Alright Libertardians I've Had Enough, Explain Yourselves!

>>133967273
Dang. Should have used a brap pic.

File: no bait pls.jpg (22KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 625x626px

>>133967273

>>133967273
>thus justifying taxation to help level the playing field
Survival of the fittest. In a free market without government involvement and regulations, you can do what you need to survive and if it has traction it will grow. If you are immoral or stupid, people will recognize it and you will fail. Self regulating machine that allows the best and brightest to gather the most resources, therefore have the most offspring, and create more intelligent kids in a cycle of ever-improving society and weeding out the stupid and weak (who will still get the benefits of living in a good society but will not contribute much to the gene pool).
>Imagine a baseball game where a winning team can hand it's wins to the next team and give it a boost and the bigger the boost the more points they start out with and the more the rules bend in their favor, like you get more strikes before being out.
This implies that there is an overarching force bending the rules for the winning teams while imposing rules on the shitty teams. In a truly free society, the other teams could decide that they don't want to play by the rules any more and undercut the big winners. But your analogy doesn't work because it uses an Organization of some sort to impose limitations/regulations that would not be present in the truly free market or free (baseball) competition.

>>133967273

Lets just burn our hands people! Its like you overthink everything!

>>133967273
>Imagine a baseball game where a winning team can hand it's wins to the next team and give it a boost and the bigger the boost the more points they start out with and the more the rules bend in their favor, like you get more strikes before being out.

It's more like, imagine a baseball game but the other team is losing. Big Daddy Government doesn't like this and believes in "equality" so moves in and takes your points and hands them to the other team.

File: friedman_pinochet.jpg (21KB, 301x272px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 301x272px

>>133967273
Prove that central planning is more efficient than the free market, otherwise you have no argument.

File: 1479402854763.jpg (5KB, 251x233px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 251x233px

>>133967273
>Maybe excess wealth leads to (listen up because this is important) unequal access to the means of acquiring wealth
Sure... If I labor to provide my children a better future, that's what I hope to achieve.

>leading to a naturally uneven competitive playing field
This isn't a game, I'm not taking food away from others, I'm not injuring them, their odds of success are none of my business or responsibility.

>, thus justifying taxation to help level the playing field by redistributing a portion of the wealth
Not a FUCKING GAME... You can't complain about shit being imba, there are no nerfs.

> Imagine a baseball game
WOW, I hadn't read ahead, and this comes up, lmao... I don't think I need to read further.

File: thinkingnap.png (13KB, 439x461px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 439x461px

>>133967273
Eh, I'll continue to answer your post... Thought It's gonna be hard changing your mind, it's been conditioned by generations of lefties telling you what to think.

> is that a persons earnings should not be stolen from them by the gov't because they earned it somehow by hardwork.
If I give you money because I think you deserve it, you'll get an advantage other people didn't, though it did come from hard work, maybe not YOUR hard work, but in a society where you voluntarily exchange labor for goods, and where you can give your goods to others, unless the law is broken, all acquired wealth is deserved, and thus all acquired advantage.

>If the playing field is uneven they might not have earned shit, thus undercutting your whole argument that taxation is theft. Think about it libertardians.
Who are you to define who deserves my money? Who are you to say that, by me choosing to give money to my children, that money is not deserved? I'm the one who acquired it, I'm the one who labored, how come I don't get to say my children deserve it?

Take a moment to consider this, cause you're wrong, but you might see the light.

>your philosophy
>more government is always bad

Stopped reading right there. Libertarianism is not anarchy. It's a broad philosophy and there are varying degrees and definitions, depending on whom you're speaking with. Some libertarians are anarcho-capitalists, some are minarchists, some are basically just conservatives who care more about civil liberties than other issues, some are just independents fed up with the government getting bigger and bigger. You've started your argument with a straw man, and not just any straw man, but the single most common libertarian straw man. It's already apparent you don't know what you're talking about.

>>133967273
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xu0sdtoacg8
Stefan Molyneux has very good arguments for free market/libertarianism. Perhaps you should listen for a while and think about your OP before trying to be condescending about something you apparently don't understand very well.

Funny how he accuses us of picking an ideology because it requires no thinking then goes ahead and analyzes economy like if it was zero sum.

Fucking brainlets.

File: steve_jobs_bill_gates_19851.jpg (29KB, 340x255px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 340x255px

These guys never had a chance

File: can you not.jpg (50KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 625x626px

>inb4 OP's 3.14 gorillion guaranteed (You)s
>>you don't think like me
>>oh hey i know how to change your mind
>>i'll insult and harangue you until you see it my way
simply_brilliant.m3u

File: 1496681833540.jpg (55KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x640px

>>133967273
tl;dr lol. looks like just another whiny little bitch who lacks the capacity for individual thought and thus needs the government to tell him what to do and how to think.

keep on boot licking and jock strap sniffing, idiot.

>>133967273
Your flame analogy is pretty good.. Often it is said that Liberty is like fire. It can be used to cook food, but also used to burn the house down.

Libertarianism is often too ideological, though I believe they are absolutely necessary to hear in today's political/social climate of government dependence. At the same time, when it comes to the private/cultural climate we have become too libertarian and the result is the "degeneracy" /pol/ loves to point out.

