|
CountFosco posted:This is the best thing I've read all day. libertarianism is merely the prime directive applied within a society
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
This looks like an especially unfortunate and dangerous situation for
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
Hey thread, it's been a while. Let's check in with the usual suspects! mises.org!
Lew Rockwell!  Okay, Rockwell has gone full prepper clickbait. That's not really surprising though. Stefan Molyneaux! https://twitter.com/4lternate_facts/status/978760638003544064 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
was reading the GBS thread about the water slide decapitation case: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3852519 Apparently the slide was designed and built by two business guys with no engineering or ride-designing experience, and when they hired an actual engineering firm to make some measurements they simply ignored the data. And eventually they started testing at night only so that no one would see their test dummies getting loving launched out of this thing and getting destroyed by the rigid metal bars in the launch path. And they had to build it in Kansas because that was the only state that would let them. Other states required too much oversight or regulation or a minimum level of technical expertise greater than "none at all" It's quintessentially libertarian in so many ways, complete with evidence destruction, paying off witnesses, hiring dudes to intimidate witnesses, and one of them was even bragging about how they're going to build an even bigger and more dangerous version while standing next to a guy who had all of his toes broken and mangled by the ride
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:Lew Rockwell! I love that one is just AAAAH SPIDERS 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
I have to agree. Ann Coulter gives me chills. Seriously though, it is interesting, in a sort of :holyfuck: sort of way to have watched this fucker's evolution from being a bit of a fringe ancap wackjob with really dumb ideas to a full on right wing mouthpiece who quotes Ann Coulter as some sort of peer. It really is frightening to watch a human being slough off what little remains of their morality and openly embrace racist, bigotry and misogyny, even if I'm fairly sure he privately held those beliefs to begin with. I wonder how much of it is money, and how much is just the fact that he's glad he can openly express his hate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 08:11
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:Hey thread, it's been a while. Let's check in with the usual suspects! Yes, misesorg, that's how this works. A unilateral departure will always, and justifiably, lead to armed conflict, because there's a lot of things that need to be dealt with first. Sovereign debt; government property; what to do with the people who want to stay with the old country; etc etc etc. There's a reason why successful splits either take many years of careful negotiation, or are the result of catastrophic failure (like the USSR); and even then, there's still often conflict (like South Sudan). When I brought this up when I was trolling their comments, they said "so a battered wife should wait to negotiate who owns the house, instead of just leaving," because they are incapable of comprehending that things can be Different and not everything can be immediately compared to a family. No, libertarian, a government taking on debt is *not* the same as you taking on debt to build an addition to your house.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
Golbez posted:When I brought this up when I was trolling their comments, they said "so a battered wife should wait to negotiate who owns the house, instead of just leaving," When you're so individualist you personify collective identities.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 15:27
|
|
|
Polygynous posted:I love that one is just AAAAH SPIDERS There was a study a while back that showed that fear responses make people more conservative politically, and iirc they literally used pictures of spiders as an apolitical stimulus. I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if he saw that and decided to embrace it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
Golbez posted:When I brought this up when I was trolling their comments, they said "so a battered wife should wait to negotiate who owns the house, instead of just leaving," because they are incapable of comprehending that things can be Different and not everything can be immediately compared to a family. No, libertarian, a government taking on debt is *not* the same as you taking on debt to build an addition to your house.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
There's also the issue that any political situation bad enough to be the "battered wife" in the metaphor is pretty much guaranteed to be armed conflict already. They just think having to pay taxes counts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:
Also answers the question of "do they understand reality" but in the normal way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:There's also the issue that any political situation bad enough to be the "battered wife" in the metaphor is pretty much guaranteed to be armed conflict already. They just think having to pay taxes counts. In this case the battered wife left her husband because he was becoming increasingly disappointed that she owned slaves. Oh and she spent some time and effort being gifted an army and supplies for her split.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Golbez posted:Yes, misesorg, that's how this works. A unilateral departure will always, and justifiably, lead to armed conflict, because there's a lot of things that need to be dealt with first. Sovereign debt; government property; what to do with the people who want to stay with the old country; etc etc etc. There's a reason why successful splits either take many years of careful negotiation, or are the result of catastrophic failure (like the USSR); and even then, there's still often conflict (like South Sudan). This is especially relevant today with regards to Catalonia and other European regions. Questions of succession are always national questions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
