ending the fed will do nothing and it won't stop inflation. banks counterfeit our money in the form of loans using fractional reserve lending, in ratios exceeding 300:1, thus banks control the issuance and the QUANTITY of our money and credit, so they're responsible for inflation, which technically isn't a tax--it enriches the usurers, not government.
by the way, there's no such thing as a free market. we need fair trade, which necessitates the use of force by representative government against those who would otherwise exploit and rob from you.
libertarianism without monetary reform is pure hatred for the poor. it allows banks and other predatory entities to exploit their labor and rob them continually. our costly welfare system is necessary because usury bankers go unchecked--the recent bailouts make this obvious. if you're a real libertarian, then vote for Bill Still and watch his award-winning docu, "Secret of Oz" (channel is bstill3). otherwise, you're a cold heartless bastard.
@MiHiVidz It would be phased out over a decade or more... I am not for destroying it in a year. It'll be unfair to those who already paid into it even if its in the red the past few years. Though please agree that Social Security is the worse kind of Ponzi scheme. A person can save their own money better than a Government Official.
@KurzLuppii The fact is that you types want it gone, period.
What would happen to those in the future? Do you think libertarianism is so wonderful that it will prevent people in the future from becoming old or disabled?
@KurzLuppii No, there's not. You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
For one thing, my Grandparents got totally hosed by Enron about 10 years ago. They tried to save & invest, and they got robbed. That's what they got for trying to build their own nest egg.
Had it not been for (YOU GUESSED IT!) Social Security to fall back on, they truly would have ended up homeless in the final years.
Now try telling me that they should have just died in the gutter, asshole!
@MiHiVidz Its called diversification. Thats the first rule any investor would tell you.
I have stocks in most industries, gold, silver, nothing exclusively tied to anything. Your grandpa and ma, sorry were morons for placing all their hopes and dreams in one company. They wouldn't die in the gutter... they have family like you and their children to take care of them. ITS CALLED FAMILY!!! you supposed to look out for each other!
I've never heard of liberitarians being accused of "hating the poor." I've debated many leftists and have never heard that. May I ask where exactly have you heard this misconception?
@TokenLibertarianGirl yeah all those free market libertarian ideas sound great on paper but dosen't work in real life. just the 2008 financial crises. libertarians always blame the goverment while the deregulation, tax cuts etc has led to more inequality. there are stats that show how big government improves life. after 2008 libertarians blame the gov for bailing out the banks, when, after deregulation, the banks nearly bought down the world.
This girl is well-intentioned, but I think I'm going to stick to watching videos that feature Milton Friedman. Milton Friedman was one of the greatest economist of the 20th and 21st century (he's now passed on). He explains economics plain and simply and also has debated political idealists with socialist view points. Put simply, Friedman let's the facts and research speak for itself.
Search for Milton Friedman on YouTube if you really want to learn about liberitarian views.
I've watched most of the videos featuring Milton Friedman and have read books by Thomas Sowell (another great economist who he taught and mentored). In my opinion, all of the ideas conveyed by Friedman are great. But if you disagree, then feel free to discuss it with me.
By the way, I've never heard of liberitarians being accused of "hating the poor." I've debated many leftists and have never heard that.
@TokenLibertarianGirl As somebody with Aspergers I'm a Libertarian I need help with certain things I don't complain about my disability.I drive have a hs diploma and college degree.
A few years ago I did research Milton Friedman & it was so eye opening to "economic truth" (a phrase I coined). More great research includes Ludwig Von Mises, Peter Schiff & Ron Paul (non-political economic interviews), Peter Schiff's book "How an Economy Grows & How it Crashes".
@summercures2 Avoid Friedman if you are looking for consistent Libertarianism. His monetary policy wasn't consistent with Libertarian principles. Read Mises, Rothbard, Bastiat, Hayek, and Hazlitt. Check out mises dot org they have free pdf and audio versions of many of the classics written by the previously mentioned Economists. Mises and Bastiat are the most challenging reads. If your a good reader start with "Human Action" by Mises. Also check out praxgirl here on youtube.
@SocietyIncollapse: You said, "[Friedman's] monetary policy wasn't consistent with Libertarian principles."
First of all, we must clarify that Milton Friedman was not a politician. He was only an economist (an internationally known economist). So he didn't exactly have the authority to impliment whatever monetary ideas he had. Secondly, Friedman always advocated less government spending. And he wanted to cut unneccessay gov programs. What part of that is not consistent with liberitarianism?
@summercures2: You said "Avoid Friedman if you are looking for consistent Libertarianism."
