It boggles my mind that people all over the world (ESPECIALLY

File: Ronpaul1.jpg (411KB, 1024x780px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 1024x780px

Furthermore, the 'perfect' liberal utopia that Locke envisioned, the 'commonwealth', has yet to come to fruition because, if anything, liberalism benefits those who help themselves a helluva lot more than those in the immediate community. Locke was even dumb enough to believe that adopting a Republican form of government with a constitution and without monarchs/nobility would have prevented power from being passed down hereditarily, which obviously hasn't fucking happened. John Mill's harm principle/Ayn Rand's NAP makes absolutely no sense, either. Both of these principles are based around physical violence or personal property theft only; so paying your laborers unlivable salaries and making them work obscene hours in a disease ridden factory somehow isn't 'harmful' according to John Mill or Rand, but punching the factory owner in the face for depriving you of basic human rights somehow is.

The only reason people on the internet (esp. imageboards) seem to be so supportive of classical liberalism is because they have feudalistic delusions/fantasies that place them as being some kind of king or baron with a significant amount of capital that they can use to basically make people slaves.

(2/2)

Sorry I had to split it up, I passed the 2000 character limit

>>1852894
>history has clearly proven that a laissez faire economy with no workers laws is not beneficial for 95%+ of the general population.
[citation needed]

File: trump wall vs bernie wall.jpg (63KB, 600x429px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x429px

>>1852894
but bro taxes are literally rape and/or theft

>>1852896
It was a stat pulled from my ass, but you're delusional if you think the majority of workers in industrial England or early 20th century America benefited from their exploitation

Stat is probably lower than 95%, maybe 80% or so sounds more reasonable.

>>1852894
Libertarianism is fucking retarded and only fools would want a state based on the inability to control their population.

yeah libertarianism is retarded and I'm glad it's no longer as strong on the internet as it used to be but I fully expect a resurgence of it once trump loses

Most libertarians are simple rural folk who because they live inna woods or on a farm can't conceive of a reason for the existence of taxes and government in general because they live in a bubble and are convinced they're 100% self reliant.

im only ancap for the memes at this point

>>1852894
>with laws against monopolies/high taxes on CEO's/strong workers rights, etc
Guess which party that begins with "L" doesn't believe in these things?

>>1852894
>many marxist forms of government
If you have a problem with Stalinism, just come out and say it. There's nothing wrong with market socialism except capital flight. But capital flight happens no matter what kind of restrictions you put on the capital holding class.

>>1852910
Except when they get their corn subsidy check in the mail.

File: 1476487513093.jpg (22KB, 349x441px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 349x441px

>there are people who actually believe that the US is on the right side of the Laffer Curve

>>1852899
>massive amounts of protectionism
>cronyism in the nobility
>high tariffs
>""free market""

>>1852968
Yeah, and explain how any of those being eliminated would have stopped workers from having 12 hour work days so they could afford a loaf of bread

This doesn't belong on /his/.

>>1852910
Democrats, "progressives", "liberals", social democrats, socialists, communists, greens, etc

are all urban dwellers scared by all the people living around them, and want a powerful father figure state to keep their neighbors in check.

>>1852898
Property is theft though. You cannot own something without depriving someone else of the right to use it.

File: CRS-8_(26239020092).jpg (777KB, 3000x2000px)

777KB, 3000x2000px

>>1852894
>>1852894

Free market capitalism is lifting millions of people out of poverty every year, curing dozens of crippling illnesses every year, and ultimately lifting mankind into the stars. If you oppose this then you are pro-poverty, pro-disease, and anti-human. You are simply a parasite that lives the highest standard of living ever lived by human beings because of the capitalist market economy that has allowed the abundance we now all enjoy.

>>1852898
But the logical conclusion of that is ahistorical and unworkable. Wouldnt you have to return all the land back to native americans, because 99% of it was unethically procured from them?

>>1853516
>he said, using an ARPAnet derivative

Seriously though, any position other than mixed economics is for autists.

