Libertarian’s Opinion On A Christmas Carol?
So seeing as how it’s been that time of year, I feel the need to ask: Do Libertarians see Scrooge at the start of the story as someone to admire, and Bob Cratchit is actually the selfish villain in the story?
Because apparently according to the Mises Institute, that is exactly what Libertarian thought should support:
With such passages like:
“So let’s look without preconceptions at Scrooge’s allegedly underpaid clerk, Bob Cratchit. The fact is, if Cratchit’s skills were worth more to anyone than the fifteen shillings Scrooge pays him weekly, there would be someone glad to offer it to him. Since no one has, and since Cratchit’s profit-maximizing boss is hardly a man to pay for nothing, Cratchit must be worth exactly his present wages.”
Because apparently, Cratchit deserves exactly what he’s getting which runs on the notion that there are apparently infinite jobs out there in all possible permutations, so no one would be dissatisfied with their job. Nobody ever ends up working at a terrible job just to make ends meet while looking for something better, nobody is forced into accepting a lower wage because its still the best of all the shitty, shitty options on display and so forth.
“No doubt Cratchit needs—i.e., wants—more, to support his family and care for Tiny Tim. But Scrooge did not force Cratchit to father children he is having difficulty supporting. If Cratchit had children while suspecting he would be unable to afford them, he, not Scrooge, is responsible for their plight. And if Cratchit didn’t know how expensive they would be, why must Scrooge assume the burden of Cratchit’s misjudgment?”
Because clearly a man who lives in the 19th century that loves his wife should’ve had safer sex or hired someone to kick her in the stomach while pregnant and “decrease the surplus population” as it were. Because apparently employers shouldn’t have to pay for someone’s family to even EXIST. What next? The employer only allows exactly 2 children for each employee and lets market factors only decide which come on top?
“As for that one lump of coal Scrooge allows him, it bears emphasis that Cratchit has not been chained to his chilly desk. If he stays there, he shows by his behavior that he prefers his present wages-plus-comfort package to any other he has found, or supposes himself likely to find. Actions speak louder than grumbling, and the reader can hardly complain about what Cratchit evidently finds satisfactory.”
Because again, Libertarianism means that people would never be miserable for a job they have to endure for a pittance. Because apparently suffering in the cold counts as a “comfort package” now. It’s like saying you get a working lunch and then told you’re not allowed to actually eat at work. Or a “Safety Package” that doesn’t actually include turning off a trash compacter before being yelled at to go inside and unjam it.
Is this article pretty on point for what Libertarianism believes? Cause if so, this has got to be one of the most sadistic, uncaring and purposefully delusional mindsets I’ve ever seen.
Article from r/Libertarian: For a Free Society