Anonymous
05/23/13(Thu)23:58 No.14622950

Anonymous 05/23/13(Thu)23:58 No.14622950

Replies: >>14623611

File: 1369367931190.jpg-(3 KB, 92x126, 1259085028584.jpg)

3 KB JPG

>2013
>economically illiterate socialist trying to get Classical, Neo-classical, Monetarists, and Austrian economists mad about a 237 year old book, thinking it is anywhere relevant to what we as students of economics study today
>mfw socialists still read Marx and therefore think their opponents read Adam Smith and not dozens and dozens of modern academic journals, and textbooks on economics

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:03 No.14623114

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:03 No.14623114

>Implying Adam Smith was a mathematician who understood economics.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:07 No.14623266

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:07 No.14623266

Replies: >>14624422 >>14625790 >>14626589

File: 1369368442144.jpg-(38 KB, 393x500, 1338501369535.jpg)

38 KB JPG

i have an economics degree and the only time i had to read an excerpt from the wealth of nations was in some 1st year leftist circle jerk social science course as a gen ed requirement.

sorry lefty, but we don't waste our time reading dated books like you omega poli sci and sociology plebs do.

Anonymous
int 05/24/13(Fri)00:14 No.14623551

int Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:14 No.14623551

Replies: >>14625829

>never read it
>never referenced it
>never supported it
>never heard someone support an argument worth my time using this book alone

get out, I've been on /pol/ since day one, this is yet again a misinformed individual making generalizations instead of doing their research.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:16 No.14623611

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:16 No.14623611

Replies: >>14623748 >>14623773

>>14622950
who all work on premises established by smith...

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:19 No.14623748

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:19 No.14623748

>>14623611

exactly what premises are those?

Anonymous
int 05/24/13(Fri)00:20 No.14623773

int Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:20 No.14623773

Replies: >>14623914 >>14626028

>>14623611
Do you think the modern anarcho-capitalist, minarchist, libertarian, conservative or republican (any right leaned fiscal conservative) author, profeessional, professor, teacher or student base their works upon John Smith in a majority of their research, assignments, philosophical practices or careers?

Do you really think calling those people retards make any of those "no"s relevant to your argument?

gtfo

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:20 No.14623792

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:20 No.14623792

Replies: >>14624007

>>14622154 (OP)

>The book bashes division of labour and calls it despicable and monstrous.

I think you misread something.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:23 No.14623914

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:23 No.14623914

Replies: >>14624147

>>14623773

he still probably reads Marx. these leftists can't comprehend textbooks, math, and statistics so they move the goal posts to fit their arguments and create fantasy scenarios where guys like alvin roth are reading and quoting adam smith in their journals

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:26 No.14624007

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:26 No.14624007

Replies: >>14624197

>>14623792
He meant that taken into it's extreme, the division of labor is bad, ie. that one person commands and the other person does what that person says.

Anonymous
int 05/24/13(Fri)00:30 No.14624147

int Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:30 No.14624147

>>14623914
I know all too well.

>sociology class
>talking about Africa and why its so poor
>someone blurts out "I give charity to groups who feed the children there"
>I say "I think its better to support groups who bring those children out of the continent so they have more than just rice in a bowl"
>"That really offends me, my wife is black, your ancestors colonization destroyed Africa, its your fault. Are you going to let those childred starve, do you know how much a plane ticket to anf from Africa is? How dare you..."
>teacher interrupts him, some fat white guy with acne scars
>he stands up and points at me still shaming me
>I get up and leave
>He follows me

and it was just the second day

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:31 No.14624197

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:31 No.14624197

Replies: >>14624412

>>14624007
>manager
>pays person to do simple time consuming work the manager can't complete alongside his workload
>employee person takes orders

FUCKING WOW!!! HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!!

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:34 No.14624290

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:34 No.14624290

Replies: >>14624360

it's like the bible to freemarker capatilist and libtards, they have never actually read it

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:36 No.14624360

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:36 No.14624360

File: 1369370188257.jpg-(51 KB, 585x511, meh.ro7248.jpg)

51 KB JPG

>>14624290

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:36 No.14624368

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:36 No.14624368

Replies: >>14624700 >>14624762

Yeah OP is a faggot and has no idea what he's talking about, but more importantly, ancaps *don't* generally view Smith in a positive light anyway.

Rothbard, building off the earlier historical review done by Schumpeter traced anarcho-capitalism to the natural law theory and proto-economics of the scholastic School of Salamanca in the middle ages.

There are some ancap newfags who idolize Smith, but the serious ancapfags view him as a statist and ultimately inferior to earlier work done by Salamanca and the physiocrats.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:37 No.14624412

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:37 No.14624412

Replies: >>14624639 >>14624875

>>14624197
Its not my opinion, but most classical liberals thought that a person shouldn't be a cog, they should have a say in how things are done and if they want they can easily change jobs or firms. He was writing in a pre-capitalist time when there was still a ton of independent artisans.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:38 No.14624422

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:38 No.14624422

>>14623266
Hey, not all of us poli sci people are circle jerk leftists. Some of us think for ourselves, and just want to be lawyers. The rest are liberal dumbasses, but there are a few of us...

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:41 No.14624555

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:41 No.14624555

The man made of straw

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:44 No.14624633

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:44 No.14624633

>200 year old economics book
>relevant to modern economics
Hold up, let me read up on what Aristotle had to say about gravity.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:44 No.14624639

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:44 No.14624639

Replies: >>14625030

>>14624412
Dude, the access to easily obtained employment is uncommon in every decade. to have a firm choice to what and how you do things is not a common option in any employment field.

As well, to say a lesser educated man can make decisions above the orders of a higher educated, more experienced and more accomplished man is really naive and ignorant.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:45 No.14624700

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:45 No.14624700

>>14624368
>rothbard
>an economist
>not a political idealist
top kek

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:45 No.14624713

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:45 No.14624713

Replies: >>14624756

File: 1369370755577.jpg-(527 KB, 2120x2201, 9t1s2h2.jpg)

527 KB JPG

>So did any Ancap/lolbertarian retards actually read this book

No, they just like name-dropping.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:47 No.14624756

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:47 No.14624756

Replies: >>14624792

>>14624713
We don't read outdated books precisely because they're outdated. I would much rather read modern scientific studies that incorporate heavy statistical, mathematical and theoretical rigor than something some old guy said.

