>In america, ISPs and mobile providers can pay for exclusive

>commie like to use shitty provider backed by government

>free unregulated market
>Government enforces to use one service kicking out other companies
Are you idiot or what?

>>61778323
/thread

OMG, they are actually defending it! : D

>>61778312
>>61778323
>It's not tyranny when a private corporation does it

>>61778264
>companies can abuse the legislative power of a corrupt government to keep others from reaching fair competition by law instead of giving better products or dominating the market with shear convinience
>libertarians would prevent the government from being able to enact these monopolies
>this is bad

>>61778345
Defending what?
>Government REGULATES market to enforce monopoly on one service
>Free unregulated market
American education as is

>>61778352
Does what, idiot? It's enforced by state. They're paying state for right on monopoly

>>61778372
It's enforced because it's paid for, such a practice should be illegal. But then again, ancaps and lolbergs sperg out at the thought of any kind off regulation, even ones that would help them.

>>61778439
In libertarian society you physically can't pay gov for monopoly because in libertarian state government does not have instruments to manipulate economy and market, in ancap society there is no government at all

>>61778264
>States pay ISPs millions of dollars to invest in infrastructure

>They literally just take the money and do fuck all but raise prices and stifle competition and pay future politicians to continue their monopoly

>There are people who still think America represents anything even remotely close to a free market

>>61778467
They wouldn't need to pay off because they would be an unchallengable monopoly. It would be completely impossible to compete in a libertarian or ancap society.

>>61778467
So instead you buy all the competition out or collude with the other suppliers. So much better.

If the cables instead were commonly owned this wouldn't be a problem. You can still have private corporations supplying the internet if you really want, the most important part is making sure noone can have a monopoly on the physical cables.

>>61778494
>>61778510
Monopolies doesn't survive in free market for tons of reasons. Read Adam Smith please. Are you 14yo who discovered libertarianism?

>>61778264
> internet neutrality is the thing that created ISP monopolies in the first place, because content-specific providers are not allowed to exist
> we could have DVD-quality netflix in early 2000s, but we didn't because of that

>>61778599
>He actually thinks companies would be more competitive and innovative if there was no regulations stopping them from showing even more corporate nepotism and market segmentation.


DOWNS
O
W
N
S

SYNDROME
Y
N
D
R
O
M
E

>>61778587
Yet monopolies be them natural or created have been around just as long.

>>61778625
Monopolies is mostly created with "help" of government. Do you think that there are fucking elfs in anti-monopoly committee? Do you think that gov are not lobbying companies interests?

>>61778649
And how do you think you stop that? Make a law against that? Oh wait, that would be regulation and we cannot allow that.

it's the same here in australia

>>61778657
In libertarian society government simply does not have instruments to manipulate markets.

>>61778680
Nothing stopping a company from sabotaging or making secret deals to enforce monopoly. You're delusional if you think that america went full libertarian the average joe will be able to afford startup capital to realistically compete with the big ISPs

>tfw socialist libertarian
>tfw all this is physically hurting me
Why do I have to want for a government that has never and will never exist?

The government has to specifically grant companies the right to dig and lay down lines to prevent a huge clusterfuck. There's no way around that.

Well actually there is. The government could just own the lines and sell access.

>>61778624
>He actually thinks companies would be more competitive and innovative
I didn't say that, nigger

>>61778707
There is nothing wrong with natural monopolies and local monopolies.

>>61778624
>He actually thinks that government has created a fucking thing.

>>61778726
And like clockwork the lolberg supports only 1 ISP per city as long as it's local only.

I've never used the word before but Americans seem to be getting 'cucked' in the ISP issues. Be it prices or surveillance or no neutrality shit.

>>61778722
>The government could just own the lines and sell access.
Barring roads, have you ever used a government-made anything? Because aside from the road system, it's basically 100% shit, and a lot of the roads are falling to pieces too.

>>61778713
Because you're naive enough to believe humans will ever put their own selfishness aside to serve the needs of the common good.

Someone's always going to come out ahead and everybody else is always going to do anything they can to be that guy. Been that way for literally the entirety of human history, not stopping any time soon.

>>61778738

Where did I say the government made anything? Their job isn't to "make" anything it's just to stop companies from raping us even more than they do now.

Now if you want to argue about how well they do that job we can but the point is we'd be in even deeper shit without the (mostly theatrical) regulations that are in place, even if they aren't always honored.


>>61778775
>Implying the GOP isn't purposefully gutting and letting local infrastructure rot so they can further their end goal of privatizing literally everything.

>>61778755
So do you try to tell me that if there's town in middle of nowhere with population of 500 people it will be served by 100500 ISP companies?

>>61778796
> Because you're naive enough to believe humans will ever put their own selfishness aside
People in the government are not aliens or robots as well.

>>61778796
>Raping us
Throw out your computer ok? It is created by company, commie. Why do you buy computer and let yourself be raped?

>>61778758
its not just the americucks getting dicked by isps because it also applies to australia here too

>>61778775
Postal service handles service in rural areas when no private company would, they also basically serve as the backend for several private companies.

Medicare and medicaid, old people and people who are simply incapable of receiving insurance. I'm sure these people would disagree with you on that.

>>61778831
>Anyone who disagrees with you is a communist
Be sure to bend over just a little further since you love being fucked so much

>>61778831
Lol, so having criticisms about corporate lobbying and the fact that the only thing stopping them from completely demolishing what tiny fraction of freedom actually remains in our markets is a thin layer of government regulation means I'm not allowed to use things created by corporations?

