991]

You know regular people can sign contracts too, right? Like if you and I have a contract between us, govt would be responsible for enforcing said agreement, should one of us breach it

[@Mablak200]

It's often only a couple sentences in before these nuts fail. 'It's primarily an issue of freedom, not an issue of what works best." He's already admitting that what's best for society doesn't matter to him, which means he loses the argument. The debate about minimum wage is about what's best for societal well-being, of which freedom is only one aspect. Sam does a good job shutting him down quickly.

[@AnxiousObserver]

And that, in a nutshell, is libertarian ideology. The most important thing in the world is freedom, regardless of the consequences or problems that arise. As long as people are "free," it doesn't matter if we love in a barbaric shithole apocalyptic world governed by aristocracy. Freedom!

[@WhenItsHalfPastFive]

Right, but what if what you determine "whats best for society" involves force? involves forcing people to comply, stealing from them, and if they don't comply, they get thrown in jail. I think the libertarian ideology - that many call barbaric, "not caring about whats best for people" - is honestly no different than liberal, or socialist ideologies which also involves just as barbaric consequences.

[@Mablak200]

Komighty1 Taxation isn't force, if by that you mean unconsented. You don't explicitly consent to pay when you order food from a restaurant, but it's assumed you know how restaurants work, and thereby implicitly consent. Likewise, it's assumed you understand societal customs, one of which is that living in a country (and using its tax-funded services no less) implies you consent to certain reasonable rules, like certain forms of taxation. Also, if taxation were force, it would still be laughable to call it barbaric. Losing a tiny portion of your income in a way that helps you and all of society (for legitimate programs), oh the barbarism!

[@WhenItsHalfPastFive]

Mablak welll I'm not talking about concrete examples, I was talking about the basis of the ideology, where you call the free market "barbarism". How is it not barbaric that there is an involuntary system, where you are forced to comply - otherwise thrown in jail. What is barbaric about the free market? explain. If you're talking about crony capitalism, ofcourse its barbaric - thats exactly why the core ideology of libertarianism is freedom - where nobody has an unfair advantage by buying off politicians, and fixing the game. What is barbaric about that?

[@Mablak200]

Komighty1 As I just explained, taxation isn't by and large involuntary. Although I didn't make any claim about the free market being barbaric, yes, it would be barbaric to allow millions of people to go hungry by cutting off our SNAP supply, to allow employers to pay slave wages, to allow child labor, to let thousands of people die from preventable diseases due to lack of health insurance, the list goes on. This would happen in laissez-faire, whether that's 'crony capitalism' or not.

[@RashaanB310]

"You're taking it too deep down the rabbit hole." Son, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. As soon as you go in to details, libertarian arguments fall apart.

[@Bob_In_Thailand]

Because libertarianism is only a concept and can never be used for practical purposes.

[@gildardo]

The literal " No not like that" argument. LOL

[@Seattle-2017]

There was a libertarian presidential candidate years ago who lost it when Sam kept asking him real world questions about who enforces property deeds and contracts. He screamed: "That's the beauty of my system Sam! We don't have all the answers! YOU, on the other hand, want to centrally plan liberty!" He later hung up when Sam basically agreed with a basic tenet of the US tax system.

[@rsr789]

@@Seattle-2017 Yes, cuz its best not to plan things and leave them to chance... certainly that was Madison's thinking 🙄

[@wvu05]

​@@RobHel "If you don't pay your taxes, you should be penalized, and if you still refuse, you should ultimately go to jail."

[@Phi1618033]

In other words, libertarians do believe that government should have coercive powers, but only to enforce the contracts that the rich and powerful force or inveigle the poor and powerless to enter into. Nice.

[@karljohn2145]

they would only want the states power to protect their own interests and wealth.

[@HeathWatts]

Libertarians believe that if their dystopian ideas materialized that they would somehow be kings instead of peasants.

[@tph2010]

A world of pure imagination...

[@sabin97]

omfg i read that as willy wonka!

[@SpoopySquid]

tph2010 "Come with me And you'll be In a world of pure deregulation..."

[@michaelevans831]

@@SpoopySquid 😂😂

[@nukiradio]

If you want to seeee compromise, simply have the market do it! Anything you want, buy it! Want to own the world? We suh-pply it!