If only the marxists did the same...

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:47 No.14624762

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:47 No.14624762

Replies: >>14624777

>>14624368
>There are some ancap newfags who idolize Smith

That's the irony. Rothbard even admits there's no such thing as anarcho-capitalism.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:47 No.14624777

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:47 No.14624777

Replies: >>14624870

>>14624762
quote

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:48 No.14624792

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:48 No.14624792

Replies: >>14624828 >>14624850 >>14626205 >>14626814

File: 1369370895466.jpg-(5 KB, 213x236, scarrrr.jpg)

5 KB JPG

>>14624756
>I would much rather read modern scientific studies

Funny, I only hear anti-scientific rhetoric coming from the right... from CATO to Mises when it comes to the environment.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:49 No.14624828

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:49 No.14624828

>>14624792
>mises
Literally nobody in the serious economic community cares about mises.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:50 No.14624850

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:50 No.14624850

>>14624792

Doing something about climate change costs the people who fund the right significant amounts of money. Laissez-faire capitalism makes them shitloads of money.

Follow the money.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:50 No.14624870

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:50 No.14624870

Replies: >>14624907 >>14624934 >>14625046 >>14625695

File: 1369371034289.jpg-(70 KB, 674x685, 1369088184671.jpg)

70 KB JPG

>>14624777
>"We must therefore turn to history for enlightenment; here we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and socialistic elements in their doctrines . . . we find that all of the current anarchists are irrational collectivists . . . We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical."

See pic, also. He admits the right "stole" the word libertarian from the left, and how it used to mean left anarchists.... which is true. That and anti-authoritarian socialists.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:50 No.14624875

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:50 No.14624875

Replies: >>14624962 >>14625030

>>14624412
But wouldn't the people actually doing the job have some ideas about how to do something more effectively? In fact some of the most successful companies implement brainstorming sessions and other things where employees are directly involved in the decision making
processes. A lot of companies that are decaying are filled with bureaucratic methods.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:51 No.14624907

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:51 No.14624907

>>14624870
What he's saying is entirely semantic.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:51 No.14624915

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:51 No.14624915

Replies: >>14624958 >>14625360

I have yet to read Wealth of Nations, OP - I'd be surprised if what you are saying is true based on what I've heard of it. Is there a chance you could provide the actual quotes that backup the points you've listed?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:52 No.14624934

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:52 No.14624934

Replies: >>14625148

>>14624870

Good, the word is bullshit anyways, I prefer Voluntaryism, personally

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:53 No.14624958

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:53 No.14624958

Replies: >>14625054 >>14625110

>>14624915
>I'd be surprised if what you are saying is true based on what I've heard of it.

You'd be surprised only because the right has the loudest-spammiest voice in the room. Doesn't mean they're right.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:53 No.14624962

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:53 No.14624962

Replies: >>14625129

>>14624875
Meant to quote:
>>14624875
Also, a lot of time the people who are supposedly highly educated are morons in terms of actual real life experience.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:54 No.14625030

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:54 No.14625030

>>14624875
I need to go to sleep, meant to quote:
>>14624639

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:55 No.14625046

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:55 No.14625046

Replies: >>14628644

>>14624870
He isn't saying there is no such thing a anarcho-capitalism. He is saying that, under the definition of anarchy as "without hierarchy," it isn't anarchy, but certainly not that the concept of anarcho-capitalism, in which no monopoly of force exists, and the state hierarchy is removed, does exists, and is anarchy in the classical sense of a stateless society.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:55 No.14625050

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:55 No.14625050

>>14622154 (OP)
>Adam Smith
>Libertarians
Try harder

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:55 No.14625054

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:55 No.14625054

>>14624958
I literally haven't heard the idea that Adam Smith was opposed to the division of labour once.
All you need to do is provide a quote.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:56 No.14625110

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:56 No.14625110

Replies: >>14625185

>>14624958
Well, actually, right now, you have the "loudest" spammiest voice in the room, and it doesn't make you right, so put up or shut up.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:57 No.14625129

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:57 No.14625129

Replies: >>14625370

>>14624962
This is why many (non-research oriented) companies avoid the students with the very best grades and go for the B average people. Also, this is why we still have interviews.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:57 No.14625148

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:57 No.14625148

Replies: >>14625183 >>14625277

File: 1369371467065.jpg-(20 KB, 410x300, 0010b7ac_medium.jpg)

20 KB JPG

>>14624934
>I prefer Voluntaryism, personally
Also known as exploitation posing as anarchism.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)00:58 No.14625183

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)00:58 No.14625183

>>14625148
>exploitation
>this shit again
Come back when the labour theory of value actually explains anything.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)00:58 No.14625185

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)00:58 No.14625185

Replies: >>14625219 >>14625315

>>14625110
>you have the "loudest" spammiest voice in the room

Funny, I don't come here that often.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:00 No.14625219

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:00 No.14625219

Replies: >>14625295 >>14625332

>>14625185
>is a trip
That automatically makes you an attention whore and a spammer.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:01 No.14625260

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:01 No.14625260

>>14622154 (OP)
>The book bashes division of labour and calls it despicable and monstrous.

wat?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:01 No.14625277

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:01 No.14625277

Replies: >>14625348 >>14625451

>>14625148
Communist anarchy and syndaclism are more exploitative. Answer the following questions for me please:

>Wage Slavery
Can you explain how this wouldn't exist in a marxist state? The definition, "Wage slavery refers to a situation perceived as quasi-voluntary slavery, where a person's livelihood depends on wages, especially when the dependence is total and immediate." seems all inclusive. The very act of working for ones living, either in a voluntary marxist society, or in a Capitalist Utopia, or the mixed market system that has always existed, or in an Edenic hunter gatherer society, so the complaint about the wage slavery of a capitalist society seems extremely pointless, or otherwise ignorant. And, if you agree, but point to the fact that those who don't work would still receive, then how long would it take for people to stop working knowing that they would still receive? However, if they receive based on their work, in how it benefits society, then by definition it is a capitalist society. Ergo, I don't understand how you resolve this problem by positing a Marxist society.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:02 No.14625295

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:02 No.14625295

Replies: >>14625345 >>14625348

>>14625219
>That automatically makes you

Throwing absolutes at me, eh?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:02 No.14625315

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:02 No.14625315

>>14625185
Doesn't matter. Your's is the claim being made, you have the responibility of backing it up, or recognizing your fucktardism.