People always say the green square doesn't really exist in the political compass. But they couldn't be more wrong. I would argue that the western world is almost entirely in the green square because we have combined the social welfare state with this private/cultural libertarianism. Basically as people we get all the rights and freedoms we could possibly ask for, but all the obligations and responsibilities have been taken up by the state. The result is BIG government. So ironically Libertarianism can be the handmaiden to big government. Highly recommend reading William Gairdner's blog if you're interested in this line of thought.

There's always two sides to every exchange. Those who have acquired an abundance of wealth have done so because they've produced goods or services for the masses. Thereby, increasing the living standards for the masses they serve. It's false to think that many of the 1% acquired their wealth from ripping someone off. It's not that simple. The 1% is an ever dynamic class whose characters--those who make up the class--are always changing.

>>133973249
>At the same time, when it comes to the private/cultural climate we have become too libertarian and the result is the "degeneracy" /pol/ loves to point out.
Libertarianism is not without morality. You can be extremely libertarian, even anarchist and not be a degenerate. You just don't have the state making laws against degeneracy.
In this society, there would not be specific Legal punishment for degenerate activities (like sex out of marriage), but there would be a strong moral and societal disapproval and shame of degeneracy. You don't need the government to prevent people from fucking around and destroying their own lives and their childrens' futures, but the disgust of your family and friends (who ideally understand the problems that degeneracy brings down the line) would help keep you from making stupid impulsive instant-gratification decisions.

File: 18057631_10155097290008449_4842639232915716900_n.jpg (148KB, 638x949px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 638x949px

Bump for intrest

Libertarians don't care about race and culture, so they need to die.

File: 1486768386433.png (677KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

677KB, 1500x1000px

Hope for hoppe

They are forever traitor, never trust them, they only care about individuality.

The weak, stupid, and poor don't deserve to live.

>>133974681
>Strawman : the post

>>133974979
I never see a libertarian that see more ambitious than it's little rat dick.

>>133967273
But it's not a mere philosophy, but more an observation of pattern. A baseline government is a good thing, no libertarian worth his salt would argue that we ought to be back in the wild west days of lawlessness. What we are against are all the systems that get in the way of the natural order that rewards the smart, strong, and hard working while ignoring the type who leech on others.

There's no moral good in being forced to cater to the week. Helping those who cannot get by should be voluntary. This also creates incentive for people to be less of an asshole in general.

File: 1494023946399.jpg (782KB, 954x932px) Image search: [Google]

782KB, 954x932px

>>133974681
Wrong
Dont got the roth qoutes ready, or the hoppe ones.
But it is very white supremist and would enforce segregation amoung race

They hate christianity, they hate border and nations, they are the destroyer of white race.

And the worse, they're proud of it.

The pure is comming near you.

>>133967273

Why don't you research what notable libertarian philosophers have had to say about the subject?

>>133975345
PURGE

>>133973974
I agree with you for the most part. The biggest point is that as a society we have been given liberty without responsibility (and so it falls upon the state) and that is the reason why we have degeneracy. I'll illustrate with an example:

A woman can get pregnant from a random guy who takes off. Normally there would be serious social repercussions for that woman, but because the welfare state will provide her with medical and financial aid there is no real punishment for acting lasciviously. So that kind of behaviour is encouraged, and even lauded as some sort of sexual freedom.

The problem is real freedom is always paired with an equal responsibility. The freedom to fuck who you want should be paired with the responsibility of having to care and provide for any children that may come from that, or pay any medical bills (birth, STD treatments, etc). But many western nations have divorced Liberty from Responsibility by placing all these obligations on the lap of the state.

>>133974766
Wrong m8, individuals are what we are, take ownership like a greek and love your "city"

>>133974766
How can I be a traitor if I never agreed to an alliance in the first place?

File: 1499100826153.png (273KB, 793x794px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 793x794px

Minimal government means minimal corruption.
Minimal regulation means minimal corporatism as an open market allows small fish to backstab the bigger fish IE the tech industry.
Big government was what went wrong in Nazi Germany, not the philosophy of a German ethno state.

>>133967273

>Libertarianism would result in smaller government
>Thinking all-powerful corporations won't lobby for more government to gain even more control

>>133967273
the preference for less government has more to do with practical experience than philosophy

"taxation is theft" falls within the NAP, which is basically the foundation of every moral framework mankind has ever adopted.

I think you need to read some more about this before your next spergin thread.

File: RightWingPopulism.png (222KB, 1000x1821px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1000x1821px

>>133975345
Absolutly wrong

File: The Debt Star.jpg (52KB, 640x512px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x512px

>>133967273
What I believe in is Personal Responsibility. I am against the welfare state that rewards bad behavior. This is based on traditional American values.
What made America great is freedom to build on your ideas and start business, this created jobs. The ability to acquire wealth based on the work you do. America has done nothing but go downhill since POTUS Johnson's Great Society, and the socialist idea that do nothings should still have a high standard of living.
Your socialist ideas do not work!! Tell me any place on Earth where Socialism has worked. On any even playing field Capitalism kicks Socialism' s butt. Not until Capitalism starts to embrace the social ideas does the strain of the social construct start to bring it down. Then to hide this face they bring in race shaming to cover their ass.

>>133975625
No gobernment no regulations to lobby for

>>133975625
Lobbying is a meme that is rapidly dying. The real subterfuge is now companies putting their guys into positions of power in government. Look up any organization that has to do with goods and services and a lot of those people were former higher ups of a private industry.