>>1852894
Libertarianism is the result of derision towards social institutions, in this (contemporary) case precipitated by some abominable patchwork of 60s counter-culture, 80s-style greed, cold war jingoism and post 9/11 anti-government sentiment.

Most libertarians are historically and philosophically pseudo-literate at best and more often willingly blind.

File: height-development-by-world-regions-interpolation-baten-blum-2012-0-579x500.png (141KB, 579x500px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 579x500px

>>1853516

Lol no it isnt

File: 1470116861886.jpg (53KB, 640x512px)

53KB, 640x512px

>>1853738
>Posts graph that shows improvement everywhere except pooinloo land
>Lol no it isn't

>>1853750

Pooinland is what we're talking about. The Third World is being genocided by Arabs for real and not pretend like the white genocide.

>>1853752
Yes, the Arabs, world renowned champions of the free market as everyone knows.

>>1853762

"Capitalism" doesn't mean anything. All if the countries you imagine as being centrally planned were in fact almost entirely market economies.

>>1853766
[citation needed]

>>1853786

Read up on how they worked. They were a bunch of firms buying goods and selling them for profit. The "central plans" were just guidelines that didn't make much practical difference.

Taxation is theft
>but muh roads
If taxes were cut everyone would be able to afford a helicopter because the cost of helicopters would go down when we all want one and we wouldn't even need roads. Libertarianism is the only true form of government. Soon you will all realize this.
If you're ignorant on the topic, read up on Ludwig von Mises who is a visionary btw.

>>1853795

A private company could build interstate highways. But it would be so large, it would be indistinguishable from a government.

>>1852898

I believe this 100%!

>>1852894
Gary Johnson isn't that bad. He is at the least reasonable. His stance on the free market and climate change is one of the reasons I am on the fence about voting for him. Otherwise he doesn't seem that bad. Just airheaded at times.

> However, history has clearly proven that a laissez faire economy with no workers laws is not beneficial for 95%+ of the general population. As soon as western countries began implementing labor laws that were more ethical, all the manufactures, big wigs, etc. just moved their production elsewhere to exploit other labor forces.

Nice assumption bro. Your understanding of history is nothing more than parroting the party line of liberal professors and labour unions.

If you actually look at the facts of history, something very few people do (hell even look at where others have found the statistics) you will see that poverty was being reduced, standards of living rose and child labour was being phased out for example, due to economic growth, before the feel good laws were put in. This goes for a lot of things like "muh robber barons".

Nice fantasies, commonly held but false.

>>1853800
> indistinguishable from a government

That's where people make an easy mistake, I think it comes from imagining that if something provides a service that the state currently does then it is now a government. This ignores that there are plenty of differences between a business and a government even when they provide the same service, it's just a little nuanced and takes a few more seconds than the usual knee-jerk reaction.

>>1852898
Why are all political cartoonists always so hyperbolic about everything?

>>1853049
Discussion of economics. /his/ is History and Humanities not history you FUCKING RETARD

>>1854005
It's the nature of the work. Also doesn't help that most of them are clearly not very good at presenting an argument or point, that's why they just draw hyperbole, it's harder for people to catch it that way than it would be in text.

>>1853875
Chad labor didn't go away until it was literally made illegal.

You're an idiot.

>>1854011
Economics is not humanities

>>1854517
Yes it is. It is a human science hence humanities

>>1854324

It never went away, it's just done by nonwhites.

>>1854517
kill yourself m8

>>1853806
The fact that he's willing to compromise and actually has governing experience puts him miles ahead of the competition in my book.

>>1854927
He wants easier immigration, if you think that wont turn us into a single party government, then you're retarded.

>>1853516
Why do capitalcucks call everyone "parasites" when capitalism requires everyone to consume as much as possible, and allows the existence of a whole class of people to live comfortably without doing any labor?