[@chlorine5795]

There is no life I know to compare to pure deregulation. Living here ...you'll defy...taxation. i know I'm years late, but i just had to comment.

[@robertjordan3155]

this is what we get when ayn rand's bad fan fiction becomes an ideology

[@dmh496]

Ayn Rand: Significant only in her Insignificance.

[@evilsWa]

I don’t think you know what fan fiction is.

[@karlawade3346]

Honey, I am quoting you on my Facebook page. Brilliantly stated!

[@aboutthat1440]

@@evilsWa Sounds like you don't understand his point.

[@Libertyjack1]

Oh, but Rand would not have accepted the term 'libertarian', for herself. She was a believer that one's success, among state and corporate actors as well as individual persons, indicated a superiority of virtue, which legitimized power and control of one over the other. Rand called her philosophy, objectivism. Most American self professed 'libertarians', most especially observed in those running for office, subscribe to Rand's theory, but they prefer the term 'libertarian', because it sells better.

[@philpottkentucky4802]

I have yet to hear one of these libertarian callers who isn't a neo-confederate, a feudalist, or a fascist corporatist. Their idea of freedom is always: I should have the freedom to do whatever I want to you, but you should not have the freedom to do things to me.

[@RetroMakesBeats]

That's all the camps that are working together in the Right Wing Coalition including Christian Fundamentalists.

[@NoWay1969]

Sam ate this guys lunch.

[@Lobos222]

Anyone else think Libertarians calling Sam sound similar in "logic" to religious people calling Atheist shows...

[@rsr789]

That's what Matt Dilahunty did so well though at The Atheist Experience: he would put them on hold when the callers went ape shit so they were muted, so he could finally make his point before letting them speak again... if not every phone call ends up as a gish gallop rant by the callers of utter lunacy.

[@TheRedCapitalist]

So, it's in the DNA of libertarians to make fools of themselves via debating other people in public?

[@AwesomeFaceOver9000]

It must be if they consistently make assholes of themselves like this.

[@RocketmanRockyMatrix]

baserocklove How are Libertarians stupid?

[@TheRedCapitalist]

baserocklove Could not write a better summary of libertarianism than that.... I'm going to have to plagiarize you.....:)

[@SteveGellerMusic]

I want to add to base's testimony. This caller began by saying that "the minimum wage is a freedom issue, not an issue of what works best for everyone." Ok. A freedom issue. Supposing, in a Libertarian world, Wal-Mart (just as an example of a giant superstore) opens a store in a small town, and they say "We're only going to pay our workers $4 an hour, but because of this, our products will be really cheap, 40% cheaper than in comparable smaller stores. You're a rug store owner in town, and you want to pay your employees $7 an hour, which you always have (adjusted for inflation), but you no longer can do this because no one will buy your rugs at the price you have to charge to employ your laborers, when they can buy similar rugs at Wal-Mart for 40% cheaper. Town loyalty only goes so far. So, to drop your prices that far, you're essentially forced to pay only $4 an hour, probably less (because Wal-Mart can still massively out-advertise you and take away most of your business, since they're so big). Or you could throw away your life's experience at selling rugs to sell a different product that has more of a market...oh, wait, Wal-Mart sells just about every product and they're ALWAYS going to sell them cheaper. You could move to a different town...oh wait, there's a Wal-Mart in every town, or one could move into your new town 3 months after you move there, and you have the same problem. If you are a worker in this town, someone who is used to making $7 an hour at the rug store, there is now no where to go in order to fulfill that voluntary $7 contract, since no one in town is hiring for that wage (Wal-Mart is crushing all of the small businesses). You can't get a higher wage at the rug store, because they have razor thin margins, and you won't get a higher wage at Wal-Mart, because they look around and say "someone is desperate enough to work for $4--someone in this town is in danger of starving if they don't get work, and $4 is better than nothing, so we'll hire those people." And then, on top of having to take a $4 an hour job, you also have to deal with the externalities of an impoverished, desperate town--a rise in crime, a potential rise in disease, the loss of property values, decaying schools, etc. And private charities, etc., will suffer because the overall town economy is depressed, so those who need the most aid will be shut out unless people who are barely making anything themselves are able to help. And where will people most likely shop? Wal-Mart, because while the rug store has lowered their prices enough to be somewhat competitive, the prices are still cheaper at Wal-Mart, and people don't have excess money to throw around. So, let's recap. Freedom. Wal-Mart gets the freedom to set whatever wages THEY want. Their workers are "free" to agree to that contract, though they really have no choice because no one is hiring for better wages, and starvation is not a real choice. So they're basically forced to work there. The citizens are forced to incur the problems that happen to their town because of the economy. The rug store is forced to lower its wages and its prices. Consumers aren't forced, but are heavily incentivized to shop at Wal-Mart, which enables this entire vicious cycle. What a lot of freedom this town has! Oh, but right, someone could just decide to start up a company in their garage and instantly out-compete Wal-Mart in the free market. Doug down the street is really going to be the next Steve Jobs and revolutionize the industry. It only happens about 0.0001% of the time, but yeah, it theoretically could, so that's all Libertarianism needs. It is a good thing the caller doesn't value "what works best for everyone," because it seems that this scenario only works best for the owners of Wal-Mart. And, BTW, in none of this example did the Big Bad Federal Government do anything to interfere with this scenario. Any company could get big enough, just by the machinations of capitalism, to be able to come into and bully a town like this.

