|
Libertarianism is coercive against reality.
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Fortunately, there's at least one politician out there who's sympathetic to such libertarian sympathies generally, and that issue in particular. I believe this one is more applicable to jrod 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:I believe this one is more applicable to jrod Didn't that link to the Glen Beck Land fanfiction thread once upon a time?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Can relationships be free of coercion. My mother gave birth to me, CHOOSING FOR ME the date of my existence. I stand against such aggression. http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199549269.do
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
I hope that author shot himself
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:I hope that author shot himself No: he makes a distinction between lives worth beginning and lives worth continuing and it turns out there are none of the former but a bunch of the latter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:Call up the ISPs and negotiate. Obviously in Libertopia the ISPs will value each individual customer and as long as you are persuasive enough you will have $5 1TB/s down. Or build your own internet with a group of your friends and out compete them! Take that ISPs!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Are you sure he isn't a JRPG villain?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Someone get this man a kitten.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:Call up the ISPs and negotiate. Obviously in Libertopia the ISPs will value each individual customer and as long as you are persuasive enough you will have $5 1TB/s down. And thank Supply-Side Jesus for that! I need that 1TB/s down so I can grab weapons torrents quickly before they're taken down! (although in Libertopia I have no idea why they would get taken down)
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
"Although the good things in one's life make one's life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. However, by coming into existence one does suffer quite serious harms that could not have befallen one had one not come into existence." And yet, on the other hand, "Although the bad things in one's life make one's life go worse than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been delivered by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be delivered. However, by coming into existence one does gain quite tremendous benefits that could not have enriched one had one not come into existence."
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
It is too appropriate to keep reading "Juffo-Wup" in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:And yet, on the other hand, drat it, you beat me to it. Yeah I don't get it. Good things in your life don't count as benefits because if you didn't exist you wouldn't feel deprived at their absence. O...kayyyy. But then why do bad things count when you also wouldn't feel any relief from their absence if you didn't exist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:drat it, you beat me to it. How can the benefit of a thing be "not being deprived of it"? That is the weirdest loving theory of value I've ever encountered. And how does never experiencing anything somehow not qualify as a deprivation? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:It is too appropriate to keep reading "Juffo-Wup" in this thread. I don't see why; the Mycons are a race of naive, child-like fungi who are incapable of comprehending that their simplistic and nonsensical philosophy causes immense harm to others, whereas libertarians on the other hand okay nvm I get it
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Can relationships be free of coercion. My mother gave birth to me, CHOOSING FOR ME the date of my existence. I stand against such aggression. Stefan Molyneux, is that you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
What is the response for corporate profits being at an all time high but not trickling down to employees?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:What is the response for corporate profits being at an all time high but not trickling down to employees? It's the state's fault. Always, for all bad things. In this case, probably the state bailing out bad actors and stopping the wrath of
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Taxes are so high that the state is stealing all of the money that would have trickled down to the workers! Oh wait, corporations are taxed on profit, not income? Hmm. Well I'm sure it's the state's fault anyway
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
If we lived in the CSA, we wouldn't have any of these problems! The greatest tragedy in the last millennia, maybe even in all of history, was the brutal conquest, annexation, and genocide of 85% of the population of the Confederate States of America. Let's all spend a moment, shedding a tear for the once proud nation, that just wanted to own other human beings  .JRod, who should I get into contact with if I want to help resurrect the Confederate States? It can't be too late, surely someone is willing to take up the good fight!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:If we lived in the CSA, we wouldn't have any of these problems! The greatest tragedy in the last millennia, maybe even in all of history, was the brutal conquest, annexation, and genocide of 85% of the population of the Confederate States of America. Let's all spend a moment, shedding a tear for the once proud nation, that just wanted to own other human beings Just ask around the House of Representatives, I think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 03:37
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:The libertarian system means that all initiatory violence is illegal and immoral, so the "rich" will have to earn their wealth and sustain their wealth through voluntary trade. As a rich person, I have tons of money. I've decided to use my money to create a new libertopian society. In my society, everything is awesome, so everyone wants to enter. However, upon becoming a member of this society, you have to sign a contract with me that stipulates the following: 1) You give me half of whatever income you make 2) You may never leave the society As the benevolent and charismatic monarch of this society, I have a bunch of guys who go around and enforce the contracts that people have signed with me, using force if necessary (but it's non-violent force, since they only use force against people who tried to initiate violence against me by breaking their contract). In fact, I even pay a bounty for people who rat out their neighbors. Jrod, am I stealing from anyone? If so, what's different between my society and a state? If not, why do you want to infringe on peoples' freedom to sign contracts with each other and enforce them? QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 04:15 on Nov 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
