The Libertarian Society of TSR. Watch

turn and fall
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#501
Report 7 years ago
#501
(Original post by Kibalchich)
man the **** up, pussy
Thought as much.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#502
Report 7 years ago
#502
if you don't think I demolished your arguments, then reply to my points, or shut the **** up
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#503
Report 7 years ago
#503
Post childish ****e and get a childish response. There's nothing more childish that not admitting when you're beat.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#504
Report 7 years ago
#504
(Original post by Algorithm69)
This thread is just one example. Your childish, flippant, terse and insulting posting style has become the norm it seems.
Mum? Is that you?

Post something sensible and get a sensible response. Post **** and get **** back.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#505
Report 7 years ago
#505
There's very little sensible discussion on this thread, tis true. A bunch of middle class kids talking about being free to starve? Get a grip.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#506
Report 7 years ago
#506
Right you are.

Tell me about the freedom to starve.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#507
Report 7 years ago
#507
Maybe not directly. Its the logical outcome of "libertarian" philosophy though.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#508
Report 7 years ago
#508
Round and round we go.

I've made my position clear on this thread. No one has been able to defend "libertarianism" from the charge that it sees freedom only in terms of freedom for people with property and everyone else can starve.

You lot are a joke. A bunch of over privildeged middle class ****ers, without the guts to admit to your hatred of the poor.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#509
Report 7 years ago
#509
Then you're an idiot. Why would you want to support a philosophy that would see you starve?
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#510
Report 7 years ago
#510
So you're not actually a "libertarian" then. Fairynuff.

My issue is with "libertarians" who promote "free" market capitalism.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#511
Report 7 years ago
#511
I consider myself a libertarian btw, in the older political sense of the word (libertarian socialist).
0
reply
turn and fall
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#512
Report 7 years ago
#512
(Original post by Kibalchich)
Maybe not directly. Its the logical outcome of "libertarian" philosophy though.
If the libertarian philosophy was adopted world wide there would be no starvation. In a free global food market resources would be allocated much more equitably than with our current system of gov. control and corruption of price signals.

The starving in Africa is caused by western regulations on food. It is a great tradition in the West to protect farmers and labour unions. All at the expense of the genuinely poor. All aid is a concessionary gesture of apology. The only true humanitarians are the free marketeers.

There is no system that has improved the lives of the common man more effectively than capitalism. There is no system that has protected the money of the wealthy as well as regulated markets.
1
reply
J1812
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#513
Report 7 years ago
#513
You lot are a joke. A bunch of over privildeged middle class ****ers, without the guts to admit to your hatred of the poor.
(Original post by Kibalchich)
Then you're an idiot. Why would you want to support a philosophy that would see you starve?
If a rich libertarian just hates the poor, and a poor libertarian is a hypocrite, who are the genuine ones?

Are you aware people say similar things, the other way around, in extremist-capitalist circles? "Socialists don't really care about the poor, they just seek their own power and control".

Hopefully the quote below will elevate the discussion a bit:

In my view, the fundamental conflict is not between bad men and good men but between mistaken beliefs and correct beliefs.

In other words, just because A believes X idea leads to bad results, does not mean people who support X are bad, they might disagree about the outcomes of X. If A supports Y instead, the pattern can work the other way.
0
reply
D.R.E
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#514
Report 7 years ago
#514
I'm hoping people will start ignoring this user Kibalchich as he is definitely just an idiot who seems to be intent on throwing around baseless strawmen instead of having any legitimate discussions. I expect he doesn't know very much about his own position anyway, hence the stupidity in his posts. Then maybe we can have some decent discussion in here.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#515
Report 7 years ago
#515
(Original post by turn and fall)
If the libertarian philosophy was adopted world wide there would be no starvation. In a free global food market resources would be allocated much more equitably than with our current system of gov. control and corruption of price signals.

The starving in Africa is caused by western regulations on food. It is a great tradition in the West to protect farmers and labour unions. All at the expense of the genuinely poor. All aid is a concessionary gesture of apology. The only true humanitarians are the free marketeers.