Milton Friedman was one of the greatest champions of liberitrianism of our time (probably one of the main economists to popularize the idealogy in the mainstream) and is well respected by many scholars and economists. In a debate, he could metaphorically beat up any leftist with both hands tied behind his back (and politely at that). But lets set all talk aside and let his vids on YT speak for themself.
Plus you actively ignore the fact that the average quality of life for the poor is many times better in countries with a strong welfare state then in nations that neglect their vulnerable. All your arguments are theoretical, ignoring the fact that there are numerous precedents and case studies that show your assumptions are wrong.
You don't hate the poor, you just understand nothing of what its like to be poor, or how people end up being poor. Your attitude is patronising, ignorant and overly simplistic.
Boy she's stupid. Is there a libertarian on the planet that understands there is this thing called REALITY that OPPOSES their insanity - look google 'The Authoritarians' and find out all about their logic... The last 30 years is the LIBERTARIAN revolution and they have fucked up everything - PLEASE WAKE UP...
@ssj4gogetassj4 This is SUCH a bizarre question. In the soviet union they had ONE party yet had a vote. Now using your insane logic, if I criticise totalitarian communism, and am a Russian, all my arguments are rendered invalid because there is no one else to vote for?... My mind boggles trying to understand you lot. Obama is fucking shit , but is LESS bad than the protofascists like Paul, Santorum and Romney - therefore...
@ssj4gogetassj4 Look, the right wing was TOTALLY wrong footed in the 60's - they regrouped and rethought - at the time they were told it was hopeless because (as is STILL the case now) the American people are left of centre - so YOU give up but that has NOTHING to do with REALITY and ALL the nasty foreign adventures are in the interests of CAPITALISTS - and Ron Paul wants to make SUPER DOOPER capitalists - I'm angry because you have NO idea how evil and bigoted libertarians are.
Never forget welfare robs from the middle class gives to the poor making the middle class poorer and the poor even more poor because now jobs start disappearing meanwhile the wealthy elite bankers always remain in control.
Welfare is not to help anyone because the abuser is offering the solution.
You know who else is socialist/communist & "loved the poor"? - Stalin, Mao, Polpot, Hitler! Guilt by association does NOT work!
And why can't you see that govt & private sector BOTH are made up of self-interested people, govt power attracts power-hungry people THAT'S WHY there are so many democracies around but people electing corrupt people OVER & OVER
Thing is govt has "LEGAL" authority to ROB (tax, inflation) & SUPPRESS, private sector has no such authority though
@tjtomkins that was sarcasm. mark twain championed the poor and the working class... he also hated the gov and was all about the free-market. read the prince and the pauper, its theme is similar to what u wrote in ur response.
It would be nice if everyone would just help others out of the kindness of their heart, but that's too often not the case. If it was, child prostitutes in third world countries wouldn't have to prostitute their selves.because the global corporation that hired them to make textiles would pay them adequate wages for living expenses. Better yet, someone would put them through school.
@JNathanK2011 This is what the government is suppose to do: protect individual freedom, liberty, and properties. If these three things are protected, then the nation will flourish with innovations and prosperity. Things like minimum wages, food stamps, or unemployment programs wouldn't even exist.
@DreadHarper3 or at least Econ 101. When someone talks about raising minimum wage or 99% vs. 1%, it tells you how little he/she understands about how economy works.
@DarkosApprentice You can if you are a broke college student. I also disagree with FAFSA. The government shouldn't be paying for people to go to school. That's part of the reason school is expensive and there are too many people with degrees. They are worthless now unless you are in medical, computers, finance, accounting, and some select other fields.
@TokenLibertarianGirl Thank you so much for posting these videos, they've educated me a ton and I've gone from being totally apathetic about politics to becoming a vehement Ron Paul supporter, and have been convincing my friends to do the same!What you're doing is great and I just hope you keep it up.
@Mectrixctic realize what you actually said, "take care of them." Does that thought even make sense? What do you think the goal of a civilization supposedly is? How exactly do you envision the future?
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus It is much more complex than that. It isn't like these people die overnight. A small business? So you are for regulation? How else would P.P.G. or Consol Energy be kept from exploding into the giants that they are? & them getting big is a good thing. They employ thousands of people. But consol is not going to be worried that there emissions will kill their customers that consume the energy that their coal produces. That isn't how it works.
@Friedstuffsable I wouldn't say that we need to trash all oil companies. Petroleum makes more than just fuel. Plastics are a huge part of our life.. Made from petrol. It needs to be extracted correctly, & safely. How do we ensure that happens? Inspectors.. & no, the inspectors can't be from a private for profit company.