The weight of your extra chromosomes could create orbit.


Go back to /pol/, homo, nobody gives a shit about your bootlicking ass here.

>>61778884
Well, it's you who like getting fucked by government and love when state are stealing your income, not me. Companies do not steal from me nothing - I'm paying them and getting myself nice goods. And when I'm paying government I'm getting cops that don't give a shit about your education, money thrown to welfare niggers, incompetent burecrauts and other shit

Just for redpilling you. There is English subtitles so you can watch it
https://youtu.be/RCgIbh28Vas
https://youtu.be/Gxrd7IspN7c

>>61778913
>Corporate lobbying
>Libertarians
You're either really dumb or just 14yo leftist

>>61778931
I bet you think it being illegal to dump factory waste into our rivers or you can't force children to work in dangerous jobs for long hours with little pay is evil communism as well.

>>61778948
>This funny "ancap" memes that kid read in some funny page on Facebook
Just stop it

>>61778966
It's what ancaps actually do believe

>exclusive rights
>ancap
Only pick one.

>>61778948
Duh, stupid. In a free market those companies wouldn't be able to turn a profit.

You think people would buy products from a company that commits atrocities and has sub-human working conditions?

Don't be ridiculous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn_suicides

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_sweatshops

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-privatization-of-water-in-india-how-cocacola-destroys-the-aquifer/5472625

>>61778982
You can't simply thrown shit from factory to river because land near the river is owned by people and you're actually cause pollution on their property.
And you can't fucking "enforce" someone to work somewhere because it's crime.

And if you're talking about just children working somewhere - their parents most likely don't allow them to work on dangerous jobs + you're losing reputation on market by doing things like that

>>61778855
Strata is understandable. It's a fucking desert in the middle of nowhere

>>61779013
1) I don't give a shit about niggers and poos
2) In poostan and China it's really not that bad.

>>61778323
This

>>61779075
>/pol/dancer opinions disregarded

Let me know how high school goes.

>>61779051

>he thinks the corprations would give a shit about who lives on the land they are polluting
>he thinks that without a state body there could actually be some way to stop them from doing it
>he thinks that living as the children of poor peasants who have no opportunities or mobility doesn't count as being "forced"
>he thinks the parents would even have a choice
>he actually believes in "losing reputation" (le ethical capitalism"

everyone take a good look at how hopelessy naive the average ancap is. they are literally the retarded yin to the full communism retarded yang. the only places that even resemble anarcho capitalism are third world shitholes like somalia and other parts of rural africa

>>61779051
>their parents most likely don't allow them to work on dangerous jobs + you're losing reputation on market by doing things like that
We can easily disprove that because before child labor laws were a thing children did work, with their parents even allowing it. I think the parents may not have necessarily wanted them to work but if they were dirt poor having their older children working and bringing money to the table was a requirement then. Children were often used for jobs that required small people or small hands which often meant working in confined spaces with poor ventilation and otherwise poor working conditions. They were also not paid well, but a lot of people really weren't paid well until a federal minimum wage was implemented.

>>61779098
>>61779084
Oh my God, kid. Do you know what is private investigation companies?

>>61779111
If parents allow this it's okay and there's nothing wrong with that.

Government enforced monopoly doesn't exist, it's like these retards who think net neutrality will destroy innovation.

>>61779098
>He thinks that government is nanny who is 100% GUD and want to help you and really give a shit about you
So you're really 14yo leftist?

>>61779125
Except of course the children do not have a choice in the matter, the parent is their guardian so what the parent says goes. The problem is children are citizens and deserve to have the same rights to life and liberty. The government basically said if children are to be subservient to parents in every other way parents are not allowed to abuse their position to take advantage of them for money making reasons.

>>61779113

>kid

sure sign of being completely ass-annihilated. projecting much? i'm guessing you are 18 tops.

in anarcho capitalism if you are not in the tippy tippy top 10% or so then you are worth less than your own organs. what are you going to pay your "private investigation company" with when you make just enough to stay alive day-by-day? you think google corp couldn't just double it to tell them to fuck off? and what are they going to do when the google corp drone army can just obliterate your house from the sky and you collect water in rain barrels?

>>61779138
>What is Brewers Retail
>What is East India Company
Really?

>>61779141

i know you think you are hot shit sitting behind your computer monitor with your assault rifle or whatever but the state is literally the only thing standing in the way of your entire neighbourhood getting napalmed and you getting herded into a work-camp

>>61779153
Yet again this 14yo dreamworld where everyone is GUD WORKERS POOR LIVEN IN SLUMS and there is BAD STUPED COMPANIES FUCKING BAD RICH.
Kid, world is not black and white, it's not binary

>>61779173
So what is case of napalming neighborhood?

>>61779187

>14yo

once again with the age accusations.

>random capital letters strawman quotes with typos

i think you are lost, you might get along better on /r/the_donald, they're more about your speed

>Kid

lol

>world is not black and white, it's not binary

and yet the ancaps are in favour of completely abolishing the state because it is 100% bad and not having it is 100% good. that sounds familiar

>>61779194

corps want your land and know there is fuck all you can do about it with your pea-shooter collection. you could be worth a few months of hard labour before you get sick and then get killed and harvested for bio materials

>>61779207
>You lost I win
Okay, okay as you say, kid. Now go to Bernie rally and other shit. You can also give some money to rapefugees
>>61779218
So in communist wonderland corps are destroying markets and people who can buy goods they produce? Nice knowledge of economics.

