Libertarians are NOT about rich corporations

Libertarians are mostly about small businesses. We want the government out of business affairs so that it's easier for small businesses to flourish.

Lefties always argue that "libertarians only care about the big corporations. without the government restricting them, they will monopolize and rule the world.". In fact it's the opposite. The big corporations love these restrictions because they are making it really hard for small businesses to even get off the ground, let alone compete with them.

Basically, libertarians want to make it easier for people to start their own businesses, and have less people relying on corporations for their salaries. More businesses means more competion, and a less crowded job market which makes it a lot harder companies to overwork and underpay their employees.

Wow, where to begin?! So many fallacies, so little time.

I guess I’ll address the main issue raised by the OP.

Libertarianism is flawed only because it has no underlying philosophy. It's a hodge podge of mixed ideas and premises off a vague notion of "liberty." It's yet to define what’s the basis of Liberty, why we need it and why it works.

With that, I’m not a libertarian, but I argue for 100% pure laissez-faire capitalism. What I mean by that term is that the government's only purpose is to protect individual rights by protecting individuals from the initiation of the use of force. The government hold a monopoly on force, for the given nation in question, and it only uses it retaliatory.

This limits the proper functions of government to police/firemen, the court system and the military. These functions are used only to protect your rights, nothing more and nothing less. This would make a proper moral government. However, some countries are close to this ideal then others, which means they are more capitalist then others.

The misconception here is that capitalism and business are the same thing. Capitalism and business are not the same thing. Capitalism is about freedom for the individual, which means freedom from force -- whether by another citizen or their own government. Business functions better under capitalism because people are free to start, maintain and grow their businesses to the best of their own ability.

The State and Economy are separated like the State and the Church would be. So think of it as a wall there, and the government doesn't cross that wall unless someone’s rights are violated. Someone else already pointed this out on this thread by saying that people who commit crimes would still be punished. The wall stands there to protect you, like it would protect you from a religious group that wanted to use the government to force you to do whatever.

I'm briefly explaining my position and the concept of capitalism to make some further points about where corporations fit into all of this.

Corporations are nothing more then legal structures for businesses. It helps them function better, obviously. But something that seems lost on a lot of people is the fact that corporations start out as small businesses. They grow into corporations because they are successful at what they do. This goes back to the whole freedom then, people are free to make a product and people are free to buy that product. No is forcing anyone to do anything in this case. If I make a choice to sell you milk and you buy the milk, this transaction was voluntary and benefited both of us. I make a profit and earn a living, and you get the milk that you want or need.

This is a basic economic concept and applies just as much to small businesses as well as large "MNCs"

But what if I want to sell you a gallon of milk for 4 dollars and someone else wants to sell if for 1 dollar? Would it be unfair for you to choose the cheaper gallon? After all, it's your hard earned money, and you’re free to spend it as you want. The less you spend on milk, then the more you can spend on other things, or save it, or invest it. It would make alot of sense to choose the cheaper gallon. It's within your rational self-interest to do so.

But what about poor old me here, who wants you to pay 3 additional dollars for the milk? This says a lot about people, it also illustrates the concept of supply and demand. I want you to pay me more, you want to pay me less. We both reach an agreement or we take our business elsewhere. I, the milk seller, have options in this case. I can lower my price or I can find people who will be willing to buy at the price I’m selling. As I’ve state before, we are free to do business with each other or not.

Building from that, why can the other guy charge a lower price? Doesn't he make less profit if he charges lower? Is he doing it just to spite me and drive me out of business?

The usual answer to low prices, are low costs. People can charge lower prices because they can PRODUCE for less cost. This gives them an advantage when it comes to dealing with other firms in the same business. All costs are passed on to the consumer in some way. The if the produce can make milk for 70 cents and charge for a dollar then he makes 30 cents profit for every gallon of milk. If his competitor can only make milk for 3.70 a gallon and has to charge 4 dollars to make up for the costs, he will still make the same amount of profit per gallon, however, because his price is so high, people will buy the cheaper product and he will end up losing money and going out of business if he doesn't find a way to lower his price, ie lowering his costs. The guy charging 4 dollars might use what profits he's save up to produce on the scale of the new guy who found a way to charge only one dollar. The guy charging one dollar might use his profits to do the same and lower his price even further. He'll sell it for as MUCH as he can while still making a profit, however, he can make more by charging less because more people will be able to buy his product. This ultimately drives the standard of living up, because now more people can afford more milk.

How does this apply to large corporations? Because the corporations usually have gotten so large because they are the ones who find ways to produce at lower costs then everyone esle. Contrary to the opinions in this thread, this does not hurt you in anyway. In fact it's helpful, it raises your standard of living because you can now have more for less and this ulimately makes you wealthier and better off.

The reason people are driven out of business buy competing firms is because they are not as good as those firms. They haven't found a way to provide better products for you. It's even better for those people who lost their jobs, because as consumers, they now pass less for the products they buy...

As I’ve said before, corporations are not above the law, and they never should be. They are not their own separate entities, they are only the individuals that make them up. If those individuals violate your rights then they should be punished. Fraud violates your rights because it uses force against you through deception. Businesses can't lie about what the sell.

However, they can charge whatever price they want to for their products. Economics will keep the prices at equilibrium between supply and demand. But it's wrong to FORCE someone to change their price because you feel it should be different. If you don't like the price, don't buy the product. Don't make the government step in and jail people for it. Would you like it if the government told you that you are making too much money so you need to give it to them or go to jail? I don't think any rational person would. You should be free to make as little or as much money as you think your abilities will allow. Just don't harm anyone else while doing it.

That's what all this talk about dismantling corporations is about. It's about someone at the ballot box or a government office deciding that they have or want the power to dictate your life and force you to comply if you don't agree with it.