Level 59 Zionist Jesuit Apolog(...) !mU3s3QPOmE
05/24/13(Fri)01:03 No.14625332

Level 59 Zionist Jesuit Apologist, Lord of the Dongles !mU3s3QPOmE 05/24/13(Fri)01:03 No.14625332

>>14625219
No really.
I'm the loudest, and I try to not be an ass about it.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:03 No.14625345

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:03 No.14625345

Replies: >>14625542

>>14625295
>complains when other people throw around absolutes
>says shit like 'the right are the biggest spammers', and 'I only hear anti-scientific rhetoric coming from the right (top lel)'.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:03 No.14625348

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:03 No.14625348

>>14625277
>Cont.

>Authority and hierarchy.

Most marxists are anarchists. This is supposedly to solve the previous problem, wage slavery. It doesn't, as I've already posited. That said, this creates another problem as well. What happens if an individual refuses to work for the society, refuses to provide the result of her work for her society. Without a hierarchy, there is no authority, and thus no way to enforce it. One common response is that social pressure might prevent them, but that is then wage-slavery. More importantly, social pressures only work so long as a person is willing to allow them. I, for example, would not respect anyone who was a member of such a society, so shunning would be a blessing, not a curse, and I am capable of surviving largely on my own, and doubt I would be singularly rejecting said society, so this wouldn't work. Another is that force would be implemented by the people, however this raises two problems. The first is that the use of force is one of the main reasons Anarchists are what they are, to end it. The second, and more difficult to solve, is that the use of force creates hierarchy, those of the superior, of the force users, and of the lesser, the receivers. Thus, by definition, to enforce this society is to destroy it.

>>14625295
Not him, but yes, it does. Being a tripfag making someone an attention whore is the only thing aside from death that is absolute.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:04 No.14625352

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:04 No.14625352

Replies: >>14625429 >>14628829

File: 1369371843318.jpg-(43 KB, 414x290, pol26.jpg)

43 KB JPG

>Libertarianism

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:04 No.14625360

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:04 No.14625360

OP can you please do what this guy has asked:

>>14624915

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:04 No.14625370

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:04 No.14625370

>>14625129
Interviews can be terrible in assessing the suitabilitiy of a candidate, I know many turds who know how to be effectively interviewed but are in fact morans. Most highly educated people are trained in doing interviews.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:06 No.14625429

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:06 No.14625429

>>14625352
No.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:06 No.14625451

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:06 No.14625451

Replies: >>14625501 >>14625506 >>14625616

>>14625277
>Can you explain how this wouldn't exist in a marxist state?
Even Marx isn't a Marxist.

>Ergo, I don't understand how you resolve this problem by positing a Marxist society.
Libertarians were anti-authoritarian socialists and anarchists that opposed Marx in the First International.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:07 No.14625501

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:07 No.14625501

>>14625451
>libertarians
>socialists

Yes the ideal of "me me me!" sure is about sustainable social structure.
yeah ok, buddy,

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:07 No.14625506

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:07 No.14625506

Replies: >>14625621

>>14625451
>Even Marx isn't a Marxist.
Wow, what a well thought out, informed response to his question.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:08 No.14625542

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:08 No.14625542

File: 1369372132766.jpg-(46 KB, 617x416, sciencepress-022412-005-6(...).jpg)

46 KB JPG

>>14625345
>and 'I only hear anti-scientific rhetoric coming from the right (top lel)'.

Well, there are exceptions to the rule. I guess I'm one too.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:10 No.14625580

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:10 No.14625580

Replies: >>14625633 >>14625638 >>14625675

>>14622154 (OP)
Dear OP, I've been saying this for years in any conversation I have with anybody on the Right and all I've ever got is blank face followed by "muh free market".
People on the Right hate being stereotyped as short-termist, blinkered and less forward-thinking but this is one of their major 'achilles heels'.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625616

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625616

Replies: >>14625839

>>14625451
What are you trying to say here? Libertarianism has its roots back in the writings of William Goodwin, particularly in Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Morals and Happiness. No one thing you said answered a single question. I said nothing about Karl Marx, I spoke about anarcho-communism/collectivism, and I didn't ask for an inaccurate history lesson.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625621

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625621

>>14625506
>Yes the ideal of "me me me!"
You sure you're not talking about capitalism here?

Learn to differentiate from Stalinism and those who opposed Marx in the First International.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625633

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625633

Replies: >>14625661

>>14625580
>B-b-but....
>MUH SINGLE PICTURE OF THE CAPITAL OF CHILE!!
>MUH HONG KONG!!

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625638

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:11 No.14625638

Replies: >>14625673

>>14625580
>implying we need to agree with an ancient book in order to be right
He started out economic thought, but that really doesn't mean anything.
Also, please, just gives me one quote that indicates that you're right. Just one.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:12 No.14625661

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:12 No.14625661

Replies: >>14625737

>>14625633
>my sole understanding of the arguments of libertarians comes from pictures on 4chan

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:12 No.14625673

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:12 No.14625673

Replies: >>14625698 >>14625707

>>14625638
>Do my research for me just so I can say I don't like the research provided!

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:12 No.14625675

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:12 No.14625675

Replies: >>14625811

>>14625580
>People on the right
>Short-termist.
>the left created policies which lead to $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities and an unsustainable Social Security system.

