Why is libertarianism so infallible?

It is due to it being the application of political science. It does not permit failed policies to be continued fruitlessly year after year with idealistic fervour, it is next to impossible for anyone surrounded by fierce libertarian critics to continue clinging on to lies. It is a purely functional machine, lubricated with justice and fueled by free speech.

If you're so fucking down on "controlled economies", then EXPLAIN why you tolerate your national, state and local governments handing out subsidies and abatements like CANDY.
That's assuming:
a) I tolerate it.
b) I'm from America.
I'd love to know what in my post indicated that either of these was true.

And you turds DARE to complain about "centrally-planned economies"!
Uh, whoa. Who exactly are you arguing against here again?

>Uh, whoa. Who exactly are you arguing against here again?

He doesn't know. He's a loon- everyone is against him (for good reason), so whatever viewpoint you put up, he'll rant against it with his baseless assertions, never forming even a basic argument. If he doesn't understand your position, he can just make it up for you, which is fine for him because he completely rejects the legitimacy of your point of view. This isn't a normal way of communicating, but he believes that his opinions are more enlightened than the rest of us, who are simply brainwashed by liberal media, etc.

Icke, not Ike

>>359
Icke, not Ike

why is this thread still here?  i can only assume its because the sad, deluded, virgin OP has nothing better to do

>>365
RedCream derailed it not too long ago with his lunacy (in other words, this thread mirrors his life).

Libertarianism is the future of democracy. Economic autonomy may not always be the best policy, but it allows for the highest economic efficiency possible unless either we become omnipotent or the universe becomes predictable. People will remember the social change of the 20th century as tyrannies masquerading under various ideologies arising through revolution, stabilising then beginning the long road to evolve into democracies utilising various social sciences the inevitable outcome of which is libertarianism as has been proven irrefutably.

An interesting question is why we want the highest efficiencies? Shouldn't we want the highest happiness?

The two aren't exclusive, but they're not inclusive either.

Libertarianism is the way to go. Fuck the current U.S. government; it's too totalitarian and invades people's lives.

Libertarianism is liberalism on steroids. All freedom, all the time. The only people opposed to it are weak failsacks who rely on the state to wipe their ass.

All freedom, all the time.
Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man, the same consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

It must be comforting to know there's nothing to catch you if something goes wrong.

>>371
If Ron Paul were elected president, market forces would somehow make it all okay. After all, only lazy welfare cases can't afford bodyguards and other personal services to make life tolerable. It's just all that taxation that you have to wait until April to get back that's making that impossible.

>>371
>>372
Libertarianism is about the enforcement of justice so your argument is null. Libertarianism is infallible.

>>373
Enforcement?! Fuck off you fascist pig!

96% of the posts in this thread are from the same person

I am that person

Didn't it used to be the big question of the Libertarian Party: would you be willing to give up your favorite government agency for lower taxes?

I would be willing to give up the government agency that keeps me from raping school children.

>>374
Criminals are the fascists, they commit injustices.
>>375
>>376
Same person.
>>377
There are many governent agencies we are better off giving up for lower taxes.

>There are many governent agencies we are better off giving up for lower taxes.

Name one that
 1: doesn't already take such a small amount of money that it's irrelevant in the big picture to begin with, and
 2: wouldn't reduce America to a 3rd world hell-hole by getting rid of it (without relying on libertarianism's magical "market forces" nonsense).

>2: wouldn't reduce America to a 3rd world hell-hole by getting
>rid of it (without relying on libertarianism's magical "market
>forces" nonsense).

>2: wouldn't reduce America to a 3rd world hell-hole by getting
>rid of it

>wouldn't reduce America to a 3rd world hell-hole by getting

>reduce America to a 3rd world hell-hole

phat chance

 i want to die

Libertarians fail to acknowledge the ethical problems with the libertarian system. Yes science could get more done if it could test on anyone, but we cannot choose who should be sacrificed for advancement. So we only allow those who volunteer. And even they are reviewed to see if a crime of ethics is not being commited. (an example would be letting a drug addict volunteer for a methadone test.)

>>381
Under libertarianism, the country would be full of people starving to death, desperate to sell their organs or test drugs for a few pennies to give to their families. See, market forces make it all work out! There would be plenty of test subjects for whatever experiments are deemed necessary by shareholders.

Hah. Who are we kidding? The starving people will just get together are start killing others.

If the critical mass is high, you get what's generally called a "revolution".

If the de facto government (whether public or private) really is as weak as many libertarians appear to want, then it'll be a pushover. End of Libertaria.

If the critical mass is too low, you get what's generally called a "high crime rate".

In either case, a thoroughly unpleasant and shitty situation to be in, for everyone involved.

>>383
>In either case, a thoroughly unpleasant and shitty situation to be in, for everyone involved.

Remember, though, the people that matter (to libertarians) will be able to hire their own bodyguards to protect them and their property. Police forces, if they exist, will concentrate on enforcing laws against the most egregious crimes (high-stakes property crimes, of course).

>>384
Yeah, I get what you're saying. Of course, hiding behind bodyguards is neither pleasant nor free. I'd like to be able to walk down the street without being accosted, kthx.

Desperate people will do desperate things. Diseased people will spread their infections. Ambitious people will raise private armies (but they won't be named that!). The power law will ensure there will be monopolies. The power disparity will increase, and my bargaining power will decrease. And so forth.