Oh, I almost forgotten. Companies are BAD STUPED CAPETALIST and they will simply destroy their clients just because they're EVIL BAD

>>61779249

>You lost I win

????

>something about bernie

never brought up bernie. i guess you're just throwing random shit at the wall to see if it sticks

>rapefugees

lol what are you even talking about?

>So in communist wonderland corps are destroying markets and people who can buy goods they produce? Nice knowledge of economics.

well if the land you occupy is worth more than the pennies you can afford after your 10hr workday you put back in, yeah. and with the world population creeping over 7 billion and automation taking over most manual labour, hate to break it to ya bud but angry right-wing squatters really aren't even worth being kept alive to a corporation unrestricted by any enforceable ethical code.

File: 150203-Lung-incidence-and-smoking-rates.png (23KB, 610x398px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 610x398px

>>61779274
Right? Why would a company be retarded enough to knowingly kill its own customers?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/mens-health/light-smoking-dangerous-in-any-dose

https://www.nap.edu/read/18997/chapter/6

>>61778264
Why would a libertarian defend that? I don't get it.
Do you have an example of one defending monopoly like that or are you just talking shit?

>>61779274
You're meming but that's exactly what's happening.

>>61779305
So in commie wonderland companies will make goods and resources from thin air? It seems like profit will come from thin air too, because there are no consumers(in Wonderland they're KILLED BY BAD CAPETALIST).

How come houseowners don't own the cables that run through their houses?
It's literally their property.

Districts should own the cables and have right to switch the whole place to any ISP they like.

>>61779327
>>61779344
Smoking are killing do you know that, kid?

>>61778738
How about the internet, retard.

>>61779345

>commie wonderland

i'm still not sure why you think i'm a communist because i oppose anarcho capitalism. to quote yourself:

"Kid, world is not black and white, it's not binary"

the rest of your post hinges on me being a communist which simply isn't true, i just recognize the hellscape that is inevitable in the case of unrestricted human greed and power accumulation.

File: d20.jpg (20KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 420x420px

All innovation comes from the public sector, because things like education and rnd are inherently socialist concepts.
Retard ancaps literally can't refute this.

>>61779274
Companies aren't really good or bad, they just do what makes the most sense for their bottom line. The problem is the incentives are usually working for the bad thing or at least against the good thing. The government should act as a counterweight, to incentivize good things or at least discourage bad things.

>>61779373
If not boom of e-commerce in 90's and .com bubble Internet will still be some network for universities
>>61779382
Please answer my question and stop whining. Where profit will come if STUPID BED copitalist killed all consumers?

>>61778264
>free
>being forced to 'choose' from a single isp
nicetry

>>61779392
Yes, you're right, but kids here thinking that companies are some Boogeyman who want to kill all the consumers for no reason.

>>61779387

if the world was run on anarcho capitalism then we would be stuck using the lowest-quality cheapest-produced junk tools so that we would have to continue replacing them (for money) forever

this is why atlas shrugged was a retarded book. rearden steel was literally the worst possible business decision for hank rearden to make if he wanted to maximize his profit. but ayn rand was a career academic who never understood economics at all so she just wrote him as this noble captialist knight-in-shining armour who has become the self-image for retarded ancaps and libertarians who are too stupid to think more than 1 day ahead

File: 1502002867201.jpg (120KB, 810x539px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 810x539px

>implying one extremity is better than the other

Need balance between corporations and government. I guess these days the problem is just deciding which you want to control your state/nation.

>>61779361
I think local and state governments own the lines in their districts they just enter into a contract with a company that is in charge of maintaining the lines and laying new lines down. If a govt allows in a new company they may break the contract which opens them up to legal problems

>>61779408
>Some network for universities
It was founded by the department of defense for use in research and development. If anything, the internet would be MORE objectively useful without those things because it wouldn't have been tainted by vapid commercialism.

>Where profit will come if STUPID BED copitalist killed all consumers?

The key is to not kill all your consumers and make sure your product is enticing or necessary enough to ignore the risk, see tobacco, alcohol, pharma, agriculture.

>>61778264
Welcome to corporatism, the shittiest form of capitalism where the government and major companies are sucking each other's cock and abusing people to stay in power.

>>61778467
Good thing America isn't libertarian. And retard citizens and (((patriots))) are actually fighting to keep it that way. EU, even though it is corrupted, has better approaches and drains money from monopolies.

>>61778587
>what is Microsoft

>>61779408
> Internet will still be some network for universities
That would be a good thing, retard.

Capitslists only capitalize (lol) on public sector innovations, they're nothing but parasites.

Anyway, you have to be a 100% retard mongoloid to be right wing and support capitalism.
>spergs out about refugees
>doesn't realize importing cheap workforce for le infinite growth meme is a capitalist incentive
Capitalism is non-discriminatory, devoid of culture, ethics or morals. Corporations will import a billion pajeets to replace your white nuclear family wonderland, if it gives them profit.

Retard.