U WOT M8?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:13 No.14625695

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:13 No.14625695

Replies: >>14625754 >>14626734

>>14624870
>red/black alliance
Correct me if im wrong, but anarchists are without a state, and communists rely heavily on a state. Why do they ally? Is there a reason outside sheer stupidity?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:13 No.14625698

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:13 No.14625698

>>14625673
>you should have to find your own citations for my arguments!
Hahahaha, go tell that to your PhD supervisor.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:14 No.14625707

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:14 No.14625707

>>14625673
>Let me make random, completely baseless claims and then push responsibility on to you when I can't prove my claim.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:14 No.14625731

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:14 No.14625731

Replies: >>14625789

File: 1369372479933.jpg-(13 KB, 220x259, 220px-Bastiat[1].jpg)

13 KB JPG

>mfw someone was against the division of labor near me
>mfw they like the idea of blotting out the sun to protect t4he candle industry

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:14 No.14625737

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:14 No.14625737

>>14625661
>arguments of Libertarians
>not 4chan

Hate to break it to you, bud.
But this (or /mlpclassyfedorafriendzoneI'maniceguy/ is right where the majority of you tardos come to create these "stellar" arguments that can be turned on their head by SRS spamming a forced meme.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:15 No.14625751

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:15 No.14625751

Replies: >>14625797

>>14622154 (OP)
ITT: Ancaps backtracking

pansy faggots, anarchism just does not work, and this is coming from a former syndicalist, one of the few brands of anarchism that has been implemented in the real world/

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:15 No.14625754

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:15 No.14625754

>>14625695
Non-anarcho-capitalist anarchists believe in a stateless communism because hurr durr wage-slavery hurr durr magical butthurt fairy will make it works somehow.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:16 No.14625789

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:16 No.14625789

Replies: >>14625832

File: 1369372598096.gif-(2.53 MB, 320x240, 213ezj7.gif)

2.53 MB GIF

>>14625731
>mfw a Libertarian relegated themselves to hyperbole because they didn't have a real point near me.

Happens all the fucking time.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:16 No.14625790

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:16 No.14625790

Replies: >>14625832 >>14625897

>>14623266
Because the chicago school TOTALLY didnt lead to 2007.

dumbass.

>He thinks retards only looking for short term selfish gain are ok.
>he cant into macro economics

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:16 No.14625797

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:16 No.14625797

Replies: >>14625882

>>14625751
ITP: Dumbass making shit up.
Seriously, no one backtracked.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:17 No.14625811

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:17 No.14625811

Replies: >>14625916 >>14626103

>>14625675
Is the social security system unsustainable?

Did the left lead to 60 trillion in unfunded liabilities? It seems we had some Republican administrations in the past fifty years but I could be wrong.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:17 No.14625829

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:17 No.14625829

>>14623551
>/pol/
>a good source for anything other than trolls, misinformation, and heated unsourced 'discourse'

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:17 No.14625832

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:17 No.14625832

Replies: >>14625854 >>14625865 >>14625938

>>14625790
Where the fuck did he say anything about that.
What the fuck.

>>14625789
>he still hasn't back up his claim with a single quote

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:18 No.14625839

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:18 No.14625839

Replies: >>14626020

File: 1369372686821.jpg-(23 KB, 398x500, Thumbs_up_kid_big.jpg)

23 KB JPG

>>14625616
> I didn't ask for an inaccurate history lesson.

Oh, really? What was inaccurate, friendo?

Libertarianism has its roots in the left. From Lysander Spooner to Mikhail Bakunin to Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. Not to mention most were anti-capitalist to boot. Hence why Rothbard had to admit there's no such thing as anarchy-capitalism.

If you want to understand how to "solve the problem of wage slavery", I suggest you read up on things like Anarcho-syndicalism.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:18 No.14625854

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:18 No.14625854

Replies: >>14625913

>>14625832
chicago school and ancap are like cousins, different, but have roots together.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:18 No.14625865

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:18 No.14625865

>>14625832
>he still hasn't back up his claim with a single quote
Who do you think you're talking to?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:19 No.14625882

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:19 No.14625882

Replies: >>14625914

>>14625797
ITP: no arguments of value.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:19 No.14625897

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:19 No.14625897

Replies: >>14626589

File: 1369372785590.jpg-(17 KB, 247x204, full retard.jpg)

17 KB JPG

>>14625790
>Believes Libertarianism/Conservatism is based on short term gains
>Trying to argue against something you clearly know shit about.
Seriously, get educated before you talk shit about something.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:20 No.14625913

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:20 No.14625913

Replies: >>14625981 >>14625982

>>14625854
The term 'Chicago school' hasn't been relevant since the 80's, you twit. Literally all it means now is 'The school of economics at the University of Chicago'. Monetarism isn't a thing. Everyone's a neoclassicist.

Anarcho-capitalism isn't taken seriously by any major economist. We have hardcore libertarians, but an-caps are null and void.
I'm guessing your sole knowledge of economics comes from political discourse.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:20 No.14625914

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:20 No.14625914

>>14625882
ITP: The exact same thing.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:20 No.14625916

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:20 No.14625916

Replies: >>14626015

File: 1369372821053.jpg-(141 KB, 625x874, bibendum.jpg)

141 KB JPG

>>14625811
Of course. Republicans stole from SS to hide the deficit. Thanks, Reagan and Dubya.

Let's throw all our money to Wall Street and see what happens :D

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:21 No.14625938

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:21 No.14625938

Replies: >>14625972

>>14625832
>not realizing that chicago school is a bunch of pansy fucks that would be ancaps if they were not so scared of the guv.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:22 No.14625972

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:22 No.14625972

>>14625938
He never said anything about the chicago school, or ancaps. He said that he had an economics degree and something about the wealth of nations.

Why do you need to extrapolate so much?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:22 No.14625981

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:22 No.14625981

Replies: >>14626043

>>14625913
American University law school actually. I am guessing you took a poli sci course this freshman year?

I do agree in ancaps being void though.

Level 59 Zionist Jesuit Apolog(...) !mU3s3QPOmE
05/24/13(Fri)01:22 No.14625982

Level 59 Zionist Jesuit Apologist, Lord of the Dongles !mU3s3QPOmE 05/24/13(Fri)01:22 No.14625982

Replies: >>14626011

>>14625913
As an AnCap, I can promise you, if I had to explain my political affiliation in public, I would refer to myself as a Rothbard Libertarian.
Too many people misunderstand Anarchy for it to be a public friendly topic.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:23 No.14626011

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:23 No.14626011

Replies: >>14626031

>>14625982
>Too many people misunderstand Anarchy
Especially the people apparently in favor of it.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:23 No.14626015

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:23 No.14626015

>>14625916
>Of course. Republicans stole from SS to hide the deficit. Thanks, Reagan and Dubya.