The takeaway I'm getting from his screeds about contracts and aggression is that all these nut jobs are really mad they didn't emerge from the womb fully formed and able to negotiate their own social contract.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:The takeaway I'm getting from his screeds about contracts and aggression is that all these nut jobs are really mad they didn't emerge from the womb fully formed and able to negotiate their own social contract. China Melville's essay on libertarianism as capitalist inadequacy is essentially spot on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:What is the response for corporate profits being at an all time high but not trickling down to employees? You assume Libertarians would see anything wrong with this. They'd probably give you some rant that the workers were paid the fair value of their labor and blah blah blah tax is theft.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:What is the response for corporate profits being at an all time high but not trickling down to employees? If the discussion of deontology vs. consequentialism earlier didn't clue you in, Libertarians don't care about outcomes. They'll fraudulently try to assert that their ideology leads to better outcomes, but when demonstrated otherwise will calmly explain that suffering and misery aren't as important as their evaluation of a society's morality -- if they don't reject empirical evidence outright.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Heavy neutrino posted:If the discussion of deontology vs. consequentialism earlier didn't clue you in, Libertarians don't care about outcomes. They'll fraudulently try to assert that their ideology leads to better outcomes, but when demonstrated otherwise will calmly explain that suffering and misery aren't as important as their evaluation of a society's morality -- if they don't reject empirical evidence outright. Because Libertarianism is a religion
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Somewhat tangential since Jrodefeld doesn't want to talk about healthcare anymore unless we all agree that he is completely right and has proven unequivocally that the US government caused all price increases in healthcare and that healthcare would be perfectly cheap and available without them, but I got asked through PM why I really care all that much about healthcare in the US seeing as I live in Canada. Besides the obvious, which is that I believe that it would save money and lives for millions of people, I wanted to drop this happy little article: quote:A warm weather holiday has turned into a hot mess for a Saskatchewan couple. The short version is that a couple from my wife's hometown decided to go on vacation and ended up with a $950,000 bill for medical care, even though they believed that they were covered by insurance. It literally came down to a matter of "Well, we found a small discrepancy that technically disqualifies you, and we don't want to pay. So tough poo poo." It actually hasn't been talked about that much in this thread, but I maintain that the worst part of the healthcare industry in the United States, without question, is the insurance industry. They might not be the key drivers of your medical costs, but the very idea that you can go out of your way to buy insurance, and still be told to gently caress right off is just crazy to me. If you want to talk messed up incentives, look no further than the incentive to willingly bankrupt or kill someone by refusing to pay for treatment due to a technicality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
This sort of thing right here is why the Canadians I know are absolutely terrified of getting sick while they're here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 08:35
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:This sort of thing right here is why the Canadians I know are absolutely terrified of getting sick while they're here. No lie, my wife refuses to travel to the US. Flat out refuses to even consider travel there for any reason solely on the grounds of health care. Admittedly that is a tad irrational, but consider how much damage that must due to the US economy, since my wife is not a dumb person or easy to scare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 08:42
|
|
|
Hard to blame her. You can slip on some ice and lose your house.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
Caros posted:Admittedly that is a tad irrational Not really, this country is Thunderdome. Why go if you don't have to?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
Caros posted:It actually hasn't been talked about that much in this thread, but I maintain that the worst part of the healthcare industry in the United States, without question, is the insurance industry. They might not be the key drivers of your medical costs, but the very idea that you can go out of your way to buy insurance, and still be told to gently caress right off is just crazy to me. If you want to talk messed up incentives, look no further than the incentive to willingly bankrupt or kill someone by refusing to pay for treatment due to a technicality. No if you consider this rationally, you'll find that this is actually impossible, because any insurance company who did this would be outcompeted by rivals with better customer service or lose business to a new player entering the market with better policies 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 08:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Not really, this country is Thunderdome. Why go if you don't have to? My boyfriend lived in Kentucky for a few years and swore to never go to the US again. And he goes to China fairly often so...
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
You see if it wasn't for government pumping money into the healthcare market that hospital stay would have cost like $200
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 10:31
|
|
|
What do they think of Reagan, anyway? I would think his whole antigov riff would've played right to them. gently caress it's disgusting how well tge right is able to convince Americans they represent their interests.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 12:04
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:What do they think of Reagan, anyway? I would think his whole antigov riff would've played right to them. From what I remember, a lot of Libertarians actually see through his rhetoric and notice his meddling in other countries and the military-industrial buildup and the War on Drugs. It's like a perfect storm of the couple things they actually get right. Obviously it's going to vary from person to person, given the spectrum of hardcore AnCaps to "basically Republicans."
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:From what I remember, a lot of Libertarians actually see through his rhetoric and notice his meddling in other countries and the military-industrial buildup and the War on Drugs. It's like a perfect storm of the couple things they actually get right. Obviously it's going to vary from person to person, given the spectrum of hardcore AnCaps to "basically Republicans." Somehow he annoys them less than Obama does though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Somehow he annoys them less than Obama does though. Yeah, I wasn't alive when Reagan was in office to compare, so it very well might be a "I never liked Bush anyway" style thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
Curious how a libertarian society would handle immigration, refugees, and so on. Like, say the Texas State of Libertarianism is doing its thing. Then Mexico gets hit with a severe drought, crops are withered, and those without resources to bring in food head north for a time to Texas where there is food. They are willing to work and abide by whatever rules are in place. Would it be aggression to simply use roads and hiking trails through the unforgiving deserts to these lands? Would libertarian villages/communes/cult headquarters have a vacancy sign when space opens up? Would it be lawful for them to camp out on some land where no one is living and start their own socialist paradise? It still seems like you would need a State apparatus to provide some organization for this reality (hence why centralized, strong governments are awesome).
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 05:01
|
|