This is shit I'd rather not put up with. I don't want beggars bothering me, I don't want to catch something, and I don't want to be robbed or killed. No, I'd rather be surrounded by contented healthy people who aren't trying to stab me in the back because they're terrified of losing their job.

>>379
FCC, Dep. of Education, Soc. Sec., DHS, not to mention several invisible taxes in the form of useless regulations and corporate taxes that raise the cost of products for the consumer.  Gutting the fed so our currency is based on some kind of real value rather than the whims of a few private bankers that the government all the power in the country to.

When you subsidize something, you get more of it, Subsidize failure with government safety nets, guess what, You will continue to get more of it. There are flaws with every system, but I would rather deal with the flaws of a system where personal liberties are best protected, giving you more range to fix said problems.

This post was way too long to read while laughing out loud. But I do have to ask: Did you take the jolly good chap to the pub?

How about this. We have the same institutions that act as a "safety net" for dumbasses who neglected to look after themselves and their children, except they are run by the private sector. If someone comes crawling to them for help they set them up inside a work camp where they will get medicare, food, protection and accomodation in exchange for agricultural labour. If we expel all illegal immigrants, including anchor babies and other loopholes there will be a huge demand for unskilled labour and it will solve all our social ills.

99% of all libertarians are college aged kids who have never had a real job in their entire lives

/thread

>>390
False and meaningless.

>>391
What is this "meaningless" you refer to?

>>392
>>390

>>385
See, that's just how market forces work. They're magical and scientifically infallible. I agree, living in Libertaria would inspire so much despair and hopelessness among the people that it would be like a disease, causing needless suffering.

Eventually, though, it all works out because libertarianism is scientifically infallible. At first, people have to deal with non-people begging for money (gee, I guess they should have studies harder at private school, huh?). Some of them give in to despair or non-libertarian 'values' such as sympathy, and they end up losing their money (and therefore citizenship). Others become stronger (wealthier), and eventually they will simply be able to buy the entire town. You won't have to worry about beggars bothering you, because they'll be arrested for trespassing and given whatever penalty your government feels fit.

>>394
This would not happen under libertarianism. With less tax and what tax there is placed using market forces everyone will be richer and have the cash to spend on social security or whatever if they want it. As for the disadvantaged they can go to the police and say "My brother coerced me into taking drugs, please help", the police will arrest the unfortunate soul's brother and place him in a work camp and the profits will be used to fund a contractor to rehabilitate the disadvantaged soul.

Bying an entire town is extremely difficult under libertarianism, you would have to be of extraordinary merit in order to achieve this and I doubt if you had an enormous source of spending power money you would aim to invest more of that into what you did best to obtain such money.

With less tax and what tax there is placed using market forces everyone will be richer and have the cash to spend on social security or whatever if they want it.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

People will be richer because of lower taxes? What about the peripheral effects of a weak government?

Also, just a guess: you've never dealt with insurance.

>>396
He's probably never dealt with paying for anything other than those gumballs you get outside of kids' stores.

Also, corporations aren't motivated by the public good. They're motivated by profit. If privatizing everything were the answer, we would have had it thousands of years ago.

It doesn't really matter, though. Libertarians are kids. I used to be one, actually. Then I grew up and realized that it was nonsense. Kids can't be persuaded by adults because they simply don't have the same capacity for reason.

>>396
Insurance, such as health insurance, is expensive due to Government interferance. Lobbyists sway Congress to meddle in things, such as health care, that they aren't originally intended to meddle in in the first place. Their meddling gives health insurance companies reduculous powers to do what they will and ultimately assist in monopolizing the health care industry.

HHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHAHAHAHHAH back at you. You really have to think things through on both sides.


>>397
People who think that the government can cater to everyone are children. The Founding Fathers thought that they could make something close to perfect, but their private wants lead it to be fallible. The Bill of Rights helped solidify it as, what would be considered today, a pretty Libertarian governemnt, less a little more federal tax so they could actually work.

So what now?

Libertarians are laughably stupid. Putting profit above public health is nothing new for American industry. Left to their own devices in the free market, corporations will gladly sell you poison if they think they can come out ahead in the end.

Case in point, leaded gasoline. They put in in gas when they realized it would prevent engine knocking, but knew from the start it would harm people's health.  Atmosperic lead rates soared for 65 years. Gasoline emmisions were literally poisoning the entire world. But no action was taken until the federal government stepped in and allowed EPA to ban the practice in the 1980s.

So why was this?  Nothing was preventing the free market from acting on it.  Knowledge of the danger was widespread, both inside and outside the oil industry. The answer is simple - profit motives trumped health concerns. There are countless examples of this principle across many industries.

Who knows, maybe its just bald faced hypocrisy. I've noticed libertarians love weakening regulation of American business, but love to tighten it in other areas. If Ron Paul really believes that Americans are fed up with illegal immigration, wouldn't the free market take care of the problem? Wouldn't Americans demand to pay higher prices for goods produced by businesses exclusively employing American workers?

When someone describes themselves as a libertarian, it colors my perception of them. When I look at their face, all I see is the ugly tumor of ignorance and greedy desire surrounding their squinty vacant eyes.

/thread

/fuck the OP

/ron paul is gay

Insurance, such as health insurance, is expensive due to Government interferance.
Bull-fucking-shit.

What planet do you live on? I can't believe I just read that.