I think I get libertarian economics now

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Look, monopoly power is what corporations want.
.

totally irrelevent, stupid, Marxist anti business BS since:

1) we have anti trust and both sides agree to it

2) one corporation may want monopoly power but less badly than a competitor needs to resist it in order to survive.

3)the history of business is more that too much power leads to complacency and defeat rather than monopoly. This is taught in MBA schools to future business leaders. Read "Only the Paranoid Survive" if you'd like to reverse your Marxist brainwashing.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Mergers and acquisitions result in more and more monopoly power, and toward the libertarian ideal.

of course that stupid brain dead Marxist ignorance given the we live in globalized world where American business is becoming far less dominant.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Okay, so I've figured out that the ideal libertarian society is made up of two classes: the rich, or the capitalists, and the poor, or proletariat. The capitalists own the state and all property, including the means of production. Their chief goals are to keep their position in society and to expand their personal wealth. They do this by intelligently deploying their human and material capital, cutting their costs to the bare minimum required for maximum efficiency, and investing in the proletariat to the minimum level for them to be useful employees. The proletariat are the workforce of society and use the property of the capitalists throughout their lives in exchange for their wages. Their chief goal is to earn those wages by using the capitalists' means of production to create and sell goods as cheaply as possible. They are also the primary consumers of those goods.

Tldr: The rich own the nation and everything in it. They acquire their wealth by the labor and taxation of the poor. The poor earn wages by working to help the rich become richer and spend those wages on the taxes that the state owned by the rich needs to perform its various functions and the goods and services they produce and need for their daily survival.

The ideal libertarian society is Somalia, but for some reason they aren't rushing over there ...

Just keep in mind the Libertarian Party went bankrupt because they couldn't find a member who could balance a checkbook. That's all you really need to know about the cranks.

Absurd, but taken directly from the statist propaganda machine...and amazingly believed.

What's amazing is how anybody falls for what is just simplistic, pseudo-intellectual, ideological fashion-ware written up to appeal to self-indulgent Burb Brats suffering from affluenza.

To think Somalia is a libertarian paradise, as leftists and statists often proclaim, is to admit not knowing anything about liberatarianism.

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

[

From my viewpoint private monopolies or colluded oligopolies are coercive for practical matters.

total goof Marxists worrying about monopolies when we are now suffering far more from too much international competition than too little. 100% ignorant is the liberal definition!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

We believe in freedom from big liberal govt as did our Founding Fathers

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

We believe in freedom from big liberal govt as did our Founding Fathers

RWNJs love big government. The bigger the better and the more invasive, the better.
RWNJs do NOT believe in individual freedom - at least, not for others.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

We believe in freedom from big liberal govt as did our Founding Fathers

RWNJs love big government. The bigger the better and the more invasive, the better.
RWNJs do NOT believe in individual freedom - at least, not for others.

patriotic conservatives sign The Pledge not to raise taxes and thus make govt bigger while treasonous Democrats are 100% opposed.

 

[dblack]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

 

[Rshermr]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in. So, they are simply spouting theory. In reality, when an attempt has been made to make an economy Libertarian in nature, the action of the populace including libertarians is to revolt.

 

[dblack]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in.

Correct. Libertarians don't dictate a 'socioeconomic system'. That's sort of the point.

 

[flacaltenn]

Okay, so I've figured out that the ideal libertarian society is made up of two classes: the rich, or the capitalists, and the poor, or proletariat. The capitalists own the state and all property, including the means of production. Their chief goals are to keep their position in society and to expand their personal wealth. They do this by intelligently deploying their human and material capital, cutting their costs to the bare minimum required for maximum efficiency, and investing in the proletariat to the minimum level for them to be useful employees. The proletariat are the workforce of society and use the property of the capitalists throughout their lives in exchange for their wages. Their chief goal is to earn those wages by using the capitalists' means of production to create and sell goods as cheaply as possible. They are also the primary consumers of those goods.

Tldr: The rich own the nation and everything in it. They acquire their wealth by the labor and taxation of the poor. The poor earn wages by working to help the rich become richer and spend those wages on the taxes that the state owned by the rich needs to perform its various functions and the goods and services they produce and need for their daily survival.