>Let's throw all our money to Wall Street and see what happens :D

Your understanding of finance sounds like something an ideologue at OWS might say. Reducing spending does not equal 'hiding' a deficit, it means reducing it. And what the fuck do you mean by 'Throwing all our money to wall street'?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:23 No.14626020

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:23 No.14626020

Replies: >>14626081 >>14626136

File: 1369373028316.jpg-(93 KB, 960x533, 522647_378517698858588_10(...).jpg)

93 KB JPG

>>14625839
>ignoring pic related even when he was posted earlier in the thread

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:24 No.14626028

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:24 No.14626028

>>14623773

Adam Smith you fucking idiot.

Anyways, stay mad because no one actually implements your kooky theories because you can't even read.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:24 No.14626031

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:24 No.14626031

>>14626011
Especially Americans. Hence why libertarianism is touted as "right wing".

America is fucktarded.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:24 No.14626043

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:24 No.14626043

Replies: >>14626092

>>14625981
>Law
Well, there you go.

I'm in postgrad economics. Seriously, 'Chicago school' isn't a term people use.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:25 No.14626081

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:25 No.14626081

>>14626020
>bastiat

Babby's first political ideologue.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:25 No.14626092

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:25 No.14626092

Replies: >>14626114

>>14626043
We use it all the time when talking about CIA sponsored death squads in Chile.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:26 No.14626103

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:26 No.14626103

Replies: >>14626163 >>14626202 >>14626997

>>14625811
>Republican
>Changing from liberal/conservative to republican democrat.
Nice try. We've had one conservative republican in the past 80 years.

Eisenhower tried on purpose to push a progressive policy, openly. Expanded New Deal policies.

Nixon pushed the most extreme environmental measures in American history, and pushed Keynesian economics.

Reagan increased spending more than any president as a percentage, expanded the military, etc.

Bush Sr. raised taxes, expanded the federal bureaucracy, etc.

Bush Jr. increased the size of government by 100%, surpassed only by Obama, created the terrible pharma bill, etc.

Ford was the only conservative in the last 70 years.

And yes, we know for a fact that SS will be bankrupt by 2035. A system that requires high birth rates and short life spans, being implemented during the time when life spans expands (in part as a result of that system) and declining birth rates is both obviously unsustainable, and short sighted.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:26 No.14626114

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:26 No.14626114

Replies: >>14626178

>>14626092
>We use it all the time when talking about CIA sponsored death squads in Chile.
Why the fuck would economics be relevant to that?

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:26 No.14626136

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:26 No.14626136

Replies: >>14626168 >>14626214

>>14626020
>confusing socialists with anti-authoritarian socialists, aka libertarians and anarchists

Also, that's some pretty weak shit.... boring quote, really.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:27 No.14626163

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:27 No.14626163

Replies: >>14626192 >>14626222

>>14626103
>We've had one conservative republican in the past 80 years.

Yeah Bush senior and Reagan were total socialists.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:27 No.14626168

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:27 No.14626168

Replies: >>14626196

>>14626136
Anti-authoritarian socialism isn't a thing.
You can't have individualist collective ownership.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626174

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626174

>>14622154 (OP)
>Americlaps
>read
I think you found your answer OP.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626178

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626178

Replies: >>14626227

>>14626114
>mah limited scope not accounting for world events.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626192

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626192

Replies: >>14626235

>>14626163
>everyone who isn't a conservative is a socialist
That's actually what you just implied.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626196

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626196

Replies: >>14626247 >>14626269

>>14626168
if its mutualist you can.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626202

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626202

File: 1369373334381.jpg-(20 KB, 331x314, 1364525032198.jpg)

20 KB JPG

>>14626103
>We've had one conservative republican in the past 80 years.

What is this nonsense? LOL

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626205

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:28 No.14626205

Replies: >>14626281

>>14624792

It's okay, there's a significant anti-science bias from the left as well. The right has climate change, the left has genotyping and genetics research that flies in the face of their preconceived notions of humanity.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626214

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626214

Replies: >>14626332

>>14626136
you'd be suprised how well it works when describing certain arguments, one in a similar vein as
"Liberals seem to assume that, if you don't believe in their particular political solutions, then you don't really care about the people that they claim to want to help." -thomas sowell

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626222

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626222

>>14626163
They weren't socialists, but they were definitely big statists. As are almost every President since at least the early 20th century.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626227

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626227

Replies: >>14626262

>>14626178
Are you seriously trying to correlate some advice that Milton Friedman gave to a dictator that was already in power to tyranny?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626235

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:29 No.14626235

Replies: >>14626267 >>14626465

>>14626192
>avoidance tactics activate!

you still decided that Raegan and bush senior weren't conservative republicans and it's flat out wrong.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626247

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626247

Replies: >>14626297

>>14626196
>if its mutualist you can.
In reality, not everyone is going to consent to their shit being shared.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626262

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626262

Replies: >>14626355

>>14626227
No, I am saying you are not looking at the whole system.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626267

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626267

Replies: >>14626307

>>14626235
I'm not the guy you responded to before, I was just pointing out that you're a fucking idiot.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626269

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626269

>>14626196
But it wouldn't be, tragedy of the commons sees to that.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626281

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:30 No.14626281

Replies: >>14626415

>>14626205
>the left has genotyping and genetics

Please do elaborate :)

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:31 No.14626297

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:31 No.14626297

>>14626247
then they are excluded and can go join there own syndicate if they want, and potentially lose out on the benefits of joining the more socialist federations.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:31 No.14626307

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:31 No.14626307

>>14626267
It was sarcasm, you fuckwit.
Lrn2context.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:32 No.14626332

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:32 No.14626332

File: 1369373535170.jpg-(71 KB, 448x597, 1363249992495.jpg)

71 KB JPG

>>14626214
>if you don't believe in their particular political solutions

This shit is so vague it can apply to anyone.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:32 No.14626355

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:32 No.14626355

Replies: >>14626388 >>14626456

>>14626262
And you don't have a clue about economics. I can tell you're doing law.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:33 No.14626388

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:33 No.14626388

Replies: >>14626456

>>14626355
>theoretical economics
>relevant to anything outside of itself.

hahahahaha

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:34 No.14626415

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:34 No.14626415

Replies: >>14626535 >>14626584

>>14626281
I am pretty leftist but this is true. Science regarding race and cultural relativism not in a positive light is thrown out. I saw a recent mainstream article asking whether 'research that proves race differences in intelligence should be banned' which was absurd.
No source though, saw it in passing a few weeks ago.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:35 No.14626446

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:35 No.14626446

>>14622154 (OP)
I also tried to tell others on here what he was saying
they think invisible hand was some kind of magical natural law

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:35 No.14626456

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:35 No.14626456

>>14626388
So much this. Cant wait until >>14626355
falls out of his ivory tower.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:36 No.14626465

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:36 No.14626465

Replies: >>14626509 >>14626528 >>14626605

>>14626235
No it isn't. Both of them practiced big government, planned economics. Now, they may have loosened some of the structures, but they by no means were conservative. Theocratic policies are not conservatism. Look at Barry Goldwater. He was labeled the image of true conservatism for decades, and he frequently made attacks on religious interference. Reagan and Bush Sr. weren't liberals or conservatives, they were moderates.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:37 No.14626509

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:37 No.14626509

Replies: >>14626636 >>14626654

>>14626465
>Theocratic policies are not conservatism.