LOL libertarians.
Muh free market and self regualtion.
Never heard of leverage you bunch of motherfucking stupids ass cunts

>>133975878

I'm not sure if lobbying is a meme, but you're right - the Revolving Door is perhaps an even bigger thread. Look how many people come from Goldman Sachs and other large banks/corporations.

File: bestfriend.jpg (130KB, 1024x825px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1024x825px

>>133975965

Hey, best friend

Prove to me you can have big government without white genocide.

Pro tip: You literally can't.

File: 1487014458754.jpg (30KB, 565x346px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 565x346px

Lets do this

>>133967273

I want gibs to disappear and see what happens.

>>133967273
>t.bootlicker

>>133975139
>Makes baseless claim
>Gets called out
>Makes another baseless claim
You really made me think. Shill.

>>133974909
they don't deserve other's labour

>>133967273
>what is a heuristic

File: National_Flag_Of_Ansnekistan_Vector.png (116KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1920x1280px

>>133975345
Fuck off idiot. Lolbergs are not us. They are communists trying to subvert Libertarians

File: gadsden.jpg (36KB, 940x611px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 940x611px

>>133971557
BTFO

>>133976219
Absolutist monarchies were white.
And in any case, there's no bigger government than each man and woman larping as the state in his 'personal castle'.

>>133976765
Oh shi....

File: 1487021755325.jpg (53KB, 940x611px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 940x611px

ran out of captchas, stand by

File: 1499982718919.jpg (57KB, 845x845px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 845x845px

>>133967273

>>133967273
You moralfags and fetish for fairness really need to GTFO. I'd watch you starve before I consent to giving you one penny. People that blame other people for their problems and have an entitlement complex. If you mother fuckers weren't whining so bad for the state to plunder my labor against my will maybe, just maybe, I'd voluntarily d'nate to help you. Do you have kids? I hope not. Not only would they have a terrible, bitch of a role model, but I really don't want to see our species get weaker because the weak and dependant are squirting out kids. Sterilize those who are not financially independent. You fuckin parasites really piss me off. I work 70 hours a week and 23 of those I make nothing because "muh tax!" Fuck you

Someone got their ass beat by an alpha male

What's with the whole "no taxes" thing? Roads are pretty good.

>>133975965
>Muh worst economy in western europe

File: giphy-facebook_s.gif (82KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 480x270px

>this thread

>>133967273
>>litteraly nothing but fallacies.
I wasn't libertarían untill I read You. I will now seriously research this ideology Because if you're typical of It's opposition It's obviously the one way to go for society.

>>133978353
You'll need to bring your own

>>133975465
>But many western nations have divorced Liberty from Responsibility
Exactly. This is the real insidiousness of the PC Culture Movement.
The inability to criticize anyone allows the burgeoning of irresponsible and degenerate populations, which cry to authority to make sure no one says anything "mean" to them, so they can continue in their illogical and self-harming ways without shouldering the responsibility to change.

File: 1495650255700.jpg (50KB, 306x545px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 306x545px

>I've Had Enough

oh no what ever will we do?!?!

>>133978379
this one is the best desu

I think all of your founding fathers were don't tread on me snaeks.

>>133967273
Do you really think that our government full of greedy jews gives a shit about you or I?

File: 1382220266535.jpg (487KB, 721x900px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 721x900px

>>133967273
Just so you know, I'm stoned as fuck right now and I can't stop laughing at OP image. It's like, a fat manchild snake being squashed.

File: Political_chart.jpg (104KB, 636x600px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 636x600px

>>133967273
>Did it ever occur to you that maybe you like this idea,
Yes
>because it's child-tier philosophy and it doesn't require you to think?
Wrong.
>It's like someone coming up with a philosophy that all warmth is bad, because they touched fire and got burned.
This is as good an analogy as "men are like cereal so being a slut shouldn't be looked down upon"
>Ever hear of context?
Yes.
>Like,
Stop.
>heat is good in winter but too much will get you burned?
If you think ALL libertarians are against ANY amount of government, you obviously didn't research anything but googling anarcho capitalism.
>Maybe reality isn't as simple as you want it to be?
Reality is HIGHLY non-linear. This is exactly why libertarians criticize central planning.
>Maybe excess wealth leads to unequal access to the means of acquiring wealth
It does. The thousand dollars are the hardest to earn, same as the first million.
>leading to a naturally uneven competitive playing field
What the fuck does that matter if the market is still geared towards the middle class? Having a rich demographic just enables us to target luxury goods at them, until they inevitably become a thing for the common man, and new luxuries have come around. source: history
>thus justifying taxation to help level the playing field by redistributing a portion of the wealth?
For what purpose? OECD has previously found that redistribution can strengthen economic growth, but this doesn't mean ANY redistribution will work.
>Imagine a baseball game...
Shit analogy, again. Moving on.
>your ideology is that a persons earnings should not be stolen from them by the gov't because they earned it somehow by hard work
Well, "somehow" may actually be more intuitive than at first glance, if you think long enough.
>If the playing field is uneven they might not have earned shit, thus undercutting your whole argument that taxation is theft
"It's not a crime if it's justified inside my own moral framework :)))"

4/10

>>133967273
> your ideology is shit because people like me will have to put effort into life
> literally non argument
Kys good sir

>>133970598
Your arguments work until you reach the highest levels of wealth, where it really does become a larger issue. Excess wealth, meaning surplus, isn't bad at all. It's the only goal you can effectively provide a workforce, besides basic survival. The problem only arises once a small group aquires an EXTREME amount of wealth, allowing them easier access to gaining more wealth, giving them more extreme wealth. It's a dangerous cycle that leads to major class differences. If you possess that much money, you can effectively outperform everyone with less, therefore making the system unfair.
>"but its not a game anon, it's just life!"