There is no system that has improved the lives of the common man more effectively than capitalism. There is no system that has protected the money of the wealthy as well as regulated markets.
Seeing as free markets have never existed, I wonder what you base your assertions on?
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#516
Report 7 years ago
#516
(Original post by J1812)
If a rich libertarian just hates the poor, and a poor libertarian is a hypocrite, who are the genuine ones?

Are you aware people say similar things, the other way around, in extremist-capitalist circles? "Socialists don't really care about the poor, they just seek their own power and control".

Hopefully the quote below will elevate the discussion a bit:

In my view, the fundamental conflict is not between bad men and good men but between mistaken beliefs and correct beliefs.

In other words, just because A believes X idea leads to bad results, does not mean people who support X are bad, they might disagree about the outcomes of X. If A supports Y instead, the pattern can work the other way.
Errrmmm...Algorithm69 isn't a "libertarian" in the political/economic sense.
0
reply
Kibalchich
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#517
Report 7 years ago
#517
(Original post by D.R.E)
I'm hoping people will start ignoring this user Kibalchich as he is definitely just an idiot who seems to be intent on throwing around baseless strawmen instead of having any legitimate discussions. I expect he doesn't know very much about his own position anyway, hence the stupidity in his posts. Then maybe we can have some decent discussion in here.
Which strawmen are they then? Could you actually engage with my criticisms of "libertarianism"? Is that too much to ask?
0
reply
turn and fall
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#518
Report 7 years ago
#518
(Original post by Kibalchich)
Seeing as free markets have never existed, I wonder what you base your assertions on?
Logic. It is the methodology of praxeology.

Suppose there is a plot of land. A populus gets its food from this land. It farms the land and it produces X food. X food can support of population of Y people. So the system regulates itself and only Y people exist.

There will not be more than Y people to a significant extent because if there was some people would be unable to feed themselves and reproduce. Thus the populus tends towards Y. That is demand would outstrip supply. Prices of food would rise and some people would be unable to pay for children they may consider concieving

Naturally as new capital and knowledge is found the ability of the plot of land to produce food will increase. And thus the population can increase.

The problem of draughts and crop failures can be solved through the price mechanism and international trade. If a crop fails then the populus can import food. It will be willing to pay more for imported food than countries without crop failures. And thus the price of food will rise to the point at which enough food is reallocted from the prior importers to the country with crop failure.

The rise in price will also incentivise more producers to enter the food market. This is the price signalling mechanism again. The new producers see the potential for profit and enter the market. As food has very flexible supply, anybody could become a farmer if they have land, this system works very well. The increase in supply is allocated towards the country with crop failure.

It is of interest to note that this phenomina could be seen as benevolance. When in reality the new producers are being guided by abstract signals of price and profit to tell them what their fellow mans needs. The new producer need not know of the famine to serve the starving. All he needs to do is be guided by self interest.

By persuing profit we are being as altruistic as we can possibly be

Here is a great video explaining this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E74itK6yLJY

F.A.Hayek


Gov. interference such as regulations on farming, subsidies, aid, tariffs all corrupt this mechanism and cause a malallocation of resources.
0
reply
D.R.E
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#519
Report 7 years ago
#519
(Original post by Kibalchich)
Which strawmen are they then? Could you actually engage with my criticisms of "libertarianism"? Is that too much to ask?
All the stuff about middle class kids and libertarianism making people poor.

I'm all for criticisms, so can you please post a succinct response to this post with all your criticisms - preferably minus the strawmen - and I will try to respond accordingly.
0
reply
J1812
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#520
Report 7 years ago
#520
(Original post by Kibalchich)
Errrmmm...Algorithm69 isn't a "libertarian" in the political/economic sense.
I noticed, I'm referring to before you knew that. You made those two accusations "rich ones just hate the poor, the poor ones are hypocrites" before he that mentioned he wasn't a free-market libertarian.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have a role model?

Yes - I know them personally (296)
25.92%
Yes - they're famous (292)
25.57%
No I don't (554)
48.51%

Watched Threads

View All