How do you justify Anarcho-Capitalism?

Doesn't everyone see what problems come about with unregulated business? Doesn't anyone see what shitty things businesses do to edge profit?

dont you see that if they fucked over their customers it would destroy their profit?

>>2

They would, as well as share holders. I know this, but why does Wal*Mart continue to exist? Once they have wealth, the wealth is used to stronghold price positions and keeping labor costs so low that nothing else can compete and you get a monopoly.

No one can tell a monopoly they disagree with their fucking over of customers, because they're the only game in town.

>>2

Also, you're presupposing that these customers are intelligent people, and we know not everyone grapples with the ever absent critical thinking ability.

>>4
the point is that a corporation wont bleed everyone dry of all their money because then there would be no one left to spend money and raise their profits.

>>4
and you know what's best for everyone better than them?

>>3
if you just think a little, you'll probably be surprised to find what the biggest monopoly in the us is.  hint: it's not walmart

>>5

But don't you think they'd keep a small but insignificant disparity between what prices are set at and what wages people earn? I'm thinking of a Wal*Mart employee who makes wages that allow them only to shop at Wal*Mart, and that reeks of a company store.

>>6

I know damn well enough that you free market cronies should embrace competition and not banter behind one homogeneous private entity.

Microsoft.

>>7
as opposed to a handful of mom and pop shops who have their kids work for free so there are no jobs for anyone else in town and charge 10 times as much just to stay afloat?

i can make up an exaggerated scenario too, and anyone who doesn't think wal-mart does more for the poor than the government has ever done is delusional.

>>8
so your entire position is supported by the fact that you are smarter than everyone and know what they should do with their lives better than them.  equality indeed...

guess again, it's not microsoft.

>>10

I never supposed that I was smarter, and if anything you've contributed more apologetics to your ideology as Wal*Mart is incapable of being unethical and monopolistic, it's the OTHER CORPORATIONS and the people's fault for shopping there.

You mind as well just out it, because monopoly is an unhinged definition and there's a lot of politics of shifting its meaning and or description.

>>9

Corporate Welfare is efficiency!

>>11
the government

>>13

I'll agree with you, but I'd rather have scumbag lawyers who pretend to care than scumbag country club board members.

>>13

And you don't think Wal*Mart is in cahoots with the Government? They are.

>>14
it really does come down to what manner of scumbag you prefer to be antagonized by, and i just would rather have the one that's on equal legal footing with me rather than the one that can change the rules whenever they want.

>>16
That's why the law makers and economy decision makers should be kept seperate. That's not anarcho-capitalism of course, that's a free market. Which is why anarcho-capitalism and socialism are in the same bucket. They are both unrealistic marx derived ideologies of course rather than sciences such as liberatarianism.

>>17

libertarianism is not a science.

>>18

and neither is Economics, I'm not being facetious here either, it's a humanity with numbers that tries to come off as serious.

>>19
Economics is a science, albeit a soft science.

>>17
Anarcho-capitalism has nothing to do with Karl Marx, simpleton. It's just libertarianism taken one step further, eliminating government all together.

Libertarianism is NOT a science by the widest definition, it's a political ideology just like marxism or conservatism.

>>20
Capitalism was defined by marx. Anarchy is derived directly from his works by devout followers in his heyday.

Libertarianism is the logical conclusion of known political science.

>>21

Social Liberatianism yeah, but Economic Libertarianism not so much.

Economics is a science, albeit a soft science.
That's playing so fast and loose with the word "science", it might as well be meaningless.

Economists can call it a science all they want, but it never was, it isn't now, and probably won't be for quite some time to come.

economy is a pseudo science the same way psychology and other things that has to do with humans are. You can measure, you can see patterns, see empirical results and deduct things from that, but they are in no way hard sciences and should never be treated as such.


"Libertarianism is the logical conclusion of known political science."
And i'm sure you know of all aspects of political science that might affect a logical conclusion? Fucking retard.

>>23
If nothing else, learn this one fact: You are an ignoramus. That's a fact. Your picture in the dictionary, right next to the definition, etc.
>>21
Read a goddam book, assnugget. Anarchist is not founded in Marxism, although their histories have been intertwined.
>>24
Once again, a soft science is still a science. This is not comparable with psychology, so GTFO Tom Cruise.

ec·o·nom·ics  /ˌɛkəˈnɒmɪks, ˌikə-/ [ek-uh-nom-iks, ee-kuh-]
the science that deals with the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services, or the material welfare of humankind.

There is no facepalm.jpg that reflects your failure of intellect strongly enough.

>>24

They're just trying to hold onto why Milton Friedman should be taken as Jesus himself and their study is legitimate so they can continue fucking the third world for labor.

>>25

You're also dumb if you think Psychology is legitimate, because it was only in the 1950s Psychologists were saying homosexuality is a mental illness, today they're acting as if SSRIs should be used if you feel sad when it rains.

>>22
You are left wing and people in the left wing are generally defined as supporting personal freedom and opposing economic freedom, you oppose libertarianism because it has high levels of economic and personal freedom and libertarian views on economic freedom contrast with yours. One more example of how anything that can be explained by political science is acknowledged by libertarianism.

>>23
Economics is the ambigious term here. Not all economists use scientific method. This does not mean scientific method is not applied in the most useful schools of economics.

>>23
>>24
Empiricism is a fundamental part of science. Long story short Kant described empiricism as defining facts and rationalism as the methods used to calculate answers from those facts and he was right. Of those economists that utilise scientific method their work is different from physicists only in that the bulk of their work involves interpreting statistics instead of evaluating a few highly accurate facts to highly complex degrees.

>>27
GTFO Scientologist

>>25
psy·chol·o·gy       (sī-kŏl'ə-jē)  Pronunciation Key
n.   pl. psy·chol·o·gies

   1. The science that deals with mental processes and behavior.



stop being a retard. economics is the study of consumption, how do people consume? well that depends on their behaviour, what is their behaviour, that depends on the psychological processes of people.

In economics you broadly generalize and say that people are rational beings etc. when you make basic models, then when you go in and actually utilize the models you take into account different behavourial patterns etc. that can be read out of an assumption or belief in how people think, or out of a large amount of statistical data. But no matter how you do things, it is impossible to make falsification and verification processes that live up to the demands of hard science, thus both of them are soft sciences or pseudo sciences (if we define science as hard science).

Oh please insult me and maybe I'll believe what you're saying.

GTFO.

>>31
your momma so fat she only need 10 glasses of water to fill her bathtub

If nothing else, learn this one fact: You are an ignoramus. That's a fact.
This is irony.

There's no need to justify it.
All the other ideologies use fake reasons to make it morally acceptable for the retards.
Anarcho-capitalism has moral relativism in its roots.

>>33
Hi Alanis Morissette!

>>35
O shi... I've been found ou... I mean, buy my next album!