Liberals and Libertarians.

There was one thread named "libertarians are a joke" with some liberals talking as though all libertarians are capitalists and libertarians pointing out that this was wrong.

Then there was another thread named "what does socialism mean" with some libertarians talking as though all liberals are communists and some liberals pointing out that this was wrong.

We should be beginning to see a pattern here.

Are we all in agreement that Marx's idea of communism and capitalism are all naive bullshit? I'm not just talking about Marx either, I'm talking about all sorts of political philosophers who knew very little about the field they discussed and viewed the world through a very narrow lense. Marx discussed socio-economics yet he did not major in mathematics which is fundamental to any subject dealing with economics. In his writings he did not prove scientifically that his theories were viable. He was a total failure. No one can take him seriously as a scientist, only as a case study in psychology investigating how people get drawn into fallacies.

So Libertarians believe communism is utter BS and claim not to be capitalists but free marketeers. Whilst liberals believe capitalism is utter BS and claim not to be communists but social democrats....

Perhaps it is time for libertarians to state clearly that capitalism is BS and for liberals to state clearly that communism is BS.

Then we can all agree that Marx and other idealists who followed suite, including national socialists, capitalists and fascists, were bullshitters and we need to do things scientifically.

As a libertarian myself I hereby clearly state that capitalism is BS.

>>29

"laissez-faire translates directly to soemthign like "let what happens happen" so a laissez-faire economy is one where the government lets what happens happen, and does not interfere in "forms of regulations and rules. This, not only for historical reasons, but also because of the human psychology leads to abuse and extortion.
I'm not saying corporations and companies are all led by evil masterminds and dun dun duuuun i'm the batman who's come to save us all by implementing communism (which i already stated i thought was a bad idea), but if you leave people in an unregulated situation, the master/slave mentality takes over in 99% of the cases - and companies are made up of people."

Do you have anything to back this up?
Didn't think so.
If you want to argue with stuff that you pulled out of your ass then I quit.

"No, i don't have to give up my rights, but the company does not have to treat me properly because demanding certain level of say, minimum wages or health insurance or protection offered in high-risk jobs, etc. is a tax imposed on the company. And we certainly can't have that."

Your wage is determined by many factors like the required level of education and the amount of people who are willing to do that work.
The idea that workers don't work for their own profit is complete bullshit.
As your view on human psychology is made of ass and poo so is anything you build up on it.

"A copyright law is the protection of a specific piece of work from being replicated thus lowering it's value (maybe). What are these other unfair practices you talk of? taxes? regulations? quotas?  well i'm terribly sorry, but companies exist in states, these states like to run around financially, and since the companies generate a profit (at least traditionally) based on the resources of that state, it doesn't seem that unfair that they pay taxes."

How the fuck didn't you understand that?
Copying software and selling it for low price is unfair or selling bad quality stuff under your trademark is unfair, too.
The point here is: entrepreneurs don't want to exploit anybody because it would also be possible to exploit them.
Anyways, to your second point: So why bother giving those resources to companies when the government can use them for themselves? Since resources generate profit just from being there and all.. whoops, no, it doesn't work that way.

"which marx was, and i was generally referring the arguments for/agaisnt the implications/causes of capitalism and communism in a marx'ian sense.
This of course is outdated, but it's still the root of how and why we understand capitalism/communism since they were ultimately defined by marx for use in marx' political/economic historical theory which as history tells us (lol durrrr i'm not a history professor but i can say things about history anyway durr durr durr) influenced europe greatly during the 19th and 20th century."

BS
gb2/Cuba/