|
KozmoNaut posted:In my experience, a lot of libertarians believe that enforcing contracts between private individuals should be the only function of the government. Do they ever explain where this limited contract-enforcing-only government should get its money? Are taxes no longer theft in this particular case, and if so, what kind of taxes? Or is the government funded solely by voluntary donations, which totally won't make them biased to always decide in favor of the deep corporate pockets funding them? NGDBSS posted:He's a closet reactionary who hides his abhorrent views on topics like eugenics, race science, etc. behind verbal diarrhea. He's also part of Eliezer Yudkowsky's "rationalist" cult of personality/AI grift. I recommend this episode of I Don't Speak German and its links for more detail. He also had a big post in 2018 about how Trump isn't racist and is actually pro-gay rights and everyone saying otherwise is the irrational tribalist liberal mindvirus.
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 00:56 |
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Do they ever explain where this limited contract-enforcing-only government should get its money? No, of course not 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 07:53
|
|
|
It really is just an absurdly childish worldview. Even by the standards of allowed Western politics that takes capitalism as the laws of physics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 08:08
|
|
|
I think the best description of them I've ever heard (and if anybody knows where this is from, I'd love if you'd drop a response and tell me)quote:Libertarians think they're lions, but really they're more like housecats VitalSigns posted:the ideology creates bear utopias? wtf I'm a libertarian now libearterian, ftfy Expo70 fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 08:12
|
|
|
The right to arm bears.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 12:22
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Do they ever explain where this limited contract-enforcing-only government should get its money? Are taxes no longer theft in this particular case, and if so, what kind of taxes? Von Mises suggested the "neutral tax", would be okay. Come up with a tax that affects people's economic decisions as little as possible. This is because Von Mises' libertarian argument was a utilitarian one: government intervention is bad because it interferes with people's free choices, because people know the circumstances of their lives and what will make them happy better than bureaucrats, the best of all possible worlds is when no one's choices are coerced. For him morality was just a convention to promote better social cooperation, he wasn't a 'taxation is theft' guy. Ayn Rand suggested a user fee. Since the government is providing the service of enforcing contracts, it should charge a fee, say 1% of the value of any contract. Paying it is totally optional, but if you don't pay it your contract doesn't get enforced. Decide you don't want to pay the VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 22:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jdcmedlock/status/1668450405263757314?t=B8IfeUdxQCuOyuB7RQtFtA&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Von Mises suggested the "neutral tax", would be okay. A tax on enlightened centrism? Finally a libertarian proposal I can get behind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 23:29
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:https://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Walks-Into-Bear-Liberate-ebook/dp/B083J1FXY8 Libertarians destroying themselves is catnip to me. https://web.archive.org/web/20230412144838/https://www.texasobserver.org/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-freest-little-city-in-texas/
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Depends what kind of libertarian you're taking about. And did he, pray tell, have any ideas on how such a "neutral tax" might work? Or is this yet another economics equivalent of a perfectly spherical frictionless cow of uniform density?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 01:13
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Ayn Rand suggested a user fee. Why doesn't the world read Donald Duck, but Ayn Rand Paul instead    
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 01:22
|
|
|
uber_stoat posted:Libertarians destroying themselves is catnip to me. Pro click, do not skip.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 01:25
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:And did he, pray tell, have any ideas on how such a "neutral tax" might work? Or is this yet another economics equivalent of a perfectly spherical frictionless cow of uniform density?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 06:03
|
|
|
uber_stoat posted:Libertarians destroying themselves is catnip to me. Honestly I think the biggest takeaway here is that you can't attract businesses with only low taxes if you are not also offering basic utilities like sewage, which takes money you don't have without taxes. Or to put it simpler, the services provided by the government have monetary value that libertarians ignore because they are stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 06:36
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Honestly I think the biggest takeaway here is that you can't attract businesses with only low taxes if you are not also offering basic utilities like sewage, which takes money you don't have without taxes. Or to put it simpler, the services provided by the government have monetary value that libertarians ignore because they are stupid. Not understanding what infrastructure actually is or means, let alone its importance to any kind of advanced enterprise or civilization in general, isn't exactly unique to libertarians, mind. Libertarians are just what happens when you take modern American civic religion seriously without all the unspoken caveats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:The idea that taxes make actions less desirable economically is not exactly controversial in mainstream, non-libertarian economics (hell it is the entire point of some taxes). A practical example is stamp duty disincentivising mutually beneficial property transactions (compared to something like land tax). I'm not saying that he's wrong about that part. I'm wondering if he thought up a type of tax that wouldn't affect someone's economic decisions and actions and still fund even a monarchist government, or if he just claimed that a hypothetical neutral tax would be the best kind of tax but conveniently forgot to specify exactly what kind of tax would accomplish that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 07:05
|
|
|
Knowing he's a libertarian, the neutral tax would probably be a flat dollar amount taken equally from all citizens. It's the same no matter what you do, therefore it doesn't affect your decisions at all! Perfectly neutral!