>>61779435
>What is enterprise market
>What is consumer grade product
>What is cheaper manufacturing
Deep economics knowledge as usual. Also, you forget that we will not use anything because companies will kill us

>>61779408

>answer my question

what question? where does profit come from in communism? it doesn't and communism is stupid. hence why i'm not a communist. therefore it's irrelevant.

it's not like "STUPID BED copitalist" would just start committing genocide all over the world at once, but once again it is you using your own black-and-white interpretation of all ideas in front of you and failing to think logically about it. the truth is you are not as an individual very valuable and would be in a very real risk of being simply exterminated to make room for assets that are more valuable if there was no ethical code to protect you.

>stop whining

holy moly you really are worked up about this aren't you? sorry to jimmy up your jangles so bad

Reminder that laissez-faire is the communism of capitalism.

>dude lmao just default to my quasi-religion when faced with any societal dilemma even though it's completely unworkable in any group of people larger than a few hundred
>if you advocate literally any other solution to literally any other problem you're a devil and eat babies

>>61779460
>What is IBM
>What is 100% lost markets of home consoles and mobile devices by MS
Heh
>>61779463
>>61779452
No it would be really bad thing. Absolutely no content and userbase
>>61779475
So they will kill everyone or not?

I can protect myself, I've got a gun

>>61779503

when someone claims to have a solution that solves all the problems at once and only requires a single sentence of explanation, it's probably not a good solution.

>>61779510
>Bad thing
>No content or userbase

Oh dear god, how could we have come this far if we didn't have social media and korean basket weaving boards and videos of cats farting?

>>61779520
So tons of ancap books are solution in one sentence?

>>61779510

>So they will kill everyone or not?

if you're not worth it, then they'll kill you. or displace you into an environment where you can't survive. quite likely actually because you are educated and have a sense of self worth. your house could house a dozen imported third-worlders who will work for a lot less than you and won't try to get guns, and they have a lot bigger guns than you do.

>I can protect myself, I've got a gun

lol. it's not 1776 anymore

>>61779532
Yes, we would. No one will give shit about Internet except 3.5 geeks

>>61779549
You can protect yourself with gun, it's not that hard.

>>61778264

This is a democracy based problem. Not even an ancap but dont blame the free market for a failure on behalf of the voters. We need to start fucking up the politicians who do this shit and the others will learn quick.

This is a problems of lazy people and would be worse with a collectivist economy. See Venezuela.

File: 902.jpg (61KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1000x800px

The nature of capitalism is that it REQUIRES a certain percentage of hobos, poor, middle class, rich and uber-wealthy.

No matter how rich a society gets under capitalism there will never be a situation where 100% of the population has every necessity fulfilled and can live their lives. If that happened, the economy would die because there'd no longer be a consumer class and no workforce.
It's imperative for capitalists to maintain that consumer-worker class by all means necessary. Whether by importing poor people or keeping people on a certain economic level.
It's nothing but a system of redistribution of wealth upwards, a mechanism of extortion and slavery.

And most importantly, there is ONE thing under capitalism that you can't buy, and that is your own time. No matter if you're poor or middle class, you WILL be waging for the majority of your time. And your expenses will proportionally stay the same for maxium extortion potential. Cheap products for poor people, expensive products for wealthy people, in the end both work the same hours and spend the same % of their income. And that creates a side effect where under capitalism innovation is impossible. Innovation is an aristocratic concept. All the renaissance era polymath geniuses weren't superhuman, they just didn't have to wage, and could explore and research their fields freely.

>>61779623
So what's wrong with hobos and rich people?

And yeah it's a lot better in socialism where everyone is poor hobos, and you all are equally miserable like in good old USSR

>>61779587
And why is that a bad thing? The only reason you give a shit about the internet is because it exists in its current form.

Personally I'd prefer a dedicated system for people who managed to graduate high school over this clusterfuck we have now where everybody thinks their opinion means a fucking thing even though they barely understand how the world works.

All retard political ideologists mistake the means for an end.

They think living under a system is desirable for some kind of aesthetic reason, as opposed to having a fulfilled, stable, fed and clothed society.
For them, the struggle itself is more important than what people are struggling for.

>>61779645
And I prefer Internet in current condition with tons of useful information, communities and stuff like that. And as you see market chooses me over you

>>61779667
Lol not for long once that fucking pajeet is done murdering net neutrality.

Enjoy paying 20 extra bucks a month to access 4chan.

>>61779635
If you like being socially engineered to fit arbitrary economic roles, nothing I guess.

You'll always have a consumerism worship carrot on a stick to console you. "Someday, I will be the boomer generation".

>>61779684
I'm paying 2 bucks for 50 mb/s

>>61779686
So what's an alternative? Socialist shit where everyone is poor as fuck, you work on shitty factory for pennies, and if you don't like it you're "enemy of people" and you're going to chop wood in Syberia

>>61779695
For now. Don't worry, your ISP is working very hard to change that.

Also, bullshit.

>>61779643
Same thing.
Both capitalism and socialism consolidate wealth and power to small entities, making everybody poor.
Both are anti-freedom and anti-human.

It's just that historically the rich countries happened to be capitalist and the poor ones communist.
There's no reason USSR wouldn't treat their slaves like the arab countries do their citizens, if they could actually afford it.

Wealth doesn't come from economic systems, it comes from the ground and from peoples' minds. Economic systems are just means of distribution of wealth, they don't create shit. Humans do.