>>1854940
This is pretty weak b8 m8

>>1853762
Arabs like saudi arabia, qatar, etc. are fully integrated in capitalism you dense motherfucker. Same thing with "failed states" like congo and all those shitholes. Everyone condemns them but at the same time they are absolutely integrated into the global market.

>>1852898
Ironically Bernie's hypothetical wall would be far more effective than Trump's, because a wall without any violent enforcement is pointless.

Classical liberals believe in health and safety regulations and regulations on monopolies. Its only kooky libertarians and anarchists who do not.

We simply believe that a free society gets you closet to the best society as a first approximation. Then you regulate to get even closer to the best society. Those regulations are only justified when they curb harms that have systematic negative effects on society and do not discriminate against or privilege without legitimate public interests in mind.

>>1852894
would this be a better answer than Trump or Hillary though?

>America isn't like a scandinavian country, it has a lot more people so you can't have democratic socialism
What did they mean by this?

File: 115614.jpg (29KB, 505x505px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 505x505px

ITT: statist cucks

>>1855196

In a large country like the US people are more diverse and more factional. If we move toward socialism different groups will petition government for more benefits at the expense of another group.

For example we have a presidential candidate quoting a bank robber as she proposes to tax the rich exclusively to provide benefits to the poor and middle class. Smaller nations don't have this same kind of wealth diversity.

>>1852894
>history has clearly proven that a laissez faire economy with no workers laws is not beneficial for 95%+ of the general population
no it hasn't

Myth: Capitalists instantly grow horns, drive wages to subsistence, neglect safety to cut costs, etcetera, they are to blame for all the bad in the world and making capitalism go away will make the badness go away.

Reality: It is human nature to exploit others, it was like this long before capitalism and continued to be like this after various "revolutions".

What capitalism, does is reduce economic relationships, oppressive or not, to financial relationships. A serf who lives like a pig and has never been more than 10 miles from the place they were born is unlikely to change much, however if they wake up one morning to discover serfdom has been abolished and they are now expected to negotiate a meager wage with the landowner and procure supplies on their own this will really make them think.

They could nail the landowner to a barn door, however violent options generally don't yield the intended results. There was a reason why the landowner became wealthy and the new system they create could end up being just as corrupt, in all but the most extreme ridiculous scenarios the ex-serfs are better off putting their efforts elsewhere, they can threaten to strike just before the harvest, perfectly acceptable under laissez faire capitalism, they can buy small plots of poor unused land and grow coffee, in their spare time they can brew alcohol or make dye, they can leave the village and work in a textile mill in the nearby town, if they live beneath their means they will have an economic surplus they can use to influence the world around them and they will be able to do this more effectively than through violent means.

File: 1445697591143.png (51KB, 339x298px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 339x298px

>>1855257
>le human nature meme
Stopped reading there.

t. Anthropologist

Taxes and regulations hurt the middle class and small companies a lot more than they hurt the rich. If the taxes are so high rich people are just going to leave. If there are many regulations rich people are going to hire lawyers to read all these pages of regulation. But the middle class can't do anything about it and also taxes and regulations discourage them from starting business. But if you decrease taxes and regulations then rich companies stay in the country and more people are starting up new ones. This leads to more jobs for everyone, more competition and therefore more wealth for everyone.

>>1855263

>cultural anthropology
>not prog propaganda

k

>>1855263
So who was the first person to invent exploitation? How did they do it? How did it spread?

>>1853516
None of the rich Western countries got to where they are now by being libertarian.
You don't really understand, libertarianism is retarded to everyone left of it, and not everything left of libertarianism is anti-capitalism.

>>1855287
I think his point is that human is both a social and individualist creature. Going to both extremes ends up badly. Best society is that which balances the need of the individual with the needs of the collective.
You can't exist outside of a group, with some rare exceptions.