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 07:53
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:I'm not saying that he's wrong about that part. I'm wondering if he thought up a type of tax that wouldn't affect someone's economic decisions and actions and still fund even a monarchist government, or if he just claimed that a hypothetical neutral tax would be the best kind of tax but conveniently forgot to specify exactly what kind of tax would accomplish that. It's been a while since I read any Von Mises, but I believe he doesn't actually literally advocate for a truly neutral tax system. He argues for the absolute minimum tax possible to effectively fund the basic services of the federal government (government should take it exactly as much as it spends and never more in a perfect scenario). He says that those minimal taxes should be levied in such a way that they encourage investment and positive economic outcomes. I don't remember if he goes into too much specifics about what his ideal form of taxation is, but most of his work is about what not to do. He definitely argues that things like payroll taxes, income taxes, and taxes on investments are the worst kinds because they punish people for working, employing others, and investing - which are the actions that generate the largest amount of economic improvement for society at large and should not be discouraged or penalized.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 14:07
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:https://twitter.com/jdcmedlock/status/1668450405263757314?t=B8IfeUdxQCuOyuB7RQtFtA&s=19 https://twitter.com/jdcmedlock/status/1668452358618255366
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 14:25
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:And did he, pray tell, have any ideas on how such a "neutral tax" might work? Or is this yet another economics equivalent of a perfectly spherical frictionless cow of uniform density? My heart tells me your guess is correct but I'm not going to read enough von Mises to find out. Lottery of Babylon posted:Knowing he's a libertarian, the neutral tax would probably be a flat dollar amount taken equally from all citizens. It's the same no matter what you do, therefore it doesn't affect your decisions at all! Perfectly neutral! He actually specifically raised this as a flawed idea because it restricts the consumption of the poor more than the rich. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Jun 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2023 16:54
|
|
|
While more of a republican thing, this does make me seriously question the solidarity of libertarians. Slacktavists come in all stripes of course but for all the tough talk on Twitter Libertarians more than many other groups rarely back it up. https://twitter.com/TheRabbitHole84/status/1669334385907351553?t=qKk3boCaeb3PniJGPWy4fQ&s=19 It reminded me of a few other things-why weren't libertarians flocking to CHAZ and the autonomous zone occupying Cop City? If they think taxation is theft you'd think they'd jump at the chance to put it into practice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2023 14:49
|
|
|
I feel like libertarians probably love cops? Don't they believe that using force to protect private property is like the only acceptable function of government? Better to build Cop City in every city than to spend even a single cent on food stamps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 11:11
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I feel like libertarians probably love cops? Don't they believe that using force to protect private property is like the only acceptable function of government? Better to build Cop City in every city than to spend even a single cent on food stamps. I think the currently most common branch of libertarianism loves cops, especially in the US. There are variants that don't, but they are even more insignificant. And of course many will argue that the only thing that makes cops bad is the democratic oversight they are still getting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 11:29
|
|
|
It wasn't too long ago that the main legitimate points made by libertarians was opposing the rise of the warrior cop. I guess the Mises caucus don't really care about that though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 12:11
|
|
|
But cops are the ones that tell you to wear ze mask, eat ze bugs, and live in ze pod! How could they love that? Cops make up the biggest bureaucracy in a city as well, if you want to look at raw numbers then look right there. "We're paying $2 billion/year for cops in LA and it's still a crime infested hellhole with all those cops!" feels like it could be a pretty bipartisan argument.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
The majority of politicians and a sizeable portion of their base understand that the cops are mostly there to terrorize the right kind of people, and will accept a small amount of terrorizing the wrong kind of people in exchange.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
If they didn't, then BLM pointed it out to them. I think that's why a bunch of people who were worried about warrior cops persecuting them for drunk driving in 2012 (vote Ron Paul) suddenly lost interest when it became tied up with a race issue. Also weed legalization across a lot of the west took away one of the main fears that libertarian leaning middle class white dudes had of the police.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2023 16:31
|
|
|
