[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)

Catalog

See 8chan's new software in development (discuss) (help out)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


A recognized Safe Space for liberty - if you're triggered and you know it, clap your hands!

File: 1446833167130.png (972.2 KB, 1226x987, 1226:987, 458526462.png)

 No.11950

am I making sense?

capitalism is technically "money" "ism" basically capitalism is in a way a religious belief in- and false idol worship of capital and/or currency.

capitalism as a system as a whole is simply a slightly better disguised version of "wage slavery" that has been designed from the ground up to be a system that is easily manipulated by those few people at the top who hold more money than everyone else in the world combined.

>The cure to BAD regulation is GOOD regulation, not NO regulation; that just leads to cartels and you're right back where you are now. Regulatory capture fools so many young libertarians into thinking that regulation itself is inherently bad when what you need is regulation to keep the free market free and break up cartels.

Of course the solution is without a doubt NOT anarchy, however:

>The solution to everyone finding loopholes in everything and breaking the rules by getting around all the rules

>is to make more rules

capitalism as a system itself is flawed. currency, money is flawed.

 No.11951

File: 1446833213370.png (1.15 MB, 1281x790, 1281:790, 836526151325.png)

>US will spend 43 million dollars on a gas station in the middle of nowhere in the desert in afghanistan

>$7000 coffee makers

>$600 toilet seats

>$37 for A screw

>$435 for a hammer

>$285 screwdriver

>$387 flat washer

>$469 wrench

>$214 flashlight,

>$437 tape measure

>$2,228 monkey wrench,

>$748 pair of duckbill pliers

>$74,165 aluminum ladder

>$659 ashtray

>$1,118.26 for a spare plastic cap for a navigator’s stool on a B-52 bomber (worth about two cents)

>Defense Accounting Finance Service writes $22 billion in checks every month

>Mark Krenik (pentagon officer) created a phony company and then billed himself $504,000. He had to repay the money, but was not sentenced to prison. Probation only, and a $495 fine. He told the federal judge that he did it because everyone else in his section was doing to the same, but he was not required to name names.

>Sgt. Robbie Miller convicted and sent to prison for stealing $1 million. would not have been caught but was involved in affairs with female co-workers. Agents say they got Miller when he was hauling evidence out of the office to burn it.

>Contractors were billing $300 a night hotel rooms, private jet flights, meals at five star restaurants and bar bills to the government.

>Air Force non-commissioned officers like Miller, who handle giant

accounts at Dayton, call any vendor account that is less than $100,000

“budget dust” and say it’s not worth the time or effort trying to

recover.

>hundreds of billions into stupid wasteful trash every year

>monsanto claims it needs to genetically modify our crops and use pesticides because it helps make the world a better place

>has the biggest and most expensive military and military budget in the entire world that makes the nasa budget look like pocket change in comparison

>claims space travel is too expensive

>claims they can't afford a living wage

>claims they can't give war veterans all the help they need as t.v. commercials go on and on with sad country music with vets missing arms and legs "help the veterans!"

>claims they can't cure Cancer/HIV/Ebola/ as the pink ribbon shows up on KFC chicken buckets everywhere that contain cancer causing ingredients

>claims they can't afford universal health care

>claims they can't house every homeless person

>claims they can't grow all crops organically

>claims they can't feed the poor unless the people themselves donate food, time, and money.

>claims people absolutely must pay taxes because otherwise they would go to jail for making the country crumble apart in failure.

http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=96;t=000012;p=0

http://www.wnd.com/2000/10/4314/

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-30/news/vw-18804_1_nut

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

DailyFail: https://archive.is/RnMCc

Fox: https://archive.is/ZhRPL

BostonHerald: https://archive.is/ojJ6p

==================


 No.11952

File: 1446833242417.jpg (159.69 KB, 900x691, 900:691, 876547956.jpg)

to be sure everyone understands:

>I am Jewish

>I am Against Zionism

>I am Against Capitalism.

>I am PRO Libertarian.


 No.11960

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>I am Jewish

>I am Against Zionism

TRAITOR

Jokes aside, no, capitalism is not a religion. Your claim is that it is the worship of money, but what is money? Money is economic and (indirectly) social power. Getting rid of capitalism won't take away people's desire for power. Keep in mind, desire for power is very much a natural thing. I feel with a free market, this desire could be fostered into creating wealth and prosperity, and it would be impossible for jackasses to use the gubmint as a coercive force to kill competition.

I've heard arguments from socialist and syndicalist anarchists that where libertarians and anarchocapitalism fails is that even though the state is gone, there will be "pecking orders" of sorts. The argument being that getting rid of the state doesn't matter if you the economic system ensures that some people will have more power than others via shekels. Arguments about how freedom doesn't necessarily mean equality aside, I find that such a point is moot by the fact that hierarchies are more or less inevitable. But at least with libertarianism, climbing up the pyramid will be a lot easier. At the very least it will make all sections a bit more comfortable. Albeit arguing over the concepts of freedom and equality and if they are indeed tied is more of a philosophical discussion than a political one.