It doesn't matter if it's a game or not, it creates a system that focuses too many resources to the top. We shouldn't topple the system, but ensure that overaccumulation of wealth isn't possible. Nobody needs 400 Billion dollars worth of property and assets.

>>133975140

But those systems dont work lol

Libertarianism isnt so much a political philosophy as a literal and autistic reading of the US founding documents. Its why you normally never see it outside of the US.

File: 1497141679894.png (117KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1000x1000px

>>133978992
Good man
>>133967273
Reminder that any dissatisfactions you have with Libertarianism are either borne of you not fucking knowing anything about it or are borne of the fact that Libertarianism is basically Incomplete Objectivism. Objectivism without the epistemology and hardly the same tier of metaphysics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erytcpYpzRk

File: 1494947683256.jpg (136KB, 750x901px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 750x901px

>>133967273

>>133967273
OP you're a fag, go watch some Chomsky youtube videos and rejoice on how morally superior you are.

>>133980919
Spicy

File: Libertarianftw.jpg (8KB, 211x239px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 211x239px

>>133967273
>WHAT
>THE
>FUCK
>ARE
>YOU
>TALKING
>ABOUT
>?
Libertarians want smaller goverment as it was intended in our inception. The goverment maintains civility among its citizens and defends it borders. That's it. The Government in case you haven't realized is REALLY INEPT. If you give the government a problem to solve they will give you Two in return.
>http://blog.acton.org/archives/49418-donald-trump-ed-koch-and-the-ice-skating-rink-a-tale-of-bureaucracy.html

File: 1488056840752.png (197KB, 705x998px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 705x998px

>>133980919
Allow me to counter

File: 1476053455854.jpg (4KB, 228x221px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 228x221px

>>133974681
>>133974766
>>133975139
>>133975345
>>133975373
Getting real sick and tired of your shit. Every single fucking day we libertarians need to suffer getting accused of being useful idiots for kikes, degenerates who don't care about culture or the white race and what not. Its so fucking tiring.

And I'm sure you'd just love living in a fascist surveillance state in which you would have little freedom and no freedom of speech.
>inb4 "muh esotericism n shiet"
There's nothing spiritual or esoteric or whatever the fuck about fascism in practice because its just a big fucking state that you have to serve. Stupid bootlicking cunt

File: Muh Communism.jpg (85KB, 646x1024px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 646x1024px

>>133967273
>Excess wealth is rarely hoarded, sure I can have billions of dollars but what good does it do me just sitting in a vault. Other swimming in gold like fucking Scrooge McDuck.

> Life isn't a game you don't get a reset.

>Uneven if you come up with a novel idea to make money that fills a specific consumer need just fucking do it nothing is stopping you "but you". There is no conspiracy to hold all the cards against someone in a free market society.

Even if the quote "better team" buys you outright you will still make vast sums of cash if your not an idiot.

>It's when the GOVERNMENT starts legislating the new business owner or little guy to death that you see any semblance of an uneven playing field.

P.S. never dive into a pile of monies, if you ever want to feel your dick again.

File: 1486258936401.jpg (63KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 480x360px

>>133981920

>>133981920
>he believes he'd be in any position of authority in a NatSoc "paradise"
simply fucking epic

File: 1499469283936.png (226KB, 300x487px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 300x487px

>it's okay to have a state, it won't push you around or throw your money in the trash at all
>a tiny bit of power can't grow into something tyrannically monstrous, right?
>it's unfair that this businessman's hard-earned money is more than my hard-earned and gibbed money combined! let's tax the shit out of him to pay my welfare!
>WAAAH WHY CAN'T I TREAD ON YOU

Fuck off, pinko/commie scum. (Nazis are pinkos too btw)

File: 18557214_1347176842017298_6853959804979524843_n.png (34KB, 858x888px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 858x888px

>>133982727
>>133982583

I'm just dumping snek/gadsden related stuff I have saved, relax.

>>133982892
fair enough

>>133967273
Natsoc is for fake lefties
Ancap is for fake anarchists
Paleocon is the real deal

File: 1492804279363.png (168KB, 398x466px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 398x466px

>>133982727
>thinking I'd want to be in a position of authority
I'm fine being a jackboot.

>>133978288

Sounds like you're fuckin stupid mate

File: Coat_of_arms_of_Mexico.svg.png (502KB, 1129x1024px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 1129x1024px

>>133981920
Gets my noggin' joggin'

File: hippity-hoppity-cant-afford-property-16529521.png (113KB, 500x544px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 500x544px

>>133982892
Ok then

File: 1500070026982.jpg (2MB, 2000x1487px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1487px

>>133970235
>> Survival of the fittest. In a free market without government involvement and regulations, you can do what you need to survive and if it has traction it will grow.