Librarians don't like cops, ask the sov cits. Librarians love cops, ask them to freeze in the name of PepsiCo In short, libertarians are not consistent in their beliefs or even across libertarians
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2023 13:58
|
|
|
Past due book notices are serious, they’re basically contracts that should be enforced to the fullest extent of the law
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2023 15:08
|
|
|
Gotta remember, the whole of American libertarian thought revolves around property law being sacrosanct, and cops are the primary enforcers of that, so of course they use boot polish for lipstick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 01:57
|
|
|
They hate marxism more than they love freedom https://twitter.com/TRHLofficial/status/1671292338231017474?t=EYGLK8Q_U_iKdOLmEzxCeA&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
There are no Libertarians in uncertified unregulated submersibles trapped at the bottom of the ocean https://twitter.com/evefairbanks/status/1671503279333810177
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
I don't remember any of that in the communist manifesto, mostly just a general exposition of capitalism being bad and unstable and the inherent conflict within it between proletarians and bourgeoisie. Also the bit at the end where he takes highly specific shots at a bunch of long defunct left wing groups of his era because he was a lefty and therefore took greatest pleasure in destroying his posting enemies. It's not a long book so you would think someone would read it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
I refuse to believe that any of these people have ever actually read Ayn Rand's long rear end soliloquies when they keep going on about fairly short books like The Communist Manifesto and 1984 despite obviously having read neither. Unless they read Atlas Shrugged as a child and it had an anaphylactic effect on reading anything longer than a tweet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:
When I first read the tweet I was thinking of Capital and I thought "well this sounds made up but I would never be able to prove it because I aint reading all that to find out", but yeah lol the manifesto is short it really shows the contempt they have for their audience when they make poo poo up about a pamphlet written for barely literate 19th century factory workers to understand
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
It's been a while but doesn't he argue that it's capitalism destroying religion in the manifesto?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
Yes, he argues that it's capitalism destroying and destabilizing all of those things she mentions.Marx posted:In the condition of the proletariat, those of old society at large are already virtually swamped. The proletarian is without property; his relation to his wife and children has no longer anything in common with the bourgeois family relations; modern industry labour, modern subjection to capital, the same in England as in France, in America as in Germany, has stripped him of every trace of national character. Law, morality, religion, are to him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 21:11
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It's been a while but doesn't he argue that it's capitalism destroying religion in the manifesto? Yeah I think there's a part in there about capitalism tearing apart pre-existing communities and social relationships and turning people into atomized individuals interacting with the market. So they might have read it and critically misunderstood it. Some people have shockingly poor reading comprehension. I remember meeting this one guy, he was telling me how he'd just turned in a paper analyzing the communist manifesto for some undergrad class and he was like "yeah it's a really messed up book, Karl Marx says he wants everyone to be poor and miserable", I started to say something but then I decided nah, this isn't the time to tell the guy he missed the point and is probably getting an F if the teacher is halfway competent. But it is Texas so maybe his teacher taught it that way for all I know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:When I first read the tweet I was thinking of Capital and I thought "well this sounds made up but I would never be able to prove it because I aint reading all that to find out", but yeah lol the manifesto is short it really shows the contempt they have for their audience when they make poo poo up about a pamphlet written for barely literate 19th century factory workers to understand I couldn't remember how short exactly so I just the Penguin Classics edition I have from the shelf. Once you ignore the 190(!) pages of introduction giving historical written by someone else, and the 8 prefaces of various translations, it's 40 pages. gently caress me these people have a genuinely impressive lack of intellectual curiosity
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 00:56 |
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I couldn't remember how short exactly so I just the Penguin Classics edition I have from the shelf. Once you ignore the 190(!) pages of introduction giving historical written by someone else, and the 8 prefaces of various translations, it's 40 pages. gently caress me these people have a genuinely impressive lack of intellectual curiosity Plus one chapter you can entirely skip as it's just Marx shittalking other contemporary socialists/socialist parties.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2023 22:26
|
|