>>61779738
>Bullshit
No, it's not. Feels good to live in slavland

>>61779475
>>61779408
Profit in both capitalism and communism comes from labour. There's nothing wrong with either economic system and they actually are both similar and will have the same end results for the people, with only a few exceptions. This is why some people who lived in communist countries prefer it because "everyone had a job, education and basic necessities and you didn't have to worry about starving or being homeless" and people who lived in capitalist countries prefer it because "you're not forced to educate yourself, you can choose your career more freely and have a chance to be above average in wealth".

The only thing in history that was wrong with "communist" countries was that they were totalitarian instead of direct democratic, even though communism was supposed to be stateless and classless and wasn't supposed to have a leader.

>>61779768
Does it? Does it really?

>>61779768
>Feels good to live in a worse authoritarian hellhole than cuba, basically living in snowy Saudi Arabia without the money

D E L U D E D
E
L
U
D
E
D

Net neutrality is just more communism, you're free with a free market, comcast can't thrive in a truly free market with their anti consumer practices

>>61779741
So if you've created goods from land in capitalist system it's yours goods, if you've done the same shit in socialist system - it's not your good, because private property is "bad", and land and all goods are "community" property.

>>61779786
>>61779787

If you're software dev in slavland you're actually not without money

>>61779725
Decentralization, individual self-sustainability, local means of production.

You're a slave because somebody is feeding you, somebody else is producing all your needs and you rely on centralized hubs for data exchange.

All political systems end up in slavery because they assume either submission to a governing entity or "cooperation", which is just submission to the social mean.

Freedom and self-determination will be achieved when each individual is completely self-reliant. But that's sci-fi tier.
As it stands now, EVERY civilization was built on a slave class. The only thing we can ask for now is for the masters to treat their slaves nice, at least. Which they're not very keen on doing.

>>61779800
>So if you've created goods from land in capitalist system it's yours goods
Lol. Who enforces your claim on your goods?
Whoever is holding a gun to your head, that's who. Be it the state or a corporation.

>>61779816
>All this money
>Still living in a shithole

Trash guys make upwards of 70k+ a year, you don't see people lining up to do that either. Turns out some people have higher standards of living than you, which is why you CHOOSE to live in what is essentially the anus of all white countries.

>>61778867
If there were no postal service or other government subsidized services people simply wouldn't move out into retarded areas and we'd have not insane population distributions. There aren't many countries like the US where half the population lives in suburbs or the middle of fucking nowhere

I hope people realize that the very concept of "property" is literally, unironically, a social construct.

Your ability to have property is just a function of your ability to keep others from making it their property.
It's just that in most societies, the state took up the role of the middle man, who provides you with physical force necessary to keep it in your possession (police, whatever), while you pay taxes.

Your claim on your physical property is no more valid than some media company's claim on their intellectual property. It's just that intellectual property is harder to protect.

>>61779883
>Your claim on your physical property is no more valid than some media company's claim on their intellectual property.
I would totally copy my neighbors house if it didn't cost me anything. And give me a nice house. And didn't take his away.

>>61780130
But you would crash le housing market, robbing the capitalist overlord of his profits.

Also, land can't be copied, it's just space.

>why won't they just dig up everything to connect the tubes directly to my house reeeeeeeee

>>61779834
100% self sustainability maintaining modern quality of life is impossible at current level of science and technology. This is what exchange and capitalism is for. So the best way is free market capitalism. For cucked society like us/Europe the best way would be libertarianism where state protects rights and property, for non cucked society with high civic duty it would be ancap where everyone is ready to protect their life and property using guns and response violence
>>61779844
I'm pretty ok with that, at least I'm not paying 40% of my income to state and not surrounded by niggers and mahmuds

>>61778796
>the common good
lol spooky

>>61779834
I'm holding the gun

>>61778323
This

>>61778312
here's the difference between private and public. Provate companies are meant to provide profit to their shareholders, people who invest in the company. If you do not invest in the company, you are not the priority of the company.

Public means run by the government, which is literally a company, where every citizen is an investor. Thus, the interests of literally everyone is number the number one priority.

Would you rather support the company you're already investing in, or the company that hands your money directly to someone else who invested?

>>61778264
Who enforces these exclusive rights? If your answer is "government", then it's not a free and unregulated market.

>>61780467
From my experience of going to private and state clinics and using private postal service and state postal service I definitely choose private

>>61778264
>government controls who is allowed to be ISP through regulation.
Liberal believes government regulated monopolies are the result of no government.

Just wow.

>>61780467
Give me my profit from public company

>>61779623
The nature of socialism is the same.

>>61780404
implying any system that gives entities monopoly on violence / enforcement o laws can be a free one.

>>61780467
>the government, which is literally a company
no they're totally different, unless something really improbable happens governments are immuable, they'll be bailed out whatever happens, worse case scenario they'll just tax people more or print/borrow money. Risk assessment for a company is totally different, if they fuck up too hard it's over.

I'm not saying we should get rid of the government altogether but I can't expect to get the same efficiency when the government take care of something, I can't expect the same level of choice when there's only one provider and I'm not really an investor if the only alternative to invest is going to jail for tax evasion.

>>61778467
>Be giant multinational no. 1 who supplies fundamental irreplaceable services/goods in the field "A" (I.e. food, medical, transportation, etc..) to the public.
>Consolidate power by acquiring more means of productions.
>Form cartel with other multinationals that also supply fundamental services, in the fields from "B" to "Z".
>Suddenly you have a shared monopoly over the means of production, as there is no law or entity preventing you from establish it.
>Nobody has the resources or other means of productions or to innovate, as they are finite and you control them all.
>If someone manages to create an alternative to what you offer, you can quickly buy him out of the market.
>There is no way that people can find an alternative to buying your services/goods, as they are irreplaceable. The point of balance between supply and demand is now whatever suits your interests and not the shared benefit of all agents that operate within the market.