They sure were when Bush was in office.
Face it, you can't make a golden standard on a changing definition.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:38 No.14626528

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:38 No.14626528

>>14626465
No, they were right wing authoritarian. Just like Obama. Look at Reagan treatment of mentally ill (and subsequent massive homeless problem).

the only credit I can give was Bush Sr. foreign policy. He handled Iraq perfectly.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:38 No.14626535

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:38 No.14626535

Replies: >>14626594

>>14626415
That whole race shit is nonsense anyway. I don't have time for that crap.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626583

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626583

Replies: >>14626626

I've never read Wealth of Nations. And I never will read it because Adam Smith doesn't know jack about economics. Wealth of Nations was written over two hundred years ago. Economic theory has developed leaps and bounds since then. The typical undergraduate microeconomics textbook will teach you a hundred times more than WoN.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626584

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626584

Replies: >>14626616

>>14626415
>this is true
>I have no source

ok then. So much for your logical basis.

SAGE
SAGE 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626589

SAGE SAGE 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626589

Replies: >>14626782

>>14625897
>>14623266

You both need to kill yourselves for being stupid niggers. You don't think for yourselves. Instead, you're fed talking points by your equally as stupid, and retarded talking heads.

Just fucking kill yourselves already.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626594

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626594

Replies: >>14626652

>>14626535
But the idea that science that contradicts current politics should be banned is absurd. Yes this opens doors to human testing and awful shit, but fuck it, Science at any cost is my motto.

The nazis were cruel fucks, but we still use their data today.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626605

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626605

Replies: >>14626704

>>14626465
>He was labeled the image of true conservatism for decades

Only by his fellow co-religionists (hint) on the Left, and they pull this shit all the time:
The only "true" conservatives are basically Democrats who want lower taxes

>and he frequently made attacks on religious interference

I've said this again and again, but apparently you fuckwits can't comprehend it:
There was no "rise of Christian fundamentalism" in the '60s, because the default views and laws at the time WERE "Christian fundamentalist".

No-one liked or wanted abortions and homosexuals. It was only with the '60s that there was actual discussion on these topics, not "see: The Bible"

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626616

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:40 No.14626616

Replies: >>14626670

>>14626584
I am just saying google for it yourself if you are interested in the topic, if not and you are lazy, fuck off and disregard.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:41 No.14626626

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:41 No.14626626

Replies: >>14626931

>>14626583
>I think people read Wealth of Nations for a lessons in modern day economics.
>I've never read it.

Winner, for retard of the day!

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:41 No.14626636

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:41 No.14626636

Replies: >>14626676 >>14626695

>>14626509
The definition hasn't changed. People are fucktarded and believe what the media says, but, in reality, it wasn't until the 80's that the religious parasites latched on and claimed to be a part of conservatism, despite the fact that by definition their policies were big government, welfare and authoritarian, thus the counter purposes of conservatism. Social "conservatism" is a contradiction in terms.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:42 No.14626652

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:42 No.14626652

Replies: >>14626705

>>14626594
Whatever. Do you hold it against me that I want Creationism banned from schools (believe or not, it's still taught here)? It's not science, and it never will be for the foreseeable future. It's fucking irrelevant.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:42 No.14626654

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:42 No.14626654

>>14626509
they still are
conservatives want laws to control peoples personal lives
they are church goers and often prejudiced against others even of the same religion
I could go on

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:42 No.14626670

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:42 No.14626670

Replies: >>14626729

>>14626616
>I'm not going to back up my claims!
>you do it!

no.
Don't bring unsubstantiated bullshit into a discussion and claim it to be relevant.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626676

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626676

Replies: >>14626838

>>14626636
>religious parasite latched on

You mean when reagan saw a voting block and radicalized them to get into office with complete disregard to the country as a whole?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626695

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626695

Replies: >>14626765

>>14626636
>it wasn't until the 80's that the religious parasites latched on and claimed to be a part of conservatism
You're about 30 years off there.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626704

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626704

>>14626605
Actually, abortion was supported and the death penalty during the 60's, according to several public polling agencies such as gallup.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626705

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:43 No.14626705

>>14626652
When the fuck did I say creationism was science? It fails completely under scrutiny and the scientific method.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:44 No.14626729

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:44 No.14626729

Replies: >>14626759

>>14626670
So disregard faggot, not like you ever contributed anything but shitposting.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:44 No.14626734

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:44 No.14626734

Replies: >>14626761

>>14625695
>>14625695
communism is by definition stateless, based on Marx's notion that the state only serves to protect bourgeois economic relations (private property and so on).
your idea of communism is really Soviet socialism as it actually existed, which was state-totalitarian as a result of Lenin's "vanguard party" (the Communist Party), which essentially seized the state, to establish what was meant to be total democratic control by the working class (clearly that never eventuated), and used it to attempt to stamp out bourgeois elements, leading "theoretically" to a stage where all property would be communally held and therefore class antagonisms no longer exist. at this point the state would become irrelevant and be dismantled, leading to "full communism".

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:45 No.14626759

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:45 No.14626759

Replies: >>14626785

>>14626729
>b-b-but you're just as bad as me! So that makes me not so bad!

mmm, cognitive dissonance tears.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:45 No.14626761

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:45 No.14626761

>>14626734
>communism
*true communism

(the end result of proletariat dictatorship (didnt work out well ;)))

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:46 No.14626765

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:46 No.14626765

Replies: >>14626821 >>14626879

>>14626695
wrong . they hijacked the 1964 republican convention and the party

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:46 No.14626782

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:46 No.14626782

>>14626589
>You both need to kill yourselves for being stupid niggers. You don't think for yourselves. Instead, you're fed talking points by your equally as stupid, and retarded talking heads.
>Just fucking kill yourselves already.