That's all intellectually accurate but it's SOOOO 19th century..

If you haven't noticed,, the Industrial revolution is ended and the "means of production" are now in the hands in the Poor Prol-s once again. The very meaning of job has also changed. You can compose, publish, sell music from a $300 platform. If you're a techy -- you can make custom products with $2000 3D printer.

It's all a new playing field,. And it's LEVELER than it ever has been in terms of YOU being your own agent. All ya got to do is have discipline, be willing to work several diff job titles, and find a niche market.

SO -- where does leave "libertarian economics" ???????????>

It's MORE important than ever. Because the REALLY good free agents can eventually take down the corporate bullies and the dismantle their stranglehold on markets.. IF --- we just remove the regulations that only the MEGA - Corporations can afford to comply with..

 

[Rshermr]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in.

Correct. Libertarians don't dictate a 'socioeconomic system'. That's sort of the point.

 

[Rshermr]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in.

Correct. Libertarians don't dictate a 'socioeconomic system'. That's sort of the point.

So, the point is to have views of an economic system that has never existed, and never will. Of course the corporate libertarian wants to dictate the system they want to operate in.
Next???

 

[dblack]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in.

Correct. Libertarians don't dictate a 'socioeconomic system'. That's sort of the point.

So, the point is to have views of an economic system that has never existed, and never will. Of course the corporate libertarian wants to dictate the system they want to operate in.
Next???

The 'corporate libertarian'?

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but you're missing the point by presuming some libertarian utopia. We simply want to minimize coercion and violence in society.

 

[Rshermr]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in.

Correct. Libertarians don't dictate a 'socioeconomic system'. That's sort of the point.

So, the point is to have views of an economic system that has never existed, and never will. Of course the corporate libertarian wants to dictate the system they want to operate in.
Next???

The 'corporate libertarian'?

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but you're missing the point by presuming some libertarian utopia. We simply want to minimize coercion and violence in society.

Who is we??
Do you include CATO in that?? No interest in eliminating government involvement?

You know, like no social security, No Medicare. Like no minimum wage.
Is that what you mean by coercion in society??
Are those folks paying millions to build an island and rule it as libertarians not libertarian??
Or are you simply lying. Or completely ignorant??

 

[Rshermr]

What we're seeing today being called "libertarian" has little in common with what Dave Nolan had in mind. Indeed, one of the RWNJs here, who says he's "libertarian", is nothing but a self-described, fat, lazy leech. He has also said he's an "anarchist". Yes, TemplarKormac - I'm talking about you.

So, what do other self-proclaimed libertarians believe?

Do they believe they should support themselves? Make their own way?

Actual libertarians believe government should not be concerned how people support themselves.

Actual libertarians, however, have no Libertarian socioeconomic system to live in.

Correct. Libertarians don't dictate a 'socioeconomic system'. That's sort of the point.

So, the point is to have views of an economic system that has never existed, and never will. Of course the corporate libertarian wants to dictate the system they want to operate in.
Next???

The 'corporate libertarian'?

I'm not sure what you're talking about, but you're missing the point by presuming some libertarian utopia. We simply want to minimize coercion and violence in society.

So, while dblack would have you believe that he, being against coercion in society, is typical of libertarians today. Totally DISHONEST.

CATO, the primary leading LIBERTARIAN THINK TANK, sets the tone for all Libertarians. Consider the Libertarian agenda:

• "Cato leads the push for privatization of government services; as early as 1983, Cato initiated the first push for the privatization of Social Security, and has heavily backed it ever since.
• Cato supports the wholesale elimination of eight cabinet agencies— Commerce, Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, Interior, Transportation and Veterans Affairs— and the privatization of many government services.

Activities

• In 2001, the Washington Post, noting Cato's influence, said it "has spent about $3 million in the past six years to run a virtual war room to promote Social Security privatization."
• Cato sponsors periodic policy forums and book forums, major policy conferences, Cato has held major conferences in London, Moscow, Shanghai, and Mexico City.

History and Background

• Cato Institute was founded by Ed Crane with a $500,000 grant from Charles Koch, a chemical and petroleum heir who was active with Crane in the Libertarian Party.