Enjoy your totalitarian corporatist oligarchy.

>>61780902
Right on property must be reinforced by violence
>>61781070
So what's wrong with natural monopolies?

>>61781100
Same thing that's wrong with natural monarchies.
Nothing.

It's just social darwinism taking its course.
Of course, some people think that human progress should be driven by human intellect and will instead of natural selection, but they're dumb.

Guys, google can't survive without regulation. If paid for regulation the government allows wasn't a power the government had, it's just a matter of weeks or months till google collapses and competition can thrive.

>>61781172
In some ways, yes bug corps are backed by government.

>>61781100
>What's wrong whit living in a society where the sole driving factor of the economy is to protect and safeguard interest of a small group of people at the top of it, and where all the rest exist solely as cattle destined to be exploited for the gain of the former.

Gee, I wonder.

>>61781131
>Pssh nothing personal, kid

>>61781266
>Commie bullshit
Pfff. What is sole factor to live in society where I must live for degenerate "folk" instead of myself and people who I like?

File: plato.jpg (66KB, 412x462px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 412x462px

>>61781266
>>61781304
The point of unification of those two viewpoints is the Platonic Truth.
The closest thing we have to objective truth.
Not degenerate perspectivism / ambiguity like we have now, or narrow minded dictation of a single ideology like totalitarian systems.

>>61778312
every country that has government-funded internet infrastructure is light years ahead of the US, because they just build shit without worrying if it'll turn a "profit" so even if you live in some rural shithole you'll still get 100 megabit internet as standard, and gigabit internet in the cities.

>>61779540
Ancaps don't have solutions because they do not recognize other problems than "get off my lawn". It's an ideology for people whose sense of self worth is so immense that a functioning society is an obstacle to them.

>>61781361
It's not build by government, retard. Government doesn't give a shit about you. Do you really think that politicans give a fuck about you?

>>61781437
It is in 1st world countries. The state either builds it themselves or provides the funding to build it, that's why Europe is about 100 years ahead of the US in terms of internet infrastructure.

>>61781454
Of course they built it. For fucking money we pay them from taxes they must build at least something.

>>61781437
This is why anything other than direct democracy is totalitarianism, just masked.

>>61781454
This is why socialism is better than corporatism.

>>61778264
>pay for exclusive rights to be the only one allowed in any given city
>libertarians and ancaps will defend this because muh free unregulated market
But this is literally government regulation dictating who is allowed to sell in a market.

absolutely non libertarian and non ancap

>>61778323
This
OP knows nothing about libertarianism and is just baiting for replies

>>61781437
>Do you really think that politicans give a fuck about you?
maybe not personally, but they have to at least act in my best interests otherwise they do not get reelected. i know the concept of a functioning democracy is foreign to americans, but here politicans are actually accountable to the people

File: 1492494803781.png (3MB, 1600x1064px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1600x1064px

>>61781474
>It's not build by government, retard.
>Of course they built it.

>>61781485
Democracy is shit when dumb degenerates from factory tell you how to live.
>>61781497
They don't give a shit about you and they can act like that only for get your money from taxes

>>61781518
In third world countries (you was talking about them first) no in first world (you was talking about them next) yes

>>61781304
The point is that the type of ancap society you want is going to turn exactly into that.

You won't have tyrannical governments, sure, but plenty tyrannical cartels of monopolists.

Free market isn't going to fix anything if you lack a state making laws that prevent it from turning into an un-free market.

>>61781526
and then they spend that tax money on public projects that benefit the people, if they don't they lose power at the next election
what's the problem exactly?

>>61781539
Western/Northern Europe isn't 1st world? That's news to me.

>>61781497
They still don't give a shit about you. They will ACT in your best interest in front of media and in public, but will definitely not give two fucks otherwise.
>here
If you're talking about Europe you're wrong. Politicians are equally if not more corrupted and the EU isn't a democracy when you can't even elect the leaders and representatives. They elect themselves.

>>61781526
>dumb degenerates from factory
As if people who study politics aren't dumb degenerates? Politicians are not needed in a government and they just exist to drain tax money. 99% of them are corrupted or idiots (or both). You don't need communism for direct democracy, look at Switzerland.

>>61781487
>>61781489
>voluntarily agree to monopolization
libertarian

>>61781571
Go welcome new rapefugee nigger Mahmuds and pay 45% tax, cuck.
>>61781559
Public projects is mistake. I don't give a shit about public projects. I want my own projects
>>61781593
That's true, politicans are assholes

>>61781593
ok retard, that's why my country has nice infrastructure, great public services, and one of the highest standards of living + happiest populations in the world

>and the EU isn't a democracy
the EU isn't a country, and if they try to apply laws to my country that the people don't agree with then we get our politicians to leave the EU

>>61781609
>voluntary agree to have rapefugee Mahmud monkey on his property
statist

>>61781631
Your country has that in 20th century because of capitalism. Soon it will be Niggeria/Mabetostan 2.0

>>61781618
>Go welcome new rapefugee nigger Mahmuds and pay 45% tax, cuck.
America has more Muslims than every Western/Northern European nation combined.

