View source for That's what freedom is all about: taking your own risks.

<!-- you can have any number of categories here -->
[[Category:Ron Paul]]
[[Category:Anthropology and Scientific Psychology]]
[[Category:Disability]]
[[Category:There Are Important Values Besides Liberty]]
<!-- 1 URL must be followed by >= 0 Other URL and Old URL and 1 End URL.-->
{{URL | url = http://critiquesoflibertarianism.blogspot.com/2011/09/thats-what-freedom-is-all-about-taking.html}}
<!-- {{Other URL | url = }} -->
<!-- {{Old URL | url = }} -->
{{End URL}}
{{DES | des = [[Kent Snyder]], [[Ron Paul]]'s former campaign chairman, was young and uninsured.  He died leaving $400,000 in hospital costs to his mother, who was incapable of paying.  He fought for the "right" to inadequate care, placing burdens on charities, his social network and hospitals.  | show=}}
<!-- DPL has problems with categories that have a single quote in them.  Use these explicit workarounds. -->
<!-- normally, we would use {{Links}} and {{Quotes}}  -->
{{Quotations|That's what freedom is all about: taking your own risks.|quotes=true}}

{{Text |
That's how Ron Paul described his campaign manager's early, uninsured death.

However, "When he died on June 26, 2008, two weeks after Paul withdrew his first bid for the presidency, his hospital costs amounted to $400,000. The bill was handed to Snyder's surviving mother (pictured, left), who was incapable of paying. "


This is a classic case of libertarians claiming that they are taking their own risks, but somebody else ends up having to pay.  There is a simple reason why libertarians routinely lie this way: their ideology claims they are independent, but the reality of human socialization is that we are interdependent in many ways.  Through families, churches, friendships, professional associations, employment, etc.  We routinely and informally assume responsibility for each other.


Recently, Brad DeLong wrote Economic Anthropology: David Graeber Meets the Noise Machine... where his comment was:  "Indeed. It really looks from the anthropologists that Adam Smith was wrong--that we are not animals that like to "truck, barter, and exchange" with strangers but rather gift-exchange pack animals--that we manufacture social solidarity by gift networks, and those who give the most valuable gifts acquire status hereby."


I think DeLong is in error because the barter and gift paradigms are often both used.  They are not exclusive.  The error is to claim only one applies or that they are exclusive, and I doubt Adam Smith makes either of those particular errors.


When we are involved in gift networks (such as families) we are not independent: others are relying on us for future gifts and we "owe" for past gifts.  This is one of the great blindnesses of libertarian ideology, and it explains why libertarians will not see as problems what normal people see as problems.  One of my favorite examples is drug usage.  That's why this Brain on Drugs public service announcement about heroin seems comical to libertarians, but makes sensible people cry.  Gift networks are very emotion-laden.  I haven't worked it out yet, but I think this ties in with the idea of  libertarianism as applied autism.
}}