during my last days at econ uni I pretty much spent most of my time telling people why mises.org was dumb and bad but the truly disgraceful thing were the colleagues who should know better since we had a full set of disciplines on scientific methodology, statistics and probability, history of economic thought and so much more gobbling down the crap and going "enough of marx, more of mises" and complaining about ideology in the course of course, there is no lmao big enough for that, but in the end those things (and more) aggrieved me so much that I ended up quitting
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 15:14
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:Well, yes? They should absolutely physically remove themselves right away but it's likely there will be protracted divorce negotations (even if those will occur at a later date and when there are cops around and so on and so forth) and a loving certainty if there's a child, who in this analogy is any citizen of the breakaway state that didn't get a choice in the matter, right? That's what I said - that eventually there will be a reckoning. They just thought I was saying CATALONIA CAN NEVER LEAVE BECAUSE SPAIN WILL KILL THEM. No, I was saying that force is not only a predictable response to a unilateral departure, but often a justifiable one. Also, a country is not a battered spouse, and its citizens are not minor children. Nor is taking a loan out to rebuild a kitchen the same as a government gathering sovereign debt. But hardcore libertarians are incapable of comprehending situations that can't be immediately boiled down to, or analogized to, individual interactions. It's just part of the philosophy - there is no society, there is no Group, there is only individuals. When I tried pointing out that, to them, they should be condemning Catalonia for speaking for its citizens that don't want to leave just as strong as they're condemning Spain, it not surprisingly got much less response. There's a party line, after all - secession good, no matter what, in all cases. Especially if that case is contrary to the interests of the American government.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
Golbez posted:Yes, misesorg, that's how this works. A unilateral departure will always, and justifiably, lead to armed conflict, because there's a lot of things that need to be dealt with first. Sovereign debt; government property; what to do with the people who want to stay with the old country; etc etc etc. There's a reason why successful splits either take many years of careful negotiation, or are the result of catastrophic failure (like the USSR); and even then, there's still often conflict (like South Sudan). Are you suggesting that the landmass of Texas cannot simply detach and float across the ocean to get away from all the commiemericans? This is violence against the borders of my fantasy and I must retaliate ETA: we will grow the binary secession tree until every single person, and then their organs, and then their sovereign cells have their membranes recognized! Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 10:52 on Apr 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2018 10:48
|
|
|
Truga posted:i'm not really sure what thread to post this in since i think it's extremely good, but since it's desert island economics, it's kinda like doomsday economics so
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:
The entire time I was reading this I knew it was coming and goddamn if it didn't deliver.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
I think there's a good av to be made out of Ayn Rand's face after Marx yells COMMUNIST REVOLUTION. Maybe a gif flipping between the two of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 04:34
|
|
|
I've had to explain Libertarians to a coworker and now I feel like doing a reread of this whole thread again please talk me out of it
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
Just tell your coworker to google jrodefeld, he's still out there evangelizing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
theshim posted:I've had to explain Libertarians to a coworker and now I feel like doing a reread of this whole thread again Slavery is freedom. Meant literally. Do you really need to reread the thread?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 11:28
|
|
|
theshim posted:I've had to explain Libertarians to a coworker and now I feel like doing a reread of this whole thread again Important question: are you at least as handsome as Prince Harry?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Important question: are you at least as handsome as Prince Harry? While I'm sure that His Highness's bride-to-soon-be would disagree, that's not setting the bar terribly high.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
It's weird to me that Americans fancy royals. They aren't exactly winning the genetic lottery. Especially not harry he's a big ginge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:While I'm sure that His Highness's bride-to-soon-be would disagree, that's not setting the bar terribly high. OwlFancier posted:It's weird to me that Americans fancy royals. They aren't exactly winning the genetic lottery. Smh that people have forgotten that bit of Jrod lore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