"Survival of the fittest!"..."uhhh ermmm...but no gov't, because that's theft....oh wait, but you 'can do whatever you want'"...Wtf kind of retarded philosophy is this?

> This implies that there is an overarching force bending the rules

It's a natural force of the market but it's still creating a situation where the rules are bent.

> for the winning teams while imposing rules on the shitty teams.

It is easier to make money when you have money. Irl I just bought property for $360,000 five years ago. It's now worth almost double. I have done no work whatsoever. I gained hundreds of thousands of dollars doing nothing. If I had tens of millions I could have gained millions just sitting on my ass. This opportunity is not available to people who can not afford it.

> But your analogy doesn't work because it uses an Organization of some sort to impose limitations/regulations that would not be present in the truly free market or free (baseball) competition.

It does not require that there be a thinking being imposing this force, therefore your counter to my analogy does not make sense. All that matter is that the playing field is not balanced, which destroys the argument that wealthy people 'earned' the money and therefore that taxation is theft.

File: 1499456085921.png (1MB, 1050x903px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1050x903px

>>133970436
> It's more like, imagine a baseball game but the other team is losing. Big Daddy Government doesn't like this and believes in "equality" so moves in and takes your points and hands them to the other team.

You just repeated the argument I countered without addressing any of my counter arguments. That's not how a dialectic works. I made the argument that the wealthier you get the easier it is to make and maintain your wealth, it's exponential in fact, and coupled with inheritance it's like a game where the scores are passed to the next team and the winners get to bend the rules. That is the analogy. Nobody would unironically say this makes any sense or is fair competition if a team loses to another team that has inherited millions of points and can strike out millions of times while the other team has to follow normal rules.

>>133974681
I care so much about mine i know it will win in the free market scenario you stupid nigger

File: 1499476341360.jpg (75KB, 507x527px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 507x527px

>>133970484
> Prove that central planning is more efficient than the free market, otherwise you have no argument.

My argument is that the moral basis that taxation is theft is false not that the public sector is 'more efficient' than the private sector. And 'more efficient' at what? In what context? You can't decide these things in the abstract, this isn't math, it's science. The state has meant the difference between savage societies and non-savage societies, weak and strong. What non-state has survived asshole? The freemarket itself has produced states into existence demonstrably all over the world, there are hundreds of empirical examples of states being more efficient than non-states so they are doing something right.

File: gadsten flag.jpg (68KB, 688x534px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 688x534px

>>133967273
I made this, Is it good senpai?

>>133978379
translate please

File: 0b9c35360236c62dd4fac5e97bd15f5502733a12_hq.jpg (28KB, 500x478px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x478px

>>133981292
This does not address the argument I was addressing, which is against the notion that taxation is theft. so.

WHAT
THE
FUCK
ARE
YOU
TALKING
ABOUT?

File: 1500321655898.jpg (124KB, 838x771px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 838x771px

>>133981413

File: natlib.png (349KB, 1290x1290px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1290x1290px

Enough bickering. We can have the NAP for WHITES and a strong border and long as you do away with social welfare and centralized planning. You can be in charge of an army. We will be in charge of every MANDATED state militia.

I'm a Libertarian Nationalist....willing to compromise.

>>133974681
I am confident my culture is strong enough that it will be able to thrive without the aid of the state.
Also without welfare niggers will drop like flies.

>>133988778
Income Taxation is theft. I'm okay with trade and sales tax at the state level.

File: 1500091041877.gif (253KB, 447x415px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 447x415px

>>133970598
>Sure... If I labor to provide my children a better future, that's what I hope to achieve.

This is not a counter argument to anything I said though. I never said 'therefore you would not get what you hope to achieve' I was countering the argument that 'taxation is theft'. Inheritance, coupled with the fact that the more you gain the higher your momentum to gaining more becomes, does not produce an EVEN PLAYING FIELD of fair competition which is the moral basis for saying "It's my money, I earned it". If I inherited it, I did not 'earn' it, my parents did. You can say 'well that's what they chose to do with their money'...yes, fine. But nevertheless the playing field remains uneven regardless.

It's like a baseball game. If a team passes the points and gets privileges from the previous team this is not 'fair competition', you can't say 'they earned it'. They obviously did not earn it, the previous team earned it. So if it's taken from the next team you aren't really "stealing" from those players.

I'm not a communist but I do think some degree of taxation is required otherwise the build up momentum of hoarded wealth becomes ridiculous.

> This isn't a game

If people are using moral arguments that 'taxation is theft' yes, that is a 'game', we need to trace back whether it's true or false that the money is being "stolen" and use reason to figure this out. The game theory I made was just an analogy to show how this attitude wouldn't make sense in other contexts.

> I'm not taking food away from others, I'm not injuring them, their odds of success are none of my business or responsibility.

Money is power and influence over the world around you, you aren't living in an abstract world separated from everyone else. If you gain power it's at the expense of everyone else around you. People need to shine your shoes and make your meals and cut your hair. You aren't just moving along as an atomic isolated individual.

>>133978992
That's already a better answer than OP deserves

File: 1498896477411.jpg (88KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 900x600px

>>133970598
> Not a FUCKING GAME... You can't complain about shit being imba, there are no nerfs.