[@robinsss]

baserocklove "They endorse as "more moral" a country with absolutely zero social safety" it doesn't endorse having a publicly financed safety net "Worst of all is the is the opposition to environmental oversight because it is ALWAYS more profitable to create more waste and more greenhouse emissions " they want hire private groups to prevent damage to the environment " I mean ffs it's an ideology when taken to logical conclusion (and argued in favor of by several prominent libertarians I might add) would have to permit slavery if that was the voting will of the state" could you name those libertarians? by the way sounded like a libertarian until they got to workplace safety laws maybe he's a republican with libertarian leaning

[@judyleasugar97]

Children are supposed to be studying.

[@ryleexiii1252]

judyleasugar97 Why though? So they can get jobs? The jobs that are lacking right now? Getting educated, especially after high school, is at this point a waste of money.

[@1-gz7xy]

Apollo you people are as dumb as shit

[@ryleexiii1252]

George kush, I'm a leftist.

[@sabin97]

apollo if you think education is expensive, try ignorance...

[@christianknuchel]

@@ryleexiii1252 This is a result of neoliberal and right wing destruction cast upon society and its economy. Children *are* supposed to be studying, for the economy as well as their quality as members of society. What children are supposed to do doesn't change because plutocratic policy making is sending the economy down the drain one boatload at a time.

[@jeremyeinbinder4632]

The Declaration of Indepence is a Declaration of War, not a legal document.

[@personalemail1632]

If its not a legal document, how do you distinguish it from the legal implications? How are other laws past by congress considered legal documents and this one isnt? How is declaring yourself independent from a country not a legal declaration? How is changing the law not legal in nature? And why did they wait for more than a year after the war had begun to declare war? What were they doing the year before, just letting themselves get shot?

[@icankickflipok]

It’s a legal document. This does not mean it’s not a declaration of war. It wouldn’t work as a declaration of war if there was no official body of power to enforce it as being legal. This happened when the original Americans in spirit (not in physical presence) guess we can call them the original patriots, backed the document with force and made the other countries recognize us as a body of power, that’s when it gained its legal status. Until then, yeah, it was a declaration of war.

[@MrGreensweightHist]

@@personalemail1632 It isn't a legal document. It is a letter of complaint to parliament. That is all.

[@nukiradio]

@@personalemail1632 he meant, it's not our core document

[@cnferguson5]