Oh no I remember him claiming to be like prince harry I just don't get why you'd suggest that as your apogee of sex appeal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Oh no I remember him claiming to be like prince harry I just don't get why you'd suggest that as your apogee of sex appeal. If we knew the answer for why libertarians were so dumb, this thread would be a lot shorter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
Maybe it's the lizard genes making him appealing to feudalists iunno.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Smh that people have forgotten that bit of Jrod lore. My memory is so bad that I forgot what "smh" stands for; how the chuffing hell do you expect me to remember something from that far back amongst all of the other bullshit that jrod spewed? My head is entirely full of French swear words, pop songs from the 80s and Marxist slogans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Okay, so now I'm curious....IS there a difference between personal property and private property? Or is thatsthejoke.gif?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Okay, so now I'm curious....IS there a difference between personal property and private property? Or is thatsthejoke.gif? Yes, personal property is stuff that's yours personally, so, like, the clothes on your back, your home, things of sentimental value, personal effects, things that you can stake a claim to because they're important to you, personally. Private property is property that you own which is mostly yours so that you can extract wealth from other people by that claim of ownership. So, your second house, your fishing and logging rights, your means of production, that sort of thing. Strictly the brandy is probably not quite personal property because it has significant trade value but as long as Marx is not using it for that purpose it kind of works. It's an important distinction because it affects what Marxists will object to you holding. They aren't going to nationalize your spunk rag, but they're going to come for your land claims and your industries. Probably not your own home though, Marxists are generally fine with people having rights over their own place of residence, it's when they start claiming rights over other people's place of residence that they get bolshy. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Apr 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Okay, so now I'm curious....IS there a difference between personal property and private property? Or is thatsthejoke.gif? Under communism the bottle of brandy would be personal property while the factory that produces brandy would be public. Marx never advocated "nobody owns anything so people can just take what they want from you." A hell of a lot of people deliberately spread misinformation about just what Marx was going after in the first place. What Rand and Rothbard are doing there is classic rent-seeking behavior which is what Marx primarily was speaking out against. They're saying "we own the means by which you would earn your survival so you must produce for us while we do nothing." It's the most common argument against capitalism and why owning the means of production publicly is a cornerstone of communist thought. It's not saying "you can't own a bottle of brandy" it's saying "you can't force people to make brandy for the profit of a business owner who doesn't actually do anything to make brandy." Under communism a brandy factory exists to produce brandy because, hey, some people like brandy so let's make some. Under capitalism it exists purely to extract profit based on the fact that people like brandy. The brandy is secondary; the profit motive is primary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Okay, so now I'm curious....IS there a difference between personal property and private property? Or is thatsthejoke.gif? This is an artifact of English moving on from the mid 1800s. They used to mean different things in common use, now they only have different meanings in archaic economic writings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
If you want to get tinfoil hatty you can argue that the fact that nobody realizes the distinction between the two is an excellent conceptual defence for capitalism. It is much harder to get people to attack the concept of private property if they may have no distinction of personal property as a separate idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Under communism the bottle of brandy would be personal property while the factory that produces brandy would be public. Marx never advocated "nobody owns anything so people can just take what they want from you." A hell of a lot of people deliberately spread misinformation about just what Marx was going after in the first place. This is an excellent explanation, thank you!
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
Communal toothbrush jokes will never get old either
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
Come nationalize THIS DICK hell yeah!! The best part about the distinction is that it allows for control over one's life (which I think is valuable) without allowing that control to implicitly affect other's ability to have security. I can have a toothbrush, but everyone is able to access the toothbrush factory. It's a really smart distinction, and I wish people could conceptualize the idea outside of the red scare.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Yes, personal property is stuff that's yours personally, so, like, the clothes on your back, your home, things of sentimental value, personal effects, things that you can stake a claim to because they're important to you, personally. ToxicSlurpee posted:Under communism the bottle of brandy would be personal property while the factory that produces brandy would be public. Marx never advocated "nobody owns anything so people can just take what they want from you." A hell of a lot of people deliberately spread misinformation about just what Marx was going after in the first place. Ah, very interesting. Thanks. I really should read Marx one of these days.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 04:42
|
|