Corporate sponsors
Cato's corporate sponsors include: Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Bell Atlantic Network Services, BellSouth Corporation, Digital Equipment Corporation, GTE Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, Netscape Communications Corporation, NYNEX Corporation, Sun Microsystems, Viacom International, American Express, Chase Manhattan Bank, Chemical Bank, Citicorp/Citibank, Commonwealth Fund, Prudential Securities and Salomon Brothers. Energy conglomerates include: Chevron Companies, Exxon Company, Shell Oil Company and Tenneco Gas, as well as the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco Foundation and Atlantic Richfield Foundation. Cato's pharmaceutical donors include Eli Lilly & Company, Merck & Company and Pfizer, Inc.

Additional Funding
80% of Cato's income comes from individual donations and subscriptions, 8% from corporations (such as ExxonMobil, which donated $30,000 during 2001), another 8% from foundations, and the remainder from conference and book sales, etc. Cato has received $15,633,540 in 108 separate grants from only nine different foundations: Castle Rock Foundation; Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation; Earhart Foundation; JM Foundation; John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.; Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation; Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation; and the branches of the Scaife Foundation"

- See more at: Cato Institute.


So, the Libertarian Party says that it favors Laissez Faire economics. That is the hallmark of a Libertarian economy. And, because it does not exist, and because populations want nothing to do with a libertarian society, self proclaimed libertarians like dblack have to say that libertarians simply want to "eliminate coercion and violence in society". But the libertarian think tanks and the libertarian party believe in free markets, or said another way, Laissez Faire economics. And in no government programs at all, except a very limited military and a few police. And no labor unions. And no minimum wage. And no anything else that may help the middle class at the expense of the very rich. No taxes on the wealthy, or corporations. Etc, etc....

And no drug usage programs. In my county, rural as it is, there are a total of about 800,000 people. Of them, about 160,000 are addicted to drugs. Almost all are addicted to heroine. And about 95% of all crime is a result of drug users looking for money to buy more drugs. And it has been getting worse now for several years, year after year. The Libertarian answer to drug use is to simply legalize all drugs. Period. No government intervention.
So, dblack and other libertarians, liers that they are, continue to say that there is no plan to produce a libertarian country. They would like you to believe that, while they spend millions trying to change our laws and own our politicians, and control our colleges. But it is not happening fast enough, so now they are trying to create floating islands under the libertarian social and economic rules they so pine for:

"As dawn breaks over the Gulf of Fonseca, southeast of El Salvador, Patri Friedman sets out for a jog. He trots past domed hothouses filled with fruit trees and feels the sidewalk sway gently underfoot as a tugboat chugs by with a floating apartment building in tow. The year is 2024, and Friedman lives on a so-called seastead, a waterbound city of some 1,000 people who produce their own food, their own energy and -- most important -- their own laws.

That’s the dream that Friedman, a libertarian software engineer at Google Inc. and the grandson of Nobel Memorial Prize–winning economist Milton Friedman, is working to make a reality. As Bloomberg Pursuits will report in its Summer 2014 issue, Friedman is chairman of The Seasteading Institute, an Oakland, California–based group financed with $1.2 million in seed money from PayPal Inc. billionaire Peter Thiel."
For Libertarian Utopia, Float Away on ‘Startup’ Nation

 

[dblack]

So, while dblack would have you believe that he, being against coercion in society, is typical of libertarians today. Totally DISHONEST.

You know, there's really no need for the personal insults. Let's just stick to the topic.

Anyone can call themselves libertarian. If your point is that lots of disingenuous people have done so ignorantly, or with a deliberate attempt to deceive, I can only agree with you. But I'm not being dishonest, I'm giving you a first hand account of basic libertarian ideals.

CATO, the primary leading LIBERTARIAN THINK TANK, sets the tone for all Libertarians. Consider the Libertarian agenda:

• "Cato leads the push for privatization of government services; as early as 1983, Cato initiated the first push for the privatization of Social Security, and has heavily backed it ever since.
• Cato supports the wholesale elimination of eight cabinet agencies— Commerce, Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, Interior, Transportation and Veterans Affairs— and the privatization of many government services.