Tell me if I'm right or wrong. You can't leave the negotiation of wages to be decided upon by only 2 parties, Employer and Worker, because The Employer will always negotiate a deal that best suits their interests and by doing so the worker will have to concede and accept the deal that more against his/her own self interest. So,Who has the greater power here? The Employer or the worker? Be honest. The conclusion I come to is that the government sets the minimum wage so that when Employers do negotiate with workers, the agreed wage will always be higher than what it would have been without government "interference." It'd be higher, or, like many employers, they'd just keep at at the set rate. Trust me, they'd go much lower if they could. I've always understood this to be Capitalism 101. People want to acquire. Those who do acquire, want to acquire more. They then acquire a lot, and of course want more and more. The problem is the Employer will do so by paying as low of a wage as he can to reap more of the profits produced by his employees. If they could get away with these ruthless practices today, they would be doing it. It's that simple. These laws exist to prevent this very thing. But you might say it's his own labor he has to offer, he can just offer it somewhere else where they'll pay him/her better. But it wouldn't be that simple, because essentially this is what you'd get: One employer offers you $3/hr. he is free do this because there is no set wage, so the worker doesn't want to work there and then goes to another place of employment where he then accepts a job offer for $4/hr. Can you see how the "freedoms" are outweighed between employer and worker? So because there is no set wage his choices of working somewhere to better his life are meek. He'll be a wage slave. If the min. wage didn't exist then employers would be pinching us as hard as they could but not hard enough just to simply keep us alive. The government acts as a buffer to this inevitable practice that would most certainly exist if we had unfettered capitalism or an offshoot of such, like "anarcho-capitalism". We've all seen what it was like when America was more capitalist than today, that's why we have child labor laws, a min. wage, and unions.

[@Hatchet-Jack]

Most jobs today pay more than the minimum wage, some a lot more. Why do companies pay more than what is required by law? Employers compete for talent and will pay an employee much more than the minimum wage based off that persons value to the company.

[@mchevre]

I absolutely agree with you, OP, and if you aren't familiar with the general Marxist analysis on this topic, you should look into it, because you seem to already have a basic understanding and agreement with it. Now, understand that Marx's critique of capitalist economy is separate from his advocacy of communism. So, one can agree with Marx in his analysis of how capitalism works, without necessarily agreeing with Marx on what should replace it. I personally am a socialist, but I'm just saying, one doesn't have to be a socialist to appreciate the marxist analysis of this topic. I encourage you to investigate this.

[@mrbadguysan]

Your deduction is indeed correct. It's the same reason Las Vegas Casinos are multi-million dollar operations despite the fact that the odds of any one bet are nearly even; the employer can outlive you in the context of a negotiation. I'm under the impression that libertarians vastly overestimate their own intelligence and charisma, that they'd be able to forge their own glorious future if the nanny-state would just piss off, that they'd do better without a floor, presumably that they'd be able to benefit from schmucks dumber than them. I believe this fundamental misapprehension leads them to think minimum wage does more harm than good.

[@mrbadguysan]

Your deduction is indeed correct. It's the same reason Las Vegas Casinos are multi-million dollar operations despite the fact that the odds of any one bet are nearly even; the employer can outlive you in the context of a negotiation. I'm under the impression that libertarians vastly overestimate their own intelligence and charisma, that they'd be able to forge their own glorious future if the nanny-state would just piss off, that they'd do better without a floor, presumably that they'd be able to benefit from schmucks dumber than them. I believe this fundamental misapprehension leads them to think minimum wage does more harm than good.

[@cnferguson5]

"Now, understand that Marx's critique of capitalist economy is separate from his advocacy of communism." That's what I always try to tell people whenever I invoke Marx into these sort of conversations, they think I'm a Communist. I wouldn't even say I'm a Marxist, but some of his writings do apply to our society as well as in conversations like the ones which were engaging, boss and worker relationship. He bases his theories off of historical materialism and he's a great historian. What does bother me about Marx is when he tries to predict the future with out much evidence to back up what he says will happen to make a convincing argument, i.e. Communism.

[@iliketrains263]

every single libertarian caller: caller: hi sam i heard ur debate with other libertarians and they didnt do a very good job and dont represent the ideaology im a real libertarian! sam: so what is a libertarian caller: i cant hear you, you're breaking up

[@rsr789]

They are in an elevator, going through a tunnel... speak up!

[@chestypants78]

Debating libertarians is too easy. It's akin to debating someone who believes: the Earth is flat/ the Moon is made of cheese/ a 950 year old man made a wooden ark/ Sarah Palin is intelligent etc etc.

[@leedaniels617]

A no brainer, so to speak!.

[@devourerofbabies]

All you really have to do to defeat a Libertarian is stand back, let them talk, and watch themselves thrash blindly about until they kick themselves in their own ass.

[@k3v1n47]

I like the beginnings of the debates with Libertarians. You just know its going to be fucktarded and High-Larious. Sam: "Who enforces the contracts?" Mike: "umm, yer goin down the wrong road"

[@raufe8461]

Road? What's a road? I'm a libertarian!

