Do deontological libertarians in your view make some mistake other than just not accepting consequentialism? Are there unique or specific problems with accepting a deontological version of libertarianism?
I think the basic mistake is rejecting consequentialism--most of the problems facing deontological libertarianism are problems that all deontological views have.
You can defend libertarianism on consequentialist grounds? How ever? The consequentialists take on the minimum wage is to keep raising it in small steps and measure unemployment after every step.
There is quite the tradition in modern moral philosophy of rejecting or at least substantially revising consequentialism, so much so that I don't think it's reasonable to found one's political views on such a moral framework and in any event it is not necessary, as libertarians like Nozick demonstrate.
No, we are just consequentalists instead of deontological. We think it can be empirically demonstrated if people want to offer a shitty job, and not allowed, usually they still want the job done and can come up with a better offer. This is purely empirical. Of course it will put an upward pressure on unemployment but you can just do it in small steps and measure the results.
A consequentialist might endorse using EITC to make shitty jobs less shitty. But "If we’re going to transfer income to low-wage workers, it’s both fundamentally unfair and politically unwise to put the entire burden of that transfer on a relatively small segment of the population (namely the owners and customers of businesses that employ a lot of low-wage workers). The right thing, given that we’re going to make this transfer, is to fund it as broadly as possible — say through an increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit, which comes out of general tax revenues." https://www.thebigquestions.com/2013/02/18/thoughts-on-the-minimum-wage/ You have to believe in something like the Copenhagen interpretation to believe that the burden should be focused on those employers & customers.
Your definition (?) seems wrong to me, since any right sensu stricto will come with a corresponding duty (or duties), yet there are many possible configurations of duties and rights which nobody would identify as "libertarian."
Do deontological libertarians in your view make some mistake other than just not accepting consequentialism? Are there unique or specific problems with accepting a deontological version of libertarianism?
I think the basic mistake is rejecting consequentialism--most of the problems facing deontological libertarianism are problems that all deontological views have.
You can defend libertarianism on consequentialist grounds? How ever? The consequentialists take on the minimum wage is to keep raising it in small steps and measure unemployment after every step.
There is quite the tradition in modern moral philosophy of rejecting or at least substantially revising consequentialism, so much so that I don't think it's reasonable to found one's political views on such a moral framework and in any event it is not necessary, as libertarians like Nozick demonstrate.
Non-libertarians often seem to have a "Copenhagen" interpretation of ethics:
https://entitledtoanopinion.wordpress.com/2015/07/17/you-said-it-better-than-my-years-of-attempts/
By having an interaction (such as offering any kind of job), you thereby acquire the blame for their pre-existing poor prospects.
No, we are just consequentalists instead of deontological. We think it can be empirically demonstrated if people want to offer a shitty job, and not allowed, usually they still want the job done and can come up with a better offer. This is purely empirical. Of course it will put an upward pressure on unemployment but you can just do it in small steps and measure the results.
A consequentialist might endorse using EITC to make shitty jobs less shitty. But "If we’re going to transfer income to low-wage workers, it’s both fundamentally unfair and politically unwise to put the entire burden of that transfer on a relatively small segment of the population (namely the owners and customers of businesses that employ a lot of low-wage workers). The right thing, given that we’re going to make this transfer, is to fund it as broadly as possible — say through an increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit, which comes out of general tax revenues." https://www.thebigquestions.com/2013/02/18/thoughts-on-the-minimum-wage/ You have to believe in something like the Copenhagen interpretation to believe that the burden should be focused on those employers & customers.
Your definition (?) seems wrong to me, since any right sensu stricto will come with a corresponding duty (or duties), yet there are many possible configurations of duties and rights which nobody would identify as "libertarian."