>>1855059
This. Its pretty obvious that OP is a pseud and hasn't read the material he's citing (Ayn Rand's NAP xd). Everybody who isn't retarded can pretty much agree that libertarianism/anarcho-capitalism is nonsense. Liberalism is another ideology entirely and the thinkers associated with it (e.g. Locke, Jefferson, Hayek, etc) would be disgusted if they discovered that mongoloids like Gary Johnson were appropriating their ideas.

>>1855253
this is how it works in these countries too though to some extent, lots of companies leave to avoid the high taxes, where is the problem in taxing them more? Besides you'd still have a giant middleclass to tax. And then it's just a matter of scaling it up, right?

>>1852894
I agree and that's why I consider myself a moderate libertarian, believing in limited government intervention in only the most crucial issues (driver's license, child labor, wages, etc).

>>1855610
It is up to debate whether there is such a thing as society.

Also no "society" has ever gone to an extreme of individualism, unless you believe the Somalia meme.

It is all very spooky, I have never seen an explanation for the things I mention. >>1852895 accuses me of imagining myself King, but I have thought about this carefully, most of the double standards I've seen involve comparing capitalism in real life to utopian communism and such, I try to avoid doing the same. I would rather be the "baron" of a trailer than have to beg a bureaucrat to let me keep my section 8 housing.

File: fatcats.jpg (63KB, 432x330px)

63KB, 432x330px

>>1855264
>trickle down economics

I wonder who's behind this post

>>1852894
I think that it's an overreaction against bad government. There's so much bullshit going on with the us government that people are overreacting and saying "let's just get rid of the state as much as possible".

File: The_Antipoverty_Effect_of_Government_Spending_Vector_Graph.svg.png (100KB, 1280x784px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1280x784px

>>1855264
>if we refuse to invest in our workforce, our economy will grow because Reagan and sweet baby Jesus

>>1856394
Unfortunately there's a racial element in America that explains why Cletus who's making $25k a year working at Walmart is so opposed to the expansion of the welfare state...

>>1852894
>>1852895
Classical liberalism is how the richest countries in the world are governed. Classical liberalism is the way the US rose to economic power.

>The only reason people on the internet (esp. imageboards) seem to be so supportive of classical liberalism is because they have feudalistic delusions/fantasies ....

you're an idiot

Watch Ron Paul Liberty Report.

>>1856427
>Classical liberalism is how the richest countries in the world are governed
>Norway

>>1856394
>% reduction
This is a proportion not a quantity, it doesn't tell us who has the lowest poverty. Also what kind of timescale does this take place over and how do they know how much poverty was reduced by social spending?

>>1856394
that graphic is misleading

the reason the US has so much poverty is not because lack of taxing, but because all the tax money goes to useless shit like military and cronyism

include countries like Switzerland, Chile, New Zealand, and your silly extrapolation will break down

>>1856450
>what is oil

>>1853491
damn, fuck you

you cannot even come into reasonable, ethical discussion about society until you acknowledge the right to property. It is the foundation of not being evil.

>>1854966
>when capitalism requires everyone to consume as much as possible

uh... because it doesn't
you can stop consuming non-necessities any time you'd like and you've be better off for it

>>1856474

this
other countries with big entitlement and welfare programs don't also have the worlds largest military 10x over or have to deal with the fucking insanely powerful fed and wall street

>>1856474
>social expenditures on non-elderly

Next time read, sport.

>>1853491
>revolution succeeds
>relax sipping ice tea on the porch enjoying the sunset with your qt revolutionary waifu, a job well done, good job comrade
>next morning the organ collectors have arrived to take you to the hospital to be euthanised so your organs can be used to save 5 people
what do

File: libertarian police.png (317KB, 1348x1243px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 1348x1243px

>>1852894
I generally agree.

Capitalism can be a very useful tool, but we should know its limits. Likewise with socialism. A mixture of the two is best. It's just a matter of figuring out which is most effective in which contexts, and preventing/reducing corporate influence over policy.

>>1856504
nice meme, socialism isn't about stealing your house or your organs it's about taking the mines and factories away from a single person who just uses them to line his pockets and having them collectively owned for society's benefit