The exact same type of argument can be thrown into the face of a libertarian. Don't like taxation? NOT A FUCKING GAME! Too bad! Stop complaining faggot. Deal with it asshole, there are no nerfs here. If the people want to use the government to take everything you have, tough shit, if you think it's unfair, TOO BAD ASSHOLE! Life isn't fair.

But if people debate like that you don't get anywhere or any closer to the truth of finding out what is moral and what is not.

> WOW, I hadn't read ahead, and this comes up, lmao... I don't think I need to read further.

This response is not a counter argument. The game was an ANALOGY that points out that this way of viewing what is moral and what is not moral would not make the cut in any other context. To brush it off without explanation is a cop out.

>>133990128
His only argument against the NAP was the usual made up scenarios and "What ifs?"

Clippity Cloppity
Get off my property !!!

>>133967273
Try to understand what government is. It's just like a private entity. It's managed by people and provides services, but unlike a private entity the users have no choice of which services they have to pay for. They are just served a bill and their lives are ruined if said bill is not paid.
Don't you see a little conflict of interest there?

What most libertarians want is the ability to decide which services to pay for and use.

File: 1498189940825.gif (97KB, 500x720px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 500x720px

>>133978992

I'm not gay like you, so I'll skip ahead and address the actual content of your argument.

If you think ALL libertarians are against ANY amount of government, you obviously didn't research anything but googling anarcho capitalism.

I'm sorry I can't counter the intricacies of EACH AND EVERY SINGLE libertarian variant gradation in a 4chan comments section. I was just tackling the one that says 'taxation is theft' and 'more government is always bad', which is the majority of libertarians in my experience. So if you don't fit this bill I'm not talking to you and so far you have not countered my arguments in any way whatsoever.

> Reality is HIGHLY non-linear. This is exactly why libertarians criticize central planning.

Yet libertarians generally view the world in a linear way "taxation is theft and government is bad' that is my criticism. Yes, NOT ALL LIBERTARIANS think this way but holy fuck I'm not addressing hairsplitting sperglords and edge cases here.

> What the fuck does that matter if the market is still geared towards the middle class?

Because the argument that 'taxation is theft' is based on a moral position that assumes an even playing field. If I was racing you on foot with my motorcycle could I say you are cheating if you strap on a pair of rollerblades? This makes no sense.

> Having a rich demographic just enables us to target luxury goods at them, until they inevitably become a thing for the common man, and new luxuries have come around. source: history

You are going down a red herring and using highly abstract reasoning (a very libertarian thing, to block out reality into this abstract fake-world box and shake it up until it produces what their imagination wants it to produce). And I never said you couldn't "target luxury goods" to rich people. wtf are you talking about? My argument is about the moral justification that taxation is theft.

>>133967273
Arguing with libertardians is pointless because they're all autists. Most people got bored of libertarianism as the Tea Party movement ran out of steam and disperesed. The ideology is dying, thankfully.

File: 1499550700464.jpg (17KB, 376x158px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 376x158px

>>133978992
> For what purpose? OECD has previously found that redistribution can strengthen economic growth, but this doesn't mean ANY redistribution will work.

Work to do what? To give at least SOMETHING back? In the form of public maintenance, jobs, etc...It can be done. I'm not saying the government is super efficient, it isn't by any stretch of the imagination but it can and has been done.

> Shit analogy, again. Moving on.

Saying the analogy is 'shit' doesn't mean it is shit. You need to explain HOW if you want to counter the argument. I could just say your whole argument is shit and move on but instead I'm responding to every single aspect of it.

> Well, "somehow" may actually be more intuitive than at first glance, if you think long enough.

Not really. I bought an apartment five years ago for $360,000. It's currently worth almost $700,000. Yes I took a 'risk' but it's a 'risk' people of lower income without access to purchasing property could make. Therefore I am in a position to be able to make almost $350,000 for doing ZERO work. I didn't do anything at all. In fact I just sat on my ass this whole time.

> "It's not a crime if it's justified inside my own moral framework :)))"

If the moral framework is based on good reasoning that can be defended and argued without tricks of rhetoric, yeah, that's how people come to moral opinions.

File: 1499300400185.jpg (149KB, 899x562px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 899x562px

>>133991157
I agree with what you are saying. The libertarian argument I am addressing is the one that says 'taxation is theft' and 'more government is always bad'. That is what I am addressing. If this does not apply to you I am not talking about your brand of libertarianism. If this does please address the argument I made specifically, which is that taxation is not theft because the playing field is inherently uneven and taxing and giving back to lower income people, in the form of jobs and perhaps things like healthcare and shit like that, is morally justifiable as a result.

File: disagreement-hierarchy.jpg (92KB, 679x516px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 679x516px

>>133967273
>flag
>not refuting any points
i feel so bad for you libertarians

>>133991983
>>133991983
>Work to do what? To give at least SOMETHING back? In the form of public maintenance, jobs, etc...It can be done. I'm not saying the government is super efficient, it isn't by any stretch of the imagination but it can and has been done.

the problem is that the government is making you give something back. Im all for charity but if a man wants to keep his money he should be able to do it.

