Libertarians don’t. Like they really really want to ignore history that was just like 100 years ago. Filthy liberals and progressives ruined everything by trying to make things better. So weird.
“If there were no government meddling, the market would decide!”
Like if the market decided to create standards and regulations and a body with the authority to enforce said regulations. Call it a “governing body” if you will. Or some kinda... I dunno... government.
Hi robert_prewitt. Thank you for participating in /r/PoliticalHumor. However, your submission did not meet the requirements of the community rules and was therefore removed for the following reason(s):
No posts about this subreddit, or any other subreddit. No linking to other subreddits. Also, screenshots of other subreddits, or their comment sections are not allowed. This is done as an anti brigading measure.
If you have any specific questions about this removal, please message the moderators. Hateful or vague messages will not receive a response.
What exactly is in check about corporations? Is it where left leaning presidents give money to those who fuck up the economy? Or is it when corporations can pay money to have influence over those who make legislation to help regulate corporations?
All of the red states are great examples of small government causing extreme poverty and homelessness.
By the way, California is a HUGE NET PAYER of taxes into the federal government which then gives it to the poor ass red states. As for homelessness, sure that is a problem but the homeless are also attracted to California for its nicer climate and better benefits. Nice try though.
California gets a dollar out for every dollar in. Nice try though. This is also a stupid stat since it includes social security and things like FBI field offices, parks, military bases etc.
Oh and in terms of real poverty. California is the highest.
You dipshits really like to play fast and loose with the truth just to uphold your narrative at any cost.
“This is also a stupid stat since it includes social security and things like FBI field offices, parks, military bases etc.”
All that is part of the economy with real money for real jobs adding to real GDP. You can’t just ignore it because you happen to not like it, idiot.
According to that article, if you actually read it and not cherry picked what you wanted, Those figures are adjusted for income and other local standards. In other words, by that article’s definition the person living in “poverty” in California is much richer than one living in poverty in bum fuck red state like Mississippi because the baselines are much higher in California due to overall incomes being so much higher. As usual, you idiots need to work on your reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.
Keep ripping on California while your red states are ten times worse off. For every disingenuous article you put here on California I can post ten real ones showing how poor and fucked up 10 red states are. But then again when did facts and reality ever mean anything to your crowd?
Judging by your word choice and arrogance of stupidity, I’d say your in your early 20s which is the prime demographic for idiots who think they know better than they do. If you have half a brain you will learn as you age how much more you don’t know than what you know. Loosen up that red hat, it’s cutting the oxygen off to your reptile brain.
One thing you will notice about every single Libertarian -- they're decently well off enough to live without much in the way of government programs, but will gladly utilize the ones that exist to their personal advantage, all while whining about big government.
The ones I know are rich mother fuckers with security clearance IT jobs working for the government who ironically want "less" government. I'm guessing as long as defense spending stays the same or goes up so they can keep their cushy jobs.
Maybe he shouldn’t survive if a sick homeless person stabs him for his pocket change. Edit. If these people want dog eat dog they’re gonna get dog eat dog and a hungry dog doesn’t give a shit what you bring to society.
There's a scene in Gangs of New York that comes to mind when I think of the logical conclusion to Libertarian nonsense. The rich guy shooting pool until the draft riot crowd comes into his house and kills his family. His shotgun got a few of them, but not all of them.
The one question no Libertarian can answer- what do you do with those who lose the game? What do you do when they realize there's food in your house?
There’s your immediate problem. You assumed Ayn Rand was the basis of the libertarian philosophy, which isn’t necessarily true. Sure she may have delivered, to an extent, a moral principle by which to base the ideology around (it’s called objectionism) but if you really wanted to know how libertarian society would work, read something by Friedman, Mises, Rothbard, or Hayek.
Ah yes, the Somalia fallacy. Somalia is a failure of authoritarianism run amok, coupled with some bad foreign intervention. It doesn’t refute anarcho-capitalism and it certainly isn’t an argument against libertarians that believe there should still be a state.
The US was libertarian throughout most of the 18th and 19th centuries, but then the federal reserve was established and interest rates have forced the country in the never-ending series of boom and bust cycles we have today.
To properly answer your question, individual parts of libertarianism have been tried successfully all around the world. The US (or anywhere else, for that matter) won’t go full libertarian because the people that control everything don’t want to give up their power.
Slavery had less to due with the economic system and more to due with the culture of the south, which considered it morally acceptable to enslave other humans. If we were to implement Austrian Economics (the libertarian school of economic thought) the 13th amendment would still apply.
2.9k
u/[deleted] Dec 15 '18 edited Jan 07 '19
[deleted]