>>61781618
the irony is i pay less in tax for public services and public projects in my country than you pay to various corporations for your healthcare, infrastructure, etc.

and the irony of an amerifat calling 90%+ white country non-white when he is 52% and falling

File: 6d6.jpg (36KB, 600x548px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 600x548px

>>61778264

>>61781618
Isn't it about time for you to go and get mugged by Tyrone and then appreciate black histroy month or something?

>>61781631
None of this changes the fact that politicians don't give a fuck about you and only work in their best interest.
>EU isn't a country
Nobody said it was.

>>61778323

This

OP is a fucking moron.

>>61781485
Democracy is shit when your population is controlled by corporate owned media and government propaganda.

there are many good arguments for a monarchy.

In 'democracy' someone is elected for 4 uses and uses the ephemeral position to grab all the power possible for themselves, their party, and their cronies. t. Obama, t. Trump.

In a monarchy when a benevolent prince is given charge of his birthright he seeks to protect and grow it for the benefit of his country

>>61781664
I'm not American, I'm European too. I'm Russia
>>61781665
I don't care about your shitty public projects to heal nigger monkey Mahmud, I want my money to spend it on something for myself, not nigger Mahmuds

>>61781684
No, it's not
>>61781699
No, there's arguments self management autonomy. On my property I can do anything I want

Republic > Democracy, you can limit who can vote under a constitutional republic

>>61781699
>society is being ruined by authority
>therefore we need more authority

>>61781701
No, you're American, I can tell because your imitation of poor English is terrible and you believe Russia is like the memes you see on /pol/. Russia has one of the highest muslim populations in the world (and is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world in general), large regions of the country are 90%+ muslim and the government has to constantly fight insurgencies.

>>61781701
>I'm Russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya

>>61781785
Heт, я pyccкий, a ты eбaнькo-кoпpoтивлeнeц c дoхyя oтpицaниeм. Tипичный лeвaчeк из Eвpoпы cчитaющий чтo дeньги и тoвapы бepyтcя из вoздyхa, a гocyдapcтвo и мeнты - этo нaши дpyзья.

>>61781815
So, yeah. With Eltsin you have war with Chechnya and with thief Putin you got tons of money thrown to Chechnya

>>61781839
nice grammar

>>61781782
didnt say society is being ruined by authority.

society is being ruled by oligarchies

>>61781884
My grammar is pretty okay. I've used some slang so I think you was trying to translate it through Google and get a lot of errors. What a dumb commie

>>61781887
so you're saying oligarchy is bad because it implies more than one person?

>>61781918
oligarchy is bad because it implies a government being ruled behind the scene by for-profit entities which have corrupted the legitimate government

>>61782058
And what for it must be running?

>>61782128
>And what for it must be running?
what?

>>61782148
What humans must be working for?

>muh free market
>has never actually heard of Hong Kong

>>61782203
Honk Kong is nice country

>>61782163
not everyone is motivated by profit

>>61782271
Everyone is motivated by some sort of profit. If it's not about money it's about to satisfy some emotions

>>61778657
yes, because limiting the government is exactly the kind of regulations libertarians are against.

>>61778625
There has never been a natural monopoly

>>61782372
The one and only store in town in middle of nowhere with population of 300 people is natural monopoly

>>61782372
Why do people act like concepts such as "monopoly" and "free market" and "society" are some kind of engimatic spirits or forces, like G-d?

They're just names for activities people do. How can there be a "natural" monopoly when monopolies are created by humans?
Is it just a trick similar to "not real communism"? Not "real monopoly"?

>>61782372
Lie

>>61782510
natural monopoly is one where it makes sense for just one company to do it because of the finite restrictions of physical space. thats how I understand it. probably way off.

>>61778323
This, true free markets don't need the government to enforce monopolies

>>61778467
I live in rand pauls piece of shit state and he hasn't done a thing about abusive ISPs

>>61783464
no state has done shit about abusive ISP's.

They lobby the shit out of politicians and the plebeians get raped.

the end.
game over.

>>61782510
>>61783321
Natural monopoly is a situation where nobody can compete with a company due to economical reasons. Artificial would be government banning the competition.

>>61783660
Why does it matter which economic entity is enforcing the monopoly, the company itself or the state in the pocket of the company?
They're both man-made and "natural".

File: Own yourself.jpg (264KB, 800x1149px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 800x1149px

>>61779441

>>61783693
Let me simplify
Natural: Companies don't want to compete because they can't due to their economical position compared to the company holding the monopoly.
Artificial: Companies aren't allowed to compete even if they could.

>>61784245
> Companies don't want to compete
Uh, huh, making a lot of assumptions on behalf of the hypothetical companies there.
What if they want to, but can't, because of the monopoly?

>>61784285
Depends on what is stopping them from competing.

>>61784497
Other humans.
Duh.

There's no reason that the monopolist wouldn't willingly give up the monopoly in the name of progress.
Isn't the premise here that free market will bring the best out of everyone and lead to the best outcome? Or will it just be greedy people fucking each other over? Hmm.

No, I'm serious. There's no reason a company couldn't give up a monopoly. In that, they are no different than any "artificial" entity enforcing the monopoly.

>>61784245
>>61784285
>>61784497
I would say that in the current state of things monopolies are spread between a few large organizations in each sector and these organizations have stopped competing in many senses.

not true for every sector, but look at ISP's.

here in the states one, maybe two ISPs are allowed to sell in any market.