[@sirius1696]

*extreme libertarian voice* where we're going, we don't need roads

[@citizen320]

...uh the road of logical reasoning?

[@hmasterpiece85]

I swear every libertarian has "phone problems". It's like a get out of jail free card so when they get their ass handed to them they can keep some dignity.

[@jimmyjams1524]

hmasterpiece85 they had to make their own phone cause Lord Homunculus has the rights to all existing phones.

[@michaelk.jensen1611]

Noticed that too. This guy though only said it at the start of the conversation unless I missed it. Maybe libertarians buy the equipment from the same brand. That imposes no minimum standards on the components used?

[@nukiradio]

@@michaelk.jensen1611 definitely squeezes their employees

[@mindhackz]

@@michaelk.jensen1611 Nah. He lied and used the get out of jail free of his phone conveniently being “all static” excuse when Sam destroyed his argument about safety laws when the typical libertarian argument falls apart when they’re reminded there’s many important laws and regulations with things like OSHA and how you can’t sue some company after arguing for deregulation of the laws that were protecting you in the first place

[@michaelk.jensen1611]

@@mindhackz yeah but I think its funnier that the libertarians are putting their "business"in telephony companies that are exempt from these rules and are using the" superior" method of free market economics and free competition without being "hampered' by regulations that" keeps out innovation " and that this" free" competition absolutely Will bring the Best products. And Thats why they constantly have these static noise and connection fallouts from these free competing innovating companies that gives the Best products for their consumers.....

[@Nethr]

Wooo! A new libertarian caller! Today is going to be a great day indeed. I always get a good laugh out of these. Thank you Sam!

[@razzan532]

"Yeah it's the moment society is established." Holy fucking shit. That's a mic drop moment there. And it totally flew over the caller's head. Wow. Just wow.

[@Aeshir2]

Openly Having A Problem With Child Labour Laws: The Highest Stage of Libertarianism

[@modelmajorpita]

When corporations form, they sign a contract agreeing to follow regulations and pay taxes, so therefore if you agree that government can enforce contracts you agree with taxes and regulations.

[@Halloween111]

Different caller, same fantasyland nonsense

[@karlawade3346]

Sam, Michael, Matt, Jaime... You are saints for dealing with these morons to shine a light on the ridiculousness of Libertarianism. You bring reason and education to a country that is increasingly in dire need of critical thinking skills and accurate information. Thank you so much. God bless you all.

[@typeviic1]

This caller wants a caste system

[@AnxiousObserver]

It's not that he/libertarians want that per se, it's that the consequences of a world in which their ideology was in place would unavoidably create an incredibly backwards and unequal society of basically lords and serfs. They are just oblivious to that reality, or they acknowledge it but think they'll be one of the lords.

[@wyoboy01]

Yeah, he'd probably be somewhere in the Untouchables region lol.

[@PrincipledUncertainty]

Come on Sam. Try getting your chimney cleaned for 50 cents these days.

[@RefriedBeanDip]

Is "getting your 'chimney' cleaned" a euphemism for something else?

[@RefriedBeanDip]

dffykvn They are against age of consent laws? Really? This makes no sense. Do they admit to this in public? They must be nuts. Surely Rand Paul, the guru of wisdom is not pro molester.

[@RefriedBeanDip]

dffykvn Against the against age of consent laws?

[@synapse131]

***** Unless you're actually getting your chimney cleaned.

[@tomcollins4261]

Caller: "Actually, most people believe in this concept [of freedom], the problem is that those of you who like to control what other people do are the majority right now." Do these people ever just once listen to themselves??

[@neems_crassidy]

"I think you've represented yourself uh...accurately." Nice, Sam. Dude's too simple to get that burn I'm sure, but we picked it up.

[@mv7853]

Whew this series really is the gift that keeps giving

[@GReid-ol5gk]

The problem with libertarians is that they lack the ability to understand nuance and practicality. They also need to start more clearly defining what freedom means to them as opposed to just spewing "muh rights" rhetoric, as if no other political camp values individual rights. Also, since he brought up the Declaration of Independence, it'll be nice if he noted that the founders also mentioned life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - NOT property. The Constitution gives the federal government leeway in interpreting the "pursuit of happiness" and that gives the government leverage to "encroach" on rights if those rights aren't being equally protected for all citizens across the board. Not to mention the Declaration of Independence has NO LEGAL STANDING, whatsoever.

