Why Should We Care About Property Rights?

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > Why Should We Care About Property Rights?

«‹›5 »

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Literally The Worst posted:

THE FIRST RUNG IS MINIMUM WAGE YOU COCKSUCKER gently caress YOU

MAKING MINIMUM WAGE HIGHER DOES NOT ELIMINATE THOSE JOBS YOU STUPID MOTHERFUCKER

Jesus Christ I want to hold you down and piss in your mouth and as I anoint you with my pungent stream I will softly whisper "gold standard bitch"

# ¿ Feb 16, 2016 06:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 18:23

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

jrodefeld posted:

I have to single out this post because of how un-self aware it is. Are you aware that for a good portion of the twentieth century, "fashionable" academic and intellectual classes spoke openly in favor of Socialism (and I don't mean Sweden)? During the "Progressive Era" State Socialism, command and control economies and extreme central planning were considered not only a respectable view, but an incredible breakthrough for human understanding? Professional Leftists fell all over themselves to praise Marx and classical liberalism fell severely out of fashion.

"Wage and Price Controls can work!", "The Bretton Woods Agreement will hold!", etc.

Just as the Left saw socialism as a brave new insight for humanity, the Right who were really more proto-fascists and militarists drummed up all this fear about Communism taking over the world, so much so that we have to constantly build up our military and create a worldwide empire in order to prevent the Communists from taking over the planet.

It was only the libertarians, remnants from the classical liberal tradition, who correctly observed the flaws in Socialist central planning and said that the Soviet Union was no threat. They would collapse because their system is non-viable.

In 1989, the Soviet Union collapsed and libertarians were vindicated. Actual Marxists and radical socialists became discredited among the mainstream, as people generally understood that their views had been discredited. And proponents of the free market did a victory lap of sorts. Bill Clinton claimed "The Era of Big Government is Over" and everyone at least tacitly acknowledged the superiority of the free economy over central planning.

This was the big question of the 20th century and the libertarians decisively won it, and you accuse us of being on the wrong side of history? I've already established that countries that have greater economic liberty tend to be more prosperous, with longer life expectancies, a larger middle class and higher living standards all around. Hong Kong, Singapore, and New Zealand are three examples of nations that tend to adhere closer to economic liberty than other nations and they are among the most prosperous.

Here is the new top 10 from the Heritage Institute. No UAE or Qatar in the top 10 so maybe you'll look at the substance of the ranking this time.

1. Hong Kong

2. Singapore

3. New Zealand

4. Switzerland

5. Australia

6. Canada

7. Chile

8. Ireland

9. Estonia

10. United Kingdom

So, according to people who have studied the issue, the nations which adhere closest to the libertarian ideal of economic liberty are also the most prosperous. Explain again how there is zero evidence of libertarian ideas leading to better outcomes? Yes, I recognize these countries are not perfectly libertarian, many have social welfare states of one form or another, but they are MORE libertarian than the others. As I've explained previously, the extent of economic liberty is what generates the prosperity that generates high living standards and allows the poor to be taken care of.

You haven't explained poo poo rear end in a top hat, you've just said it over and over again like it was a self evident truth

# ¿ Feb 16, 2016 06:58

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

I don't know why you people are acting iike that rear end in a top hat is gone forever and not just until he feels like proselytizing again

# ¿ Feb 16, 2016 11:47

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Caros posted:

Jokes aside, it is kind of eerie that jrodefeld's registration date was my wedding day. Never noticed that before today.

the lolbert is coming from inside the house

run

# ¿ Feb 16, 2016 17:19

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

McDonald's has had machines that fill drinks to the appropriate level at the push of a button for years they're not about to go to an all robot staff

# ¿ Feb 18, 2016 22:03

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Caros posted:

I don't even know what that is.

A goon who makes great videos mocking Dork Enlightenment types. Look up A Measured Response to the Sarkeesian Effect on YouTube

# ¿ Feb 18, 2016 22:04

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

ToxicSlurpee posted:

They'll do it within hours of it becoming cheaper and more efficient than human employees.