>Saying the analogy is 'shit' doesn't mean it is shit. You need to explain HOW if you want to counter the argument. I could just say your whole argument is shit and move on but instead I'm responding to every single aspect of it.
nah mate you analogy was fucking shit, its like me saying "imagine the government is a thief and the more he steal the worse it is. point proven" your analogy sucks and doesn't apply in this case.
>
Not really. I bought an apartment five years ago for $360,000. It's currently worth almost $700,000. Yes I took a 'risk' but it's a 'risk' people of lower income without access to purchasing property could make. Therefore I am in a position to be able to make almost $350,000 for doing ZERO work. I didn't do anything at all. In fact I just sat on my ass this whole time.

and your risk boosted the economy, its not that fucking hard mate, you can work or your possessions can work for you. Next you are going to say people who start business and hire someone to run it should not be allowed to do so because they aren't "earning" their money.

If you were born with money is because, generally, someone in you family saved money sometime in history. Are you saying the government should abolish inheritance?

>>133992432
Taxation is not theft, it's extortion by definition. The playing field is indeed naturally uneven, and there is no valid theory, rule, or moral for redistribution of anything in it but such natural properties such as land, air, water, etc. Taxation is the sequestration of the fruits of one work, for which there is no moral basis whatsoever, meanwhile property (literally, a "place to be") is comparatively barely taxed.
So yes, taxation is extortion and land accumulation is immoral.

>>133967273
>Maybe excess wealth leads to (listen up because this is important) unequal access to the means of acquiring wealth, leading to a naturally uneven competitive playing field, thus justifying taxation to help level the playing field by redistributing a portion of the wealth?

Which clearly does fuck all for that purpose, your point?

>>133974681
Which is why I'm a Libertarian first and a National Socialist second, you stupid nu-fascist

File: ancaps.png (22KB, 648x458px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 648x458px

Ancaps and Libertarians are a fucking joke

File: 1495072781556.jpg (194KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 768x1024px

>Explain Yourselves!
I do not care about you and other strangers and have no cause or reason to do so in the slightest.

You're not worth my time or effort and unless you have something you're willing to buy from me or sell to me, I want nothing to do with you.
You are your own worst enemy.

That is all.

File: d86ba47e8a939586f517f80759b3bb4c.jpg (69KB, 564x397px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 564x397px

>>133994070
You don't know the first thing about it do you? And your meme sucks donkey arse

File: 1496196661720.jpg (35KB, 1057x611px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 1057x611px

>>133994268
> I do not care about you and other strangers and have no cause or reason to do so in the slightest.

And I don't give a fuck about your realizations about this profound thought either. So I'll move on.

> You're not worth my time or effort and unless you have something you're willing to buy from me or sell to me, I want nothing to do with you.
You are your own worst enemy.

Great argument faggot. Now, I'll move on to the next gaylord libertardian who has no argument. Next.

>>133994520
You seem upset. You're mad that you're on your own. You want help and hate people who refuse to aid you.

Or maybe you hate those of us that prioritize ourselves over you.

>>133992993
My argument is that it is that 'taxation is not theft', it's a way of keeping the playing field more even than it is inherently. Please, let's stick to the argument and not go down a red herring here.

> and your risk boosted the economy, its not that fucking hard mate, you can work or your possessions can work for you.

This is another red herring. My argument is that poor people do not have this ability and that I do not have the ability to make millions, only hundreds of thousands sitting on my ass in real estate. Yes it is a minor risk, in real estate, but whatever.

> If you were born with money is because, generally, someone in you family saved money sometime in history. Are you saying the government should abolish inheritance?

No, I'm saying in light of issues like inheritance, taxation is morally justifiable.

>>133967273
>If the playing field is uneven they might not have earned shit, thus undercutting your whole argument that taxation is theft
You're fucking trolling. This whole argument isn't coherent, and relies on vague shit like "uneven". Make it better or fuck off

>>133994912
>keeping the playing field more even
that is a moral claim. where are you deriving your morals from?

>>133994912
So because someones ancestors sacrificed and took risks you think it should be taken from them because they passed it on to their children?

>>133994912
The playing field will not kept even by giving power (taxes) to one concentrated owner (the government). What are you smoking?

>>133994070
>conflating Sarcuck with libertarianism
Lurk more newfag

File: 1499467502165.jpg (324KB, 800x417px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 800x417px

>>133988115
>And 'more efficient' at what?
Distributing resources and organizing society. The free market works from the bottum up and will always produce a decentralized government as a consequence. Any attempt to do otherwise is just needlessly resisting the current and will always result in disaster.

File: 1492726528313.png (460KB, 536x609px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 536x609px

>>133994742
> You seem upset. You're mad that you're on your own.

Actually I'm barely paying attention to this thread. I'm making reservations to go to dinner at an expensive restaurant right now. wtf are you even going on about?

> You want help and hate people who refuse to aid you.

Hmmm...I based this argument on the fact that I gained almost $300,000 in real estate in a few years of sitting on my ass doing nothing. My place is currently going for like $700,000, I paid $350,000 in cash. Seems wrong to watch ppl slaving around me while I sit on my ass chatting online.

> Or maybe you hate those of us that prioritize ourselves over you.

? i don't know or give a fuck about you.

File: 53c358eb0321382a947b5716d8ff34f7.jpg (79KB, 565x750px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 565x750px

>>133995043
'uneven' is not vague stop acting stupid. The ability to buy a home, sit on it, and earn $300,000 in a few years is a risk only available to people who can do this. Also, people who inherit huge wealth compared to someone who doesn't has an UNEVEN advantage. Are you really this stupid?