[@LoveAllAnimals101]

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for rich white men only! Slave owners and institutionalised hyper- segregation are the hallmarks of American manifest destiny, whose cousin, Zionism, have a lot in common by the way. Bigot-laced xenophobic exceptionalism is what truly makes the US great!

[@MatthewBorn88]

Does all free market cell phone service suck? Or maybe their alternate universe just has poor reception.

[@TORTOISESFORDAYS]

"your taking it too deep down the rabbit hole" Uhh nope that's just consistency.

[@KingJT80]

lol this is where this argument falls apart

[@ilikeme1234]

Stop dominating him! I mean the conversation. His ass is starting to hurt

[@natebrick875]

Seems like every libertarian that calls in has a shit phone connection. Interesting.

[@liberator6]

Without certain government regulations and “interference,” one person’s “freedom” will inevitably become another person’s oppression.

[@devourerofbabies]

8:21 "Most people believe in this concept, the problem is that those of you who like to control what other people do are the majority right now" LOL wut? Most people believe in libertarianism, the only problem is that the people who don't are the majority? LOLOLOLOLOLOL Libertardians. Gotta love 'em.

[@kathykelly5930]

Most ppl are libertarians in their personal lives, they want freedom for themselves, but they want to impose upon other ppl because they are a hypocrite

[@devourerofbabies]

kathy kelly Libertarianism isn't about liberty in people's personal lives. This is one of Libertardianism's greasiest tricks: take common values, and pretend that they're somehow "Libertarian". Next you'll be claiming that breathing air is "Libertarian".

[@kathykelly5930]

devourerofbabies Well, the etymology of libertarian is simply free will. But libertarian philosophy, while a young discipline has always focused on common sense principles that most ppl agree with and tried to universalize them across society.

[@devourerofbabies]

kathy kelly I'm clearly talking about the modern American Libertarian movement, not the original etymology.

[@TybudX]

The part where he admits that an 18 or 20 year old is worth the minimum wage while trying to defend his child labour straw man... fucking gold.

[@fmiller36]

Holy shit. Excellent observation.

[@sejembalm]

What a lot of people fail to appreciate is the interests of employees and societal interests. So much attention is lavished on the interests of the industrialists and employers, how enforcing minimum wages, safe working conditions, and forbidding extensive child labor are OUTRAGEOUS infringements on the employer's rights and interference with their unfettered freedom to contract. But the employees have competing interests in being paid a wage they can live off of, having a reasonably safe workplace, etc. Libertarians keep obsessing over the plight of the richest and most powerful in society. Are they corporate sycophants or just enthralled with wild power imbalances to favor monopolistic capital?

[@SteveGellerMusic]

They literally do feel this way. They believe that "since the employer comes up with the innovation to start the business, and takes the risk, he deserves all of the advantages and the employee deserves nothing.

[@dudeist_priest]

I love this "you keep trying to bring reality into this" mentality of the caller.

[@frenzy1225]

"You've represented yourself quite... accurately." I lost my shit at that haha

[@Apjooz]

We should all try to be more like Bangladesh.

[@infiniteflame2374]

Libertarians need to exercise their freedom to buy better phones.

[@RefriedBeanDip]

Do we think Mike will call back for another spanking next week or will he seek therapy?

[@blujay66]

This was incredibly fun to watch.

[@angryexgop6184]

I appreciate your professional courtesy and calm debating with him and how you invited him to call again.

[@johnnytwotimes7854]

Why do they never actually call back?

[@999across]

A 14 y/o do not need the states permission to work however there are laws in place which restrict the hours a 14 y/o can work as well as times she/he can work. These laws are in place for good reason unless you believe children toiling away in factories for over 40 hrs a week is freedom. Furthermore, I'm certain those who object to child labor laws would not allow their kids to work under those conditions.

[@nethleck1]

More libertarian videos, please.