Out of curiosity, what is your idea of "GOOD" regulation and what makes it good? And how would you prevent corporations from buying out a government that can make said regulations in order to make "bad regulations?


 No.11966

>>11960

> I feel with a free market…

Capitalism and the free market are completely different things. It is entirely possible to have one without the other. And in fact rarely are they both seen together in practice.


 No.11973

File: 1446878670094.png (3.62 MB, 800x4088, 100:511, 56326532464.png)

>>11960

>capitalism is not a religion. Your claim is that it is the worship of money, but what is money?

basically It is a solid piece of matter, I would compare it to idol worship statues. money even says "god" on it and people are obsessed with it. I would say that indirectly people do technically worship money because they are forced under its control their entire lives and the more they have, the more power they have.

>Money is economic and (indirectly) social power. Getting rid of capitalism won't take away people's desire for power. Keep in mind, desire for power is very much a natural thing.

you are absolutely right.

>I feel with a free market, this desire could be fostered into creating wealth and prosperity, and it would be impossible for jackasses to use the gubmint as a coercive force to kill competition.

The problem is that all the more wealthy and powerful groups and individuals are all friends (pic related as an example)

>I've heard arguments from socialist and syndicalist anarchists that where libertarians and anarchocapitalism fails is that even though the state is gone, there will be "pecking orders" of sorts. The argument being that getting rid of the state doesn't matter if you the economic system ensures that some people will have more power than others via shekels. Arguments about how freedom doesn't necessarily mean equality aside,

your reply is really one of the first real serious non-shill replies. Thank you for your actual thoughts you have put into this.

>I find that such a point is moot by the fact that hierarchies are more or less inevitable. But at least with libertarianism, climbing up the pyramid will be a lot easier. At the very least it will make all sections a bit more comfortable. Albeit arguing over the concepts of freedom and equality and if they are indeed tied is more of a philosophical discussion than a political one.

Really, I'm just trying to lift the veil of corruption so that everyone has a better clue what's going on.

>Out of curiosity, what is your idea of "GOOD" regulation and what makes it good? And how would you prevent corporations from buying out a government that can make said regulations in order to make "bad regulations?

That's a good question. While I could think of many different examples of what a utopia is, the problem is that people are very far from perfect and would be the quick end of that utopia. I'm trying my best, and that is all I will truly admit to.


 No.11974

>>11966

I agree. this is an excellent point as well.


 No.12170

thred bemp


 No.12173

People who want to eliminate hierarchy are retards.

The Iron Law of Oligarchy always wins. Oligarchies lead even the most equality-minded political parties, because anti-hierarchy leftists are hypocritical idiots.


 No.12174

Once you distil capitalism enough you get pure anarchism. Laissez faire capitalism means free exchange of wealth, material, labour, time and energy.


 No.12178

>>11950

>capitalism is technically "money" "ism"

But it isn't. At all.

Capitalism means a fiat currency where the banks loan out money that doesn't exist prior to issuing the loan.

The free enterprise system, for example, is a system based on money but does not imply capitalism.


 No.12179

>>11973

>basically it is a solid piece of matter

This is a pretty ridiculous line of thought. Any object is "a solid piece of matter". Have you read any Rothbard, just out of interest?

To understand money you need to understand the development of trade. In a small community with little division of labour it is possible for a barter economy to persist, but as the division of labour grows, so too does the need for a fiduciary medium of exchange. Imagine, for example, a man whose job it is to manufacture crankshafts. Since a crankshaft is a specialized piece of equipment, the demand for them is confined only to a small number of people. It is unlikely that a baker would want to trade his bread for crankshafts, for example. Thus, if the man can trade his crankshafts for a good that is in higher demand he opens up his options of purchases. This is the purpose of money. Instead of an over complicated system of bartering to eventually reach basic necessities, one can trade their good or service for a fiduciary medium that is accepted by other producers for their respective goods or services. Prior to fiat currency, currencies evolved naturally. Gold, silver and copper were easy and obvious choices because they were easily transportable and did not degrade easily, but the key is that these goods already had a value prior to their being used as currency. You are correct when you say that currency has no intrinsic value when talking about fiat currency, because fiat currency is only backed up by the force of government via legal tender laws. However, simply saying that money is "a solid piece of matter" is not helpful in any way, because there is no intrinsic, objective value of anything. All value is, after all, subjective.


 No.12183

>>11966

>Capitalism and the free market are completely different things

Examples?


 No.12185


 No.12187

>>12183

Capitalism doesn't necessarily exclude acquiration of property through violent means. It's perfectly compatible in a capitalist system to own a factory because the state handed it over to you. In a free market, that wouldn't be possible. Instead, the factory would propably belong to your workers, as they use it regularly and hence will eventually homestead it.


 No.12191

>>12187

>Instead, the factory would propably belong to your workers, as they use it regularly and hence will eventually homestead it.

Not if the factory owner had legitimately & voluntarily acquired the land and the resources and paid people to voluntarily put the factory together.


 No.12217

>>12191

This is the scenario I ruled out. I was specifically talking about a case when a factory is just handed over to a capitalist by the state.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]