>>133994912
>My argument is that poor people do not have this ability and that I do not have the ability to make millions, only hundreds of thousands sitting on my ass in real estate. Yes it is a minor risk, in real estate, but whatever.

OK and why should they (the poor) have the right to someone else's work? Morality is subjective, but if you take away the ability to have maximun profit away from the rich they will move somewhere els. Take Singapore for example, low taxes and low resources in comparison to south American countries. and just that bring so much capital into the country that it basically stopped being a 3 would country. when you lower the taxes it's almost garanted to improve quality of life to citizen(including the poor) in the long run. And lets not talk about abolishing all form of taxes because its impossible in our reality, those who believe that are uninformed or simply crazy. \But in a general sense taxes are bad.

>>133995070
> that is a moral claim. where are you deriving your morals from?

The argument that 'taxation is theft' is a moral argument and I'm using that as my point of departure.

File: 1494025519280.gif (504KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

504KB, 1080x1080px

>>133994268
>soggy waffle

>>133995373
If the gov't uses it to give out health care, defense, build roads, transportation, to create jobs, etc...The lower and middle classes often benefit from this. It's not efficient, I agree but it is at least something.

>>133995845
> Distributing resources and organizing society. The free market works from the bottum up and will always produce a decentralized government as a consequence.

Empirical reality does not support your ideology. States form in the open and free market and dominate and grow larger and larger, not decentralized gov't.

>>133996626
>The lower and middle classes often benefit from this
What? No. You need to explain yourself. You can't just say that.

File: chicagoboys.png (192KB, 425x231px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 425x231px

>>133996757
>Empirical reality does not support your ideology
Yes it does. Neoliberal free market autism was applied to Chile while it was under a military junta and led to the peaceful transition of power back to the people and created a thriving democracy.

File: 1499401750226.jpg (49KB, 736x622px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 736x622px

>>133996443
> OK and why should they (the poor) have the right to someone else's work?

Because, as I just explained about 100 times, wealthy people have unfair advantages and their capital is usually the result of having capital and receiving inheritance.

> Morality is subjective, but if you take away the ability to have maximun profit away from the rich they will move somewhere els.

This is true, which is why I don't support taking an enormous sum or communism which is even stupider than libertarianism, I just support the idea of higher taxes for people who make more money.

> Take Singapore for example, low taxes and low resources in comparison to south American countries. and just that bring so much capital into the country that it basically stopped being a 3 would country. when you lower the taxes it's almost garanted to improve quality of life to citizen(including the poor) in the long run. And lets not talk about abolishing all form of taxes because its impossible in our reality, those who believe that are uninformed or simply crazy. \But in a general sense taxes are bad.

I'm not against having low taxes for wealthy and poor people across the board, I just think wealthier people should pay more and I explained why.

>>133995902
>I gained almost $300,000 in real estate in a few years of sitting on my ass doing nothing. My place is currently going for like $700,000, I paid $350,000 in cash. Seems wrong to watch ppl slaving around me while I sit on my ass chatting online.

Well the choices you made led to these consequences, if you had invested in a failing company or some other form of investment that lead to the loss of your capital then you would have lost it all.
I know this is basic stuff but follow my line of tough.

you had 350.000 and jimmy had 350.000 jimmy spent it all in hooker and drugs but you decide to invest.

now jimmy is a new men and is working to have save money. and you don't need to work because you invested . It would not be fair for the government to tax you in order to help jimmy buy his house would you not agree.

Not lets say you were born with this money and jimmy was not, that just mean you parents worked while jimmy's parents did not. \And it would not be fair for your parents if the government took their money and helped jimmy go to med school.

and if your parents where born with money... you get my point.

File: 1440272387307.gif (3MB, 337x510px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 337x510px

>>133997170
>This is true, which is why I don't support taking an enormous sum or communism which is even stupider than libertarianism, I just support the idea of higher taxes for people who make more money.
If you tax something you will get less of it. If anything we should tax the poor more.

File: 544037f32cacfc5d8735380c27c3e26f.jpg (8KB, 236x371px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 236x371px

This has been fun folks but I have to go to dinner, I'll make another thread about this in a few days and ass rape libertarianism again. see you at the party faggots.

>>133997170
rich people should not pay more because the "deserve" >133997186 the money they have. Taxing the rich at a higher rate is punishing them for being rich, which is unfair in it's core since in order to be rich they "worked harder" than the rest.

File: 1436785906137.jpg (54KB, 614x572px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 614x572px

>>133997433
>ass rape libertarianism again
>i-i totally showed y-you guys, gotta go

>>133996626
You don't have the right to take what is not yours. I shouldn't have to pay for someones healthcare. The only jobs it creates are more government jobs which require more taxes. They do not build roads. They just pass the contract to whoever can peddle the most influence. Who do the worst job possible such as asphalt which they know is shit so they can get paid to redo it in a couple of years. Transportation is better off being left to the private sector as with everything else. You might be able to convince me on defense but how much is too much? The only thing i want to be defended against is the government extorting me for money.

>>133988115
>My argument is that the moral basis that taxation is theft is false
The word is "assertion", not argument. You made no argument. If people have the right to keep their stuff, then taking away from them is theft. Libertarians can distinguish right and wrong and they stick to their guns, unlikely 99% of political ideologies.