The irrational nature of Libertarianism

[Poptech]

Again, how do you prevent cartels and monopolies in a purely free-market system?

They are inevitable results of capitalism.

Incorrect, cartels are an inevitable result of government regulation, since in a pure free market collusion for price control would inevitably attract third parties to that market and under-cut the cartel thus making them futile.

It is only theoretically possible to have a resource monopoly but it may be impossible to determine when this is reached.

[boutons_deux]

Incorrect, cartels are an inevitable result of government regulation, since in a pure free market collusion for price control would inevitably attract third parties to that market and under-cut the cartel thus making them futile.

goddam, you're one stupid mother er. And of course you can't give any examples to support you stupidity.

[DarrinS]

goddam, you're one stupid mother er. And of course you can't give any examples to support you stupidity.

Meh, too easy.

[Poptech]

goddam, you're one stupid mother er. And of course you can't give any examples to support you stupidity.

An example of a lack of a university education.

[boutons_deux]

An example of a lack of a university education.

You Lie.

and you got no evidence of "cartels are an inevitable result of government regulation,...."

[RandomGuy]

If it is not a position of a free market proponent than it is a strawman argument <- go look up the definition of the phrase.

I am more familiar with the definition than you are. No need to look it up.

You might want to, though, look up what a reductio ad absurdum is.

Lastly, you can't about people trying to figure out what your position is, if you are unable, or unwilling to spell out your terms, answer honest questions directly, or clarify things.

That is not honest.

[RandomGuy]

Incorrect, cartels are an inevitable result of government regulation, since in a pure free market collusion for price control would inevitably attract third parties to that market and under-cut the cartel thus making them futile.

It is only theoretically possible to have a resource monopoly but it may be impossible to determine when this is reached.

Bull .

Cartels are the inevitable result of private en ies colluding to set prices in a free market without government regulation. They have existed since capitalism itself. Drug cartels, LIBOR price fixing, Coffee or e monopolies are not, and have not been theoretical.

Such cartels would act to exclude the third parties attracted to that market, and squash new compe ion in a way similar to monopolies.

Cartels exist now, have existed, and will always exist where you have free markets.

Your God is not infallible.

[RandomGuy]

There would have to be a law they could sue about. Large companies frequently sue using government regulations against their compe ion.

I do not claim cartels could not exist in a laissez faire system, rather they could not last long. What you are concerned with legal abuse though relates to a company using the regulatory environment against their compe ors. Without these regulations they could only sue for things like theft.

You don't need "laws" to sue about, you merely need actionable torts, i.e. theft and contract disputes. Anybody who has ever taken a business law class with an introduction to contracts and UCC understands that.

A single farmer's right to use the water on his land can easily be inpinged by the large corporate farm next door, for example.

You still have not told me how this farmer would prevail against the army of lawyers that corporation could field, barring any redress through governmental action.

[Poptech]

Cartels are the inevitable result of private en ies colluding to set prices in a free market without government regulation. They have existed since capitalism itself. Drug cartels, LIBOR price fixing, Coffee or e monopolies are not, and have not been theoretical.

None of those are examples of free markets but rather the result of government regulation.

Such cartels would act to exclude the third parties attracted to that market, and squash new compe ion in a way similar to monopolies.

How exactly do they do this?

Your God is not infallible.

Another strawman argument.

[angrydude]

lol at the dumbasses not understanding the solution to the problems they about daily

[Th'Pusher]

Can libertarians name a single society where libertarianism has been successfully implemented? Spare me the Hong Kong bull as we all know the state owns all land, offer social medicine and welfare

[RandomGuy]

Wow.



You can't make this stuff up.

[RandomGuy]

"he wants people to have licenses to drive cars"

GASP.

[RandomGuy]

Another ongoing failure of an ideology.

PopTech

[RandomGuy]

Bam.

[sickdsm]

Bam.

Bailing from one thread to bump another when you didn't respond to my comment yet?

[RandomGuy]

Bailing from one thread to bump another when you didn't respond to my comment yet?

Didn't bail. Just had a meeting. This thread is one of my subscriptions, so it makes a convenient vehicle when the subject of libertarian philosophy comes up.

Your Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.1

Libertarian left.

https://www.politicalcompass.org/

I have some fairly strong libertarian leanings as well. I just don't think its purest form is any more rational than communism.

[sickdsm]

Didn't bail. Just had a meeting. This thread is one of my subscriptions, so it makes a convenient vehicle when the subject of libertarian philosophy comes up.



Libertarian left.

https://www.politicalcompass.org/

I have some fairly strong libertarian leanings as well. I just don't think its purest form is any more rational than communism.

Sounds like we agree. So why the hostility towards libertarian then? Majority of people in america are libertarian leaning. They either don't know it or refuse to embrace it.

[RandomGuy]

Sounds like we agree. So why the hostility towards libertarian then? Majority of people in america are libertarian leaning. They either don't know it or refuse to embrace it.

I think we likely agree on many things. The compass.org website is interesting. I am a social liberal, and fiscal conservative.

What bothers me are the nutters who are hard line zealots. PopTech was one and Parker another.

[boutons_deux]

"Majority of people in america are libertarian leaning."

link?

WTF is libertarianism? and how is it different from conservatism? I'm interested differences that result in different policies.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Sounds like we agree. So why the hostility towards libertarian then? Majority of people in america are libertarian leaning. They either don't know it or refuse to embrace it.

speak for yourself. Not everyone thinks like you.

[RandomGuy]

Sounds like we agree. So why the hostility towards libertarian then? Majority of people in america are libertarian leaning. They either don't know it or refuse to embrace it.

True "pure" libertarianism is not dissimilar to communism. sounds good on paper, but fails miserably when applied in the real world.

[RandomGuy]

Can libertarians name a single society where libertarianism has been successfully implemented? Spare me the Hong Kong bull as we all know the state owns all land, offer social medicine and welfare

https://www.texasobserver.org/the-ri...city-in-texas/
The Rise and Fall of the “Freest Little City in Texas”
How a libertarian experiment in city government fell apart over taxes, debt and some very angry people.

It is actually a pretty funny/tragicomic read.

[RandomGuy]

See you just don't get it. It would be in the interest of a private individual or corporation to care of the land they own and they would do a better job of it than the government. So if our national parks, take Yosemite for example, were returned to private ownership then it would be kept even more pristine because that would generate more tourism/profits. Well unless they realized they could just flood it like it's sister valley Hetch Hetchy and make more money selling the water to Califorinia. But they wouldn't be able to do that because it's public land, no wait it's private, no wait it's....


RG, the correct description of libertarians is "politically irrelevant". Why spend time arguing with them?

This is a 2010 post that didn't age well, given the libertarian influences on the GOP in the interim.

[boutons_deux]

Libertarians are pawns of the oligarchy. Everything they want empowers the oligarchy.

I bet most libertarians have no ing idea.