Look at all that argument. This is the best argument in the world. Nothing could possible beat this argument, it is coherent, well reasoned and logical. Truly, a sight to behold.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:46 No.14626785

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:46 No.14626785

>>14626759
>muh trolling.>>14626759

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:47 No.14626814

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:47 No.14626814

Replies: >>14626908

>>14624792
>Funny, I only hear anti-scientific rhetoric coming from the right

Do get all your political news from /pol/ or what?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:47 No.14626821

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:47 No.14626821

>>14626765
Wrong. They lost the 1964 nomination when Goldwater won. It wasn't until Reagan that they gained any poll.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:48 No.14626838

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:48 No.14626838

>>14626676
Yes.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:48 No.14626865

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:48 No.14626865

goldwater was booed for saying abortion was between a woman and her doctor

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:49 No.14626879

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:49 No.14626879

Replies: >>14626954 >>14627024

File: 1369374556818.jpg-(51 KB, 447x509, 1264281195847.jpg)

51 KB JPG

>>14626765
Have you got any citations for that? Actual citations, not m-m-muh Goldwater!

>hurr fuckin fundie fascists takin over MUH CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT
>what are sodomy laws?
>why was on-demand abortion only legal in two states before Roe?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:49 No.14626893

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:49 No.14626893

Replies: >>14627954

File: 1369374586514.png-(477 KB, 499x500, 1301801921523.png)

477 KB PNG

>Says Capitalism appeals only to the lowest common denominator and that free markets will turn people into stupid drooling retards and turns all humans into abstract cogs within a system.

He's absolutely correct. Do people actually disagree with this?

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:50 No.14626908

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:50 No.14626908

>>14626814
>Do get all your political news from /pol/ or what?

What? I don't even come here that often. Are you blind to the right wing's insanity on pollution and climate change? You got people like fucking Joe Barton apologizing to goddamn BP, lol.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:50 No.14626931

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:50 No.14626931

>>14626626
He didn't say that. He said that reading it was pointless...

Maybe a joke went over my head, because otherwise, you're a dumbass.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:51 No.14626954

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:51 No.14626954

>>14626879
Goldwater was actually proof that Goldwater was wrong.

>dat irony

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:52 No.14626997

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:52 No.14626997

Replies: >>14627260

>>14626103
>We know for a fact that SS will be bankrupt by 2035

Is this a consequence of draining money out of it or the unavoidable consequence of the decrease in contributors vs. benefactors because that is actually false, truthfully if it does become bankrupt because we made it a policy to devert funds away from it, productivity increases could easily support such a system.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)01:53 No.14627024

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)01:53 No.14627024

Replies: >>14627131

>>14626879
He's kinda right. Barry Goldwater realized his whole states' rights shit/Southern Strategy brought over all the religious nutballs.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:56 No.14627131

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:56 No.14627131

Replies: >>14627216 >>14627321

>>14627024
The southern strategy didn't start until Nixon... Do you even history?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:58 No.14627216

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:58 No.14627216

Replies: >>14627336

>>14627131
It started with lbj .he know if he signed the civil rights bill he would loose the religious and racist

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)01:59 No.14627260

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)01:59 No.14627260

>>14626997
Except there are 3.3 workers per retiree, instead of the original 16 per retiree. Yes, draining the fund killed it faster, but by 2035 it will be bankrupt without the draining. The system itself is failed.

And, before you say anything I just stated is false, the government's Social Security Administration said it first. Suck reality, bitch.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)02:01 No.14627321

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)02:01 No.14627321

Replies: >>14627398

File: 1369375298676.jpg-(77 KB, 720x540, 1332563833480.jpg)

77 KB JPG

>>14627131
*slaps forehead*

It begin with Barry Goldwater... He lost running in 1964, remember?

You can still lose an election and start moving further to the right... hence the Tea Party.

Barry Goldwater warned you.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:02 No.14627336

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:02 No.14627336

Replies: >>14627435 >>14627567

>>14627216
That isn't a southern strategy, and the strategy didn't work. Carter and Clinton both won most of the south, so it either was the worst political strategy in the world, or pretending that state's rights means jim crow to justify creating the illusion of a "southern strategy" was stupid as fuck liberals making shit up.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:03 No.14627374

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:03 No.14627374

Replies: >>14627417

Its like how creationists attack the origins of species. You guys are economic creationists. Economies need a designer aka the state they can't just order themselves.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:03 No.14627398

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:03 No.14627398

>>14627321
But the fact is, Goldwater was a paranoid anti-religionist. Not to bash him, I would have supported him if I had been old enough to vote at the time, but he was always afraid of religionists.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:04 No.14627417

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:04 No.14627417

>>14627374
THIS

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:04 No.14627435

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:04 No.14627435

>>14627336
Carter was actually what the right at the time said they wanted
a white christian southerner
clinton won because the country were sick of the psycho cruel right

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)02:08 No.14627567

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)02:08 No.14627567

Replies: >>14627810

File: 1369375683984.jpg-(47 KB, 312x401, lee-atwater-republican-strat.jpg)

47 KB JPG

>>14627336
>creating the illusion of a "southern strategy" was stupid as fuck liberals making shit up.

WUT?

400 hrs in mspaint.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:11 No.14627674

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:11 No.14627674

Replies: >>14627858 >>14628211

>>14622154 (OP)

As a guy working on his PhD in Economics, this makes my dick hard.

I usually come here for the lulz -- putting up with the "Austrians" -- this made my day

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)02:15 No.14627795

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)02:15 No.14627795

Replies: >>14627825

Here's why MLK ditched Barry Goldwater (because of racism/extremism):

>The Republican Party geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism. All people of goodwill viewed with alarm and concern the frenzied wedding at the Cow Palace of the KKK with the radical right. The "best man" at this ceremony was a senator whose voting record, philosophy, and program were anathema to all the hard-won achievements of the past decade.