Activities

• In 2001, the Washington Post, noting Cato's influence, said it "has spent about $3 million in the past six years to run a virtual war room to promote Social Security privatization."
• Cato sponsors periodic policy forums and book forums, major policy conferences, Cato has held major conferences in London, Moscow, Shanghai, and Mexico City.

While I wouldn't agree that CATO "sets the tone for all libertarians", none of these goals is coercive. So what is your point?

So, the Libertarian Party says that it favors Laissez Faire economics. That is the hallmark of a Libertarian economy. And, because it does not exist, and because populations want nothing to do with a libertarian society, self proclaimed libertarians like dblack have to say that libertarians simply want to "eliminate coercion and violence in society". But the libertarian think tanks and the libertarian party believe in free markets, or said another way, Laissez Faire economics. And in no government programs at all, except a very limited military and a few police. And no labor unions. And no minimum wage. And no anything else that may help the middle class at the expense of the very rich. No taxes on the wealthy, or corporations. Etc, etc....

Again, how is any of this coercive?

 

[Rshermr]

So, while dblack would have you believe that he, being against coercion in society, is typical of libertarians today. Totally DISHONEST.

You know, there's really no need for the personal insults. Let's just stick to the topic.

Anyone can call themselves libertarian. If your point is that lots of disingenuous people have done so ignorantly, or with a deliberate attempt to deceive, I can only agree with you. But I'm not being dishonest, I'm giving you a first hand account of basic libertarian ideals.

It is you that is being dishonest. You are trying to gloss over what libertarianism is about. Your version is part of it, but you leave the majority out. It is not just lying, but advanced lying. How to misdirect without saying anything untrue, by leaving out anything specific. You are not a simple lier. You are an advanced lier. Relative to personal insults, I find it impossible to discuss your posts without insulting you, me boy.

CATO, the primary leading LIBERTARIAN THINK TANK, sets the tone for all Libertarians. Consider the Libertarian agenda:

• "Cato leads the push for privatization of government services; as early as 1983, Cato initiated the first push for the privatization of Social Security, and has heavily backed it ever since.
• Cato supports the wholesale elimination of eight cabinet agencies— Commerce, Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, Interior, Transportation and Veterans Affairs— and the privatization of many government services.

Activities

• In 2001, the Washington Post, noting Cato's influence, said it "has spent about $3 million in the past six years to run a virtual war room to promote Social Security privatization."
• Cato sponsors periodic policy forums and book forums, major policy conferences, Cato has held major conferences in London, Moscow, Shanghai, and Mexico City.

While I wouldn't agree that CATO "sets the tone for all libertarians", Yes, but then you are wrong. none of these goals is coercive. So what is your point? But then, as a libertarian, that is exactly what you would say. The vast majority of people, and nearly all who lived in a country where there was an attempt to achieve a libertarian society would believe what you say. But you are welcome to your opinion.

So, the Libertarian Party says that it favors Laissez Faire economics. That is the hallmark of a Libertarian economy. And, because it does not exist, and because populations want nothing to do with a libertarian society, self proclaimed libertarians like dblack have to say that libertarians simply want to "eliminate coercion and violence in society". But the libertarian think tanks and the libertarian party believe in free markets, or said another way, Laissez Faire economics. And in no government programs at all, except a very limited military and a few police. And no labor unions. And no minimum wage. And no anything else that may help the middle class at the expense of the very rich. No taxes on the wealthy, or corporations. Etc, etc....

Again, how is any of this coercive?

There we go, me boy. Really showing your stripes. How about state and national parks? Who controls the building of roads? What about a safety net to help those that slip through wonderful the laissez faire economy you favor?
Which is why, me boy, there is NO LIBERTARIAN SOCIETY IN THE OVER 200 COUNTRIES OF THIS WORLD AND HAS NOT BEEN IN THE PAST. That tells people not to trust libertarians, because they lie. They simply want to set up a social system that has NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL.