[@AndiDuck]

Wage theft is the illegal withholding of wages or the denial of benefits that are rightfully owed to an employee. Wage theft, particularly from low wage legal or illegal immigrant workers, is common in the United States. Wage theft can be conducted through various means such as: failure to pay overtime, minimum wage violations, employee misclassification, illegal deductions in pay, working off the clock, or not being paid at all. These violated rights have been guaranteed to workers in the United States since 1938 by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

[@SpoopySquid]

How to trip up a libertarian: just ask them what they think of child labour/health & safety regulations

[@jewsco]

Or slavery

[@jakedemedeiros9978]

“Yeah it’s the moment that society is established” I’ve never seen such a concise killshot

[@Stikibits]

There's jobs and profit in child-labour and non-livable wage exploitation. And children and the exploited don't have to be exploited if they don't want to be, right? It's a free market of the exploited and the exploiter. It works out pretty well for some, doesn't it?

[@frontierbrainrobby5449]

Watching this in 2018, the main point that I learned over the course of my arguments with libertarians is that there is no such thing as a contract between only two parties.

[@IMatchoNation]

Prohibition on child marriage: ABSURD! MUH FREEDOM! OSHA: Well I benefit from that, so of course that should exist. The libertarian mind, folks.

[@pano3607]

I’ve heard a bunch of these libertarian call ins and I have to say, I appreciate this guy’s discourse, but he might be the worst at making the case. He posited a non sequitur in the shape of his marriage hypothetical argument (if you believe the government can get involved in contracts, it can dictate who’s allowed to marry who), then when Sam pointed out that in fact the government does do that, he says “you’re going too far down the rabbit hole”. It’s HIS rabbit hole! And we’re still very much in the bounds of reality: brothers and sisters can’t marry because inbreeding is dangerous. So he switches to “Why can’t they restrict gay marriage then?” And there we have it: his view of government is pretty black and white, it seems. If they can stop you doing X, why can’t they stop you doing Y? Well, a more conservative Supreme Court probably would have stopped us doing Y (same sex marriage). The grey area in the middle is where political debate lives. Basically, the way I see it (and the way it kind of is, I’m sure we’d all agree), is that the role of government is to restrict certain freedoms to ensure a more cohesive, happy and productive society. It doesn’t sound pretty until you consider that the freedoms it restricts are things like: the freedom to rip someone off, the freedom to drive drunk, the freedom to make a catastrophic decision for yourself etc What the two main parties do is apply certain ideologies to those decisions. GOP for example, seems intent on giving companies more power to stiff people and weakening labour unions. Dems seem more keen on curtailing companies’ freedom to poison the environment. Like it or not, it’s well within a government’s remit to protect its citizens by restricting SOME “freedoms”.

[@jbeihl1]

ahhhhh I loooove these segments. Hold on. let me go warm up my popcorn.

[@EgonSupreme]

"I think you represented yourself quite accurately". Ouch.

[@waterhead001]

In his "Reports on Manufacturers" Alexander Hamilton called for a High Wage economy based upon Manufacturing and Production. Why isn't this the Conservative/Libertarian view?

[@phillyeagles5058]

Honestly as a parent if my Child is doing the work of a don't on the job they should get paid the same as an adult on the job

[@devourerofbabies]

Yay! It's been too long since the last one.

[@bendublinski3156]

Government approval for a 14 year old working: 14 year old: I need a permit for this job School: Ok, here you go. It's not that hard...

[@52flyingbicycles]

That was a very good point: if you expect the government to enforce your contracts then you invite their ability to regulate contracts. More specifically, the government can choose which contracts they enforce, and should do so based upon an agreed-upon set of rules.

[@hadi96100]

5:02 - LOL :)) - Thank you Sam...

[@curtisl2000]

12:12 that broken static is his brain refusing to learn something

[@matthewragnoli6859]

seder destroyed him well done sam

[@tylerzack152]

Great debate

[@renardleblanc5556]

If I wanted to contract someone to commit a crime, I'm *pretty* sure that should be illegal, even if it's just between them and I.

[@MackerelSkyLtd]

“Contract killers shouldn’t have the government interfering with their hit!”

[@scoobydoobers23]

Sam is quite a bit to my left, but dammit that man can have a simultaneously civil and intense debate.

[@Titanvol91]

It's probably a state by state situation but in Tennessee I know you can work as a bagger in a grocery store at 14, no school permission required. And fast-food restaurants at 15

[@jewsco]

Yes it’s state by state in Illinois you have to be 15 1/2 and get a work permit from school . At 16 you are free to work as you please

[@kerrydehorney2949]

Love it!!!