>It was both unfortunate and disastrous that the Republican Party nominated Barry Goldwater as its candidate for President of the United States. In foreign policy Mr. Goldwater advocated a narrow nationalism, a crippling isolationism, and a trigger-happy attitude that could plunge the whole world into the dark abyss of annihilation. On social and economic issues, Mr. Goldwater represented an unrealistic conservatism that was totally out of touch with the realities of the twentieth century. The issue of poverty compelled the attention of all citizens of our country. Senator Goldwater had neither the concern nor the comprehension necessary to grapple with this problem of poverty in the fashion that the historical moment dictated. On the urgent issue of civil rights, Senator Goldwater represented a philosophy that was morally indefensible and socially suicidal. While not himself a racist, Mr. Goldwater articulated a philosophy which gave aid and comfort to the racist. His candidacy and philosophy would serve as an umbrella under which extremists of all stripes would stand. In the light of these facts and because of my love for America, I had no alternative but to urge every Negro and white person of goodwill to vote against Mr. Goldwater and to withdraw support from any Republican candidate that did not publicly disassociate himself from Senator Goldwater and his philosophy.

(1/2)

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:15 No.14627810

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:15 No.14627810

>>14627567

You should probably read the whole post, not just a small part of it...

It's also fascinating that Atwater is the only person anyone can seem to pull up to support the southern strategy argument.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)02:15 No.14627825

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)02:15 No.14627825

File: 1369376159076.jpg-(32 KB, 420x306, 1350026689021.jpg)

32 KB JPG

>>14627795
(2/2)

>While I had followed a policy of not endorsing political candidates, I felt that the prospect of Senator Goldwater being President of the United States so threatened the health, morality, and survival of our nation, that I could not in good conscience fail to take a stand against what he represented.

>The celebration of final enactment of the civil rights bill curdled and soured. Rejoicing was replaced by a deep and frightening concern that the counter-forces to Negro liberation could flagrantly nominate for the highest office in the land one who openly clasped the racist hand of Strom Thurmond. A cold fear touched the hearts of twenty million Negroes. They had only begun to come out of the dark land of Egypt where so many of their brothers were still in bondage-still denied elementary dignity. The forces to bar the freedom road, to drive us back to Egypt, seemed so formidable, so high in authority, and so determined.

-July 16 1964 King

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:16 No.14627858

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:16 No.14627858

>>14627674
That's the third time you've pointed to your phd in economics, I call bullshit. Not that it matters, there are austrains, classifications and fucktards with PhD's in economics as well, so it doesn't make you some special snowflake man.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:19 No.14627954

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:19 No.14627954

>>14626893
>Says Socialism appeals only to the lowest common denominator and that command economies will turn people into stupid drooling retards and turns all humans into abstract cogs within a system.

ftfy retard

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:21 No.14627999

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:21 No.14627999

Replies: >>14628025

why is this faggot thread still going. there isn't anything economics related going on in here.

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6
05/24/13(Fri)02:21 No.14628025

GATOR !8ZK7w05Zo6 05/24/13(Fri)02:21 No.14628025

>>14627999
Do threads normally stay on topic? Nope.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:23 No.14628066

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:23 No.14628066

Nobody takes everything Smith said as entirely factually correct. He formed a good foundation for the development of modern economics, but many of his assumptions and predictions turned out incorrect. It's like Newton. He made enormous contributions to early mathematics and physics, but he was also wrong about many things.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:26 No.14628211

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:26 No.14628211

Replies: >>14628286 >>14628346

>>14627674
>haha I knew better than Mises and Rothbard, I've got a PhD

If you're a Keynesian you should kindly retake your entire doctoral program over and rethink your conclusion.

If you're Chicago you're at least close.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:29 No.14628286

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:29 No.14628286

>>14628211
>iF your a Keynesian
>rethink
>Think
There is a flaw in your plan

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:30 No.14628346

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:30 No.14628346

Replies: >>14628392 >>14628511

>>14628211

what's wrong with Keynes?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:32 No.14628392

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:32 No.14628392

Replies: >>14628589

>>14628346
His economic philosophy that is dependent on bubbles and public economic interference...

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:36 No.14628511

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:36 No.14628511

>>14628346
Not to mention his idea of a perfect relationship between inflation and employment was decimated in the 1970's under Carter, when we saw the rise of stagflation, and his philosophy taking 10 years to solve the great depression, something that a lassiez-faire attitude solved in 18 months in 1920-21, a depression that dipped lower than the great depression, and was fixed with no government interference, leading to the roaring twenties.

His "economics' is only popular because it gives politicians an excuse to say they tried something, no matter how stupid that something was or how little it worked.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:36 No.14628525

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:36 No.14628525

Replies: >>14628601

keyens said when the economy is good pay down debt
when the economy is bad(when the business cycle ends) you can soften the crash buy building infrastructure
friedman if you have enough to pay down debt you are taxing too much and when the crash comes (when the business cycle ends)
the free market will fix it

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:38 No.14628589

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:38 No.14628589

Replies: >>14628630

>>14628392
and what did friedman do about that?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:39 No.14628601

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:39 No.14628601

Replies: >>14628636

>>14628525
That is an insane oversimplification, and an inaccurate one with friedman.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:39 No.14628630

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:39 No.14628630

Replies: >>14628660 >>14628808

>>14628589
He suggested not creating bubbles...

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:39 No.14628636

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:39 No.14628636

>>14628601
how?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:40 No.14628644

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:40 No.14628644

>>14625046
But there'd still be states in your "anarcho"-capitalists society, it's just they'd be run by private interests, be far smaller and call themselves corporations.

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:40 No.14628660

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:40 No.14628660

>>14628630
did it work?

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:41 No.14628694

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:41 No.14628694

>>14622154 (OP)
lolbertarian here. no one i know gives 2 shits about this statist asshat

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:45 No.14628808

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:45 No.14628808

>>14628630
I have some useless ideas too
maybe we should give them a try
the biggest problem with capitalism for 300 years was the system always makes bubbles and crashes
about every generation keynes solved that

Anonymous
05/24/13(Fri)02:46 No.14628829

Anonymous 05/24/13(Fri)02:46 No.14628829

>>14625352
Is this image being deliberately retarded? They seem to be confusing what states rights means. Also it presents a false dichotomy, you can hold a position somewhere between total anarchy and total state control.