And that's a thing that will happen soon (it's not)

# ¿ Feb 18, 2016 22:07

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Grand Theft Autobot posted:

I want to, but I'm crazy busy this Sunday.

same, got work then dogs then wrasslin

next sunday on the other hand

# ¿ Feb 19, 2016 03:58

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

paragon1 posted:

I've still got to get out the one where me and dickeye talked about comics for four hours, but I had an idea for one in the hopefully near future, depending on how work goes. In March at the latest.

It'd basically be a Show and Tell where everyone participating visits some lovely libertarian corner of the internet and shares their "favorite" content from it. Your Mises.coms, LewRockwell.coms, basically anything Jrod and people like him are likely to link to when making an internet argument.

Or we could do some live exploration of a couple particular places, as one of the statist sheeple, I'm open to suggestions.

i like the idea of doing a livestream of us exploring bad poo poo, the best parts of the first two were people looking up weird poo poo and reading it as it became relevant

dog dick coffee table dot com

# ¿ Feb 19, 2016 03:59

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

paragon1 posted:

Gay sex mostly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZvUMmDF0I4

Also talking, but mostly gay sex

very communist

this is the one where i show up halfway in and forget to turn my mic on

the other one is the one with dog dick coffee table dot com

# ¿ Feb 19, 2016 04:24

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

paragon1 posted:

dog dick coffee table dot com is everywhere, if you believe hard enough

i think you'll find that dog dick coffee table dot com was inside you, all along

# ¿ Feb 19, 2016 04:32

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Hbomberguy posted:

Dickeye did you ever do anything with the podcast I mixed and mastered for you?

E:

Something libertarians love to do, and I know this because I get dozens and dozens of comments from them on my videos, is break down a counter-argument into composite parts so thoroughly that they no longer have to engage with the argument, and can simply shoot down individual phrases, but sometimes just individual words, and sometimes even jokes that didn't have any relevance to the point being made.

I think that process is key to libertarian thinking. It's an allusion to 'objectivity' (coughs sarcastically) in some abstractly pseudoscientific sense, where you're breaking things down into composite parts and rebutting them piece-by-piece, but in doing this you actually lose the essence of the argument. This gets more glaring when you notice that certain topics get brushed off in single sentences. In their second post Rode just writes 'communism is a disaster and everyone knows this' and moves on to the next thing.

So libertarian thinking consists of filibustering opposing points of view into oblivion by offering more and more quibbles without actually engaging with the point, combined with very specific assertions about what makes society good, which change and shift in accordance to new evidence and are usually unfalsifiable - society gets better when things are laissez-faire, oops, turns out I accidentally supported slavery there, erm, slavery doesn't count! - backed up with common knowledge - 'because if you're smart, like I'm sure I am, you already know X and I don't have to prove it or think about it more than this'.

Nope because I am a horrible human being who hates his own projects too much.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2016 15:17

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Halloween Jack posted:

In an interview, Alan Moore said (paraphrased) "I never expected that people would see a smelly, outcast paranoiac who's terrified of women as the hero of the story. But I forgot about, y'know, average comic book nerd."

rorschach is also a longform burn on Steve Ditko being a fuckin nutjob objectivist

i don't like watchmen much, but i appreciate that

# ¿ Feb 20, 2016 19:13

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Bryter posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD7EKZ32ODQ

steve ditko famously had a meltdown over a letter stan lee wrote, trying to patch up the bad blood between them over creatorship of spider-man, saying "i consider steve ditko to be the creator of spider-man", because consider means it's an opinion and not a fact

that was the point where, by all accounts including his own, stan just went "yeah i'm uh, i'm done here"

# ¿ Feb 21, 2016 15:43

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 18:23

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

i never got my fight, and that's a shame

# ¿ Feb 21, 2016 15:44

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > Why Should We Care About Property Rights?

«‹›5 »