[@joshuagrobelch]

1 guy sueing a mine Corp. Lol.

[@JohnDoe-jq4re]

If companies get to exist then they should at least be heavily regulated

[@Jimbobasaur]

Great debate there Seder, you handled that with ease.

[@jaelynn7575]

Oh, my parents taught me how to work at home, no problem. Started working at age 16.

[@anthonydelfino6171]

Was this Mugatu calling in?? "The age-old right of kids to work is under attack!"

[@draco89123]

Libertarian caller, you were very wrong, but very polite. I appreciate it.

[@spinninglilies2526]

One member of a contract often has much more power and leverage to coerce the other weaker member of the contract into an unfair or unsafe position.

[@coladict]

Most people agree with me, but the problem is that people like you are the majority - caller.

[@fdub301]

It's about damn time.

[@heavyhandsmcgee]

Stop trying to take away my right to take advantage of less fortunate people.

[@jonathanhernandez3292]

a few words in and I knew this was going to be good

[@nosuchthing8]

Who needs child labor laws...

[@surreallife777]

If this libertarian was truly mature and honest with himself he would concede that he was wrong but but most Libertarian specialize in denial when they are cornered logically.

[@hyking4ahyqueen520]

It's amazing how out of touch these Libertarians are with reality. I started working at the age of 15 for the LADWP (public utilities company) through a work study program created by the LAUSD (public school system) school in Los Angeles. Those two federally funded programs kept me off the streets, in school and taught me the work ethics that prevented me from becoming another black man caught trapped in the prison-industrial complex. But libertarian don't care about how beneficial government is for the overall population. It's a party of narcissistic sociopaths.

[@Zatzzo]

Only "phone bad" libertarians are true libertarians.

[@nickmathiason2917]

I’m convinced that the libertarian “phone issues” are just a way to avoid a question and jump to another platitude about freedom to change the subject. They always seem to happen right after a tough question is asked lol

[@ibringit987]

This dude, not being intellectually aware enough to not start off admitting his preference of libertarianism is not based on what works best, but whatever his definition of freedom is, sums up my issue with this ideology.

[@waterhead001]

Libertarians live in an alternate reality.

[@PimWSmit]

And again “Allright, so...” or “Okay,.... so”

[@icankickflipok]

Actually I will say I remember where I live, at 15 I was told I’d have to get permission from the school to work by the school. So maybe it depends where you live. Each state has different education standards and there may not be any law against that federally, so it’s possible it’s been left to the states to make that decision. But I could be having a mandela effect where I’m misremembering who told me that, so make sure to pinch that salt and sprinkle it on your thoughts about what I’ve said.

[@gregorsamsa1364]

Incestuous marriages should be legal

[@ericacross7337]

I worked when I was 14 and I didn't have to do anything special...

[@SadisticSenpai61]

It depends on the state regarding what work you're allowed to do when you're 14 as well as the requirements that have to be fulfilled in order to get a work permit. When you're 16, most of those restrictions go away. I've never heard of a state requiring you to get permission from the school, but I suppose there might be one somewhere. Oh and a lot of those restrictions are ignored if it's seasonal work - including minimum wage. Most companies don't want the bad PR for hiring minors below minimum wage for seasonal work, so they pay them minimum wage anyway. But there are a few that do it anyway - including the theme park near where I grew up. They still pay their workers about $5 an hour every summer. In my state, no one under the age of 18 is allowed to wash dishes as part of their job because there's been too many cases of kids scalding themselves. The first job I ever had, my boss wouldn't even consider anyone under 18 for exactly that reason - washing dishes and dealing with hot water was part of the job and she didn't want to deal with the hassle of having someone else on hand take over that part of their job.

[@UltaBlueRev]

The ultimate winner of this argument was, in fact, the libertarian caller as he defeated himself quite resoundingly once Sam let the fool argue against child labor laws. 🤣

[@marcusgaunt8222]

Sam, the role of government in enforcing contracts is to be an independent agency in which it enforcing a consensual contract between two free parties. Why does this job automatically give the government the right to introduce terms of contractual obligations? It makes no sense...