They prices their shit non competitively, so that both agree to charge a certain price and it doesnt matter who you go with they are both overcharging.

>>61778467
>ancap
fuck off with this oxymoron.

>>61778264
>libertarians and ancaps will defend this
Left libertarians won't, it's like GPL.
Though I agree ancap goyim will be simply bought by the jews into slavery.

>>61784285
So it's okay for libertarians to base their worldview on contrived imaginary scenarios but no one else?

>>61784626
You mixed up your sides there.

File: c2c9dea6510b6dfd661508cfd544d536c6e7a44ba887a2e98b0146c3c4b707bc-liberty.jpg (69KB, 674x685px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 674x685px

>>61784617
>Left libertarians
Nobody means that when they say "libertarian" anymore. Unless maybe you're not american.

>>61784582
How will these other humans stop the competition then? If they make a better and more appealing product than you then it's natural that your company dies. If they bribe the government officials to pass laws to harass the competing companies, then its artificial. This isn't very hard concept to grasp.

Alko in Finland is an artificial monopoly. Adding sugar to yeast isn't very hard or expensive but the local goverment thinks that we'll drink ourselves to death if other companies were allowed to sell liquor.
If AMD crashed due to Intel/Nvidia making a better product and they bought AMDs remainings, they would have natural monopolies, because manufacturing CPUs/GPUs requires a lot of capital investment and knowledge and the end result would be very likely shaky because only Nvidia GPUs can handle 1024x tesselated floor tiles and uses one light bulb less power or whatever and not very many companies are willing to take such risks.

>>61785246
>If they make a better and more appealing product
>free market naturally selects for quality
BEEP BEEP BEEP

implying the free market isn't a first come first serve game. It also selects for the lowest common denominator. It's like populism in economic form.

The market can't expand to create infinite competition and treat all players fairly, because frankly, resources are limited.
The only way to ensure "fair" or quality oriented capitalism is to set up extreme economic mobility, where huge corporations can fall and disintegrate as easily as for a small company to grow into a large corporation. I don't see a way to enforce that without state intervention, or, actually, at all.

Ok, let's say a company reached "natural monopoly" with its superior products.
But then something went wrong internally, the head engineer died, I dunno, and they can't produce quality products anymore. But they're still holding on to all that infrastructure, economic presence, resources, etc.
How do you internally restructure the company to pretty much replace its intellectual workforce, without destroying the company (to replace with another one) and creating a huge dent in the economy by having to reinvent the bicycle?

That means some kind of extrinsic entity has to control the company.
How do you fire Zuckerberg without demolishing Facebook and destroying and or breaching decades worth of personal information and data?

>>61780467
>of the 20 public ISPs reviewed in this study, only 3 broke even or better, and only 1 was on track to pay back the capital costs of its infrastructure within its expected operational lifespan

Wait, what if the company's product IS the infrastructure / public utility itself?
What if they built roads and maintain them? And then they stopped?
Would the competition build a new road next to the first one, offering a better service?
Will we have like five parallel lines of roads by several companies, each with varying levels of quality and fees?

>>61785314
The more appealing product tends to sell whether it's actually better than the competition or not. There's many variables that effect that aspect of a product, but none of it is very meaningful in the debate regarding what makes a monopoly natural.

>>61785524
The thing is that monopolies are actually desirable IN CASE that the product offered is truly superior.
Imagine if there was two competing internets, or several types of proprietary data storage mediums, electrical socket types, plug shapes, etc. It'd be hell.

The problem is, the only way to determine which product is superior is by the judgement of an experienced human mind, not the chaos of natural selection.

>>61785562
It's called a standard. Many different companies make USB cables.

>>61785612
Standards are statism.
All phones should have unique charging cables.
https://www.slashgear.com/eu-committee-to-introduce-legislation-requiring-common-smartphone-chargers-27299382/
Look at that evil jewropean parliament forcing me to use micro USB. I don't want to use micro USB, my preferences aren't being represented, HELP I AM BEING OPRESSED

File: e20.png (75KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 600x600px

>pay for exclusive rights
>free unregulated market

Really made me think.

File: 1500898319001.png (26KB, 713x611px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 713x611px

Does libertarianism mean no more IP laws, DMCA, etc?
Lol, who's gonna enforce them anyway?

Good luck convincing capitalists to give up their ability to bully the consumer with state lobbyism lmao

File: 1270233109225.jpg (21KB, 367x451px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 367x451px

>>61778312
>1gb internet for basically nothing
>Shitty

Ameriaclaps, everyone

>>61778264
>can pay for exclusive rights
Who do they pay for these rights....?

>>61786574
Yes, ultimately it would be up to the company to enforce them via DRM if they don't want their work copied

>>61785420
Nice source you have there, Ajit

>>61779623
>The nature of capitalism is that it REQUIRES a certain percentage of hobos, poor, middle class, rich and uber-wealthy.
You said that right.

>It's nothing but a system of redistribution of wealth upwards, a mechanism of extortion and slavery.
But at least we can try to create more relief from this, instead of making it seem like slavery.

>No matter if you're poor or middle class, you WILL be waging for the majority of your time.
And those people need relief from waging as well. Lazy or intolerant people are not an excuse for no relief or just little, but people are using this more and more as the world evolves.