 

[dblack]

There we go, me boy. Really showing your stripes. How about state and national parks? Who controls the building of roads? What about a safety net to help those that slip through wonderful the laissez faire economy you favor?
Which is why, me boy, there is NO LIBERTARIAN SOCIETY IN THE OVER 200 COUNTRIES OF THIS WORLD AND HAS NOT BEEN IN THE PAST. That tells people not to trust libertarians, because they lie. They simply want to set up a social system that has NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL.

Red and caps? Seriously?

Anyway, I'd appreciate if you answer my question. You claimed I was being dishonest by saying that libertarians want to minimize coercion, and then cited several libertarian goals as examples:

CATO, the primary leading LIBERTARIAN THINK TANK, sets the tone for all Libertarians. Consider the Libertarian agenda:

• "Cato leads the push for privatization of government services; as early as 1983, Cato initiated the first push for the privatization of Social Security, and has heavily backed it ever since.
• Cato supports the wholesale elimination of eight cabinet agencies— Commerce, Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, Interior, Transportation and Veterans Affairs— and the privatization of many government services.
• ... libertarian think tanks and the libertarian party believe in free markets, or said another way, Laissez Faire economics. And in no government programs at all, except a very limited military and a few police. And no labor unions. And no minimum wage. And no anything else that may help the middle class at the expense of the very rich. No taxes on the wealthy, or corporations. Etc, etc....

But none of these policy goals impose coercive government. In fact, they do the opposite, they remove it. So what in the world are you talking about?

 

[Rshermr]

There we go, me boy. Really showing your stripes. How about state and national parks? Who controls the building of roads? What about a safety net to help those that slip through wonderful the laissez faire economy you favor?
Which is why, me boy, there is NO LIBERTARIAN SOCIETY IN THE OVER 200 COUNTRIES OF THIS WORLD AND HAS NOT BEEN IN THE PAST. That tells people not to trust libertarians, because they lie. They simply want to set up a social system that has NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL.

Red and caps? Seriously?

Anyway, I'd appreciate if you answer my question. You claimed I was being dishonest by saying that libertarians want to minimize coercion, and then cited several libertarian goals as examples:

CATO, the primary leading LIBERTARIAN THINK TANK, sets the tone for all Libertarians. Consider the Libertarian agenda:

• "Cato leads the push for privatization of government services; as early as 1983, Cato initiated the first push for the privatization of Social Security, and has heavily backed it ever since.
• Cato supports the wholesale elimination of eight cabinet agencies— Commerce, Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, Interior, Transportation and Veterans Affairs— and the privatization of many government services.
• ... libertarian think tanks and the libertarian party believe in free markets, or said another way, Laissez Faire economics. And in no government programs at all, except a very limited military and a few police. And no labor unions. And no minimum wage. And no anything else that may help the middle class at the expense of the very rich. No taxes on the wealthy, or corporations. Etc, etc....

But none of these policy goals impose coercive government. In fact, they do the opposite, they remove it. So what in the world are you talking about?

Ah, me boy, you say they do not impose coercive GOVERNMENT oppression. I do not feel oppressed by our government in any area. Let consider:
1. Public Social Security - Best thing since sliced bread for the vast majority of people. For proof, look at what happens to politicians when they try to privatize it. They always change directions quickly. People like it a lot.
2. Medicare Read my response above.
3. public parks, city, county, state - Great for the majority. Private parks are no where near as popular. Not counting amusement parks, which are NEVER public.
4. Public roadways - Good deal. I have no problem. Are you looking for private roadways? They exist, and cost a bunch. People only drive on them if they have the money and have to because of traffic problems.
5. Tax on the wealthy - if you knew ANYTHING about economics, you would know that increasing taxes on the wealthy is very close to completely non-recessionary. Hurts no one except some very wealthy folks.
6. Tax on Corporations - see #5.
7. Minimum Wage laws - Stats show that they have NEVER been a long term drag on the economy, and they help people actually live.
8. Labor Unions - While cons like monopoly power in corporations, they see no need to allow labor to have offsetting power. Really?
And on and on, me boy.

So, all of those things which libertarians are against I see as non problems and generally good things. They simply do not allow the wealthy to become more so. What libertarians are, me boy, as you well know, is in the pocket of the wealthy. None of those things that are currently handled by the gov are in any way coercive of me. At all.
Your argument is spacious.