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus Okay. The welfare state, social security, maybe it isn't good. Libertarians might have a point there. But they do not have a point on shit canning agencies that do a job that simply can't be privatized. There is a reason we no longer have 12 year old coal miners.. Because it is fucking illegal. Who enforces those laws? Free Enterprise? Not possible.
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus I speak in reality. You speak in theory. Let's say that a tannery begins operation in your town. Who makes sure they don't dump Chromium into the water? What incentive do the company owners have to pay more to dispose of their toxic byproducts correctly? They don't have one until laws are established that make it so if they don't follow the rules, they lose their business. Now, who enforces those Laws? Private companies do not enforce them. Understand?
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus You never had room to begin with, you obtuse boy. Your zero regulation fantasy is a joke. It will never, & has never functioned in a complex society. How is a private company going to enforce Laws, (A.K.A. Regulations) on other private companies? Explain that. You can't because it is a made up fantasy. The only entity that can enforce Laws is the government. Would you have a private police force not represented by the state giving out tickets? IDIOT!
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus You're the one who needs a history lesson on your free enterprise hard on. Do you think a private company has the ability to control the air traffic of an entire nation? Tell me this dumb fuck: How would they make a profit doing that? Would the community come together & donate to them? This completely unregulated wet dream has not existed in any functioning nation in modern history. Even ancient Egypt had state regulations Idiot. Read more.
I really don't understand the answer for the libertarians on corporation regulation. You can't just let a corporation test a nuclear bomb as an extreme example.
I think there has to be some kind of balance that keeps the corporations in check and held accountable.
In the case of BP... I guess BP should get the crap sued out of them by coastal residents/businesses, and this example should be enough to keep people from taking shortcuts?
It would seem some shortcuts end up worth it to some.
In addition, wages decreased for the working classes from the 1970s to the late 1980s. This lack of income also created a situation where the working class had no social freedom, as they were essentially bound by their occupations. Any attempt to leave would be considered financial suicide for an individual.
So, ultimately, a libertarian society will essentially guarantee the financial murder of the poor, and eliminate social freedoms. Pure libertarianism is a pipe dream as much as communism.
Sorry TokenLibertarianGirl, but the end of welfare programs (and minimum wage) will increase poverty among the working class, and actually discourage social freedom among said classes. Name in point, Chile during the 70s and the 80s. Chile essentially had a libertarian free-market. There were little to no regulations on businesses, and nearly every sector except the military was capitalized. From the 1970s to the late 80s, poverty rates increased from 27% to 40%.
@Friedstuffsable - You COMPLETELY missed my point. Current nukes are inherently unsafe. NO INSURER would insure the nuke operators against accidents. So they got the government to do it for them for a token payment. We get unsafe reactors that could poison us and destroy the value of our property, they get free insurance for reactors that SHOULDN"T EVEN EXIST, and would never exist in a free market. You are pretty much wrong.
I believe the exact opposite of this video. If we had no governments, there would still be poor people.In fact I would argue that even more people would be poor, and the disparity would be far larger than it is today.
Friedstuffsable - Look up "Price-Anderson". The NRC eliminates the need for nuclear power plants to price the risks of their operation into their product. The government almost completely absolves nuke operators from any and all liability for nuclear accidents, no matter how awful, so they design and build nukes that are inherently unsafe. How does that square with your simpleton conception of government as a "protector"?
@lifesabeachnj NO, they don't. The NRC enforces regulations. How would you have it? A private company hired by their community to go in & check their reactors? Energy wouldn't allow that. You want a profit driven organization who deals with something extremely dangerous to regulate themselves?
I also got educated by taking political science classes in college, learning about various ideologies, finding that just because libertarians don't support welfare doesn't mean they hate the poor, or are against them. It's all a matter of ones philisophical position on politics.
I took political theory & did a good amount of extra time studying political ideologies & political philosophies, so I knew libertarians aren't hattin on poor people because they want 2 get rid of welfare. I guess those who judge libertarians just becuase they want to get rid of welfare programs are much more uneducated then anything when it comes 2 politics. Any self proclaimed liberal who hates on libertarians, thinkin their heartless, because they want 2 get rid of welfare R plain ignorant.
OK, then let's end all taxes since it's all by force. Which will in turn end the CIA, FBI, DOD, AMA, FDA, BOE, DOC, & all main functions of government. Cool, then our newly found super "freedom" will save us from unlicensed butcher doctors malpractice, chemically infected drinking water, collapsed interstate bridges, a house on fire, foreign invaders, buildings not built up to code, or nuclear spills. Gee, this IS fun thinking like a Libertarian! Holy shit you're fucking crazy
@Bolgernow Government is there to protect property rights so nuclear spills and air pollution could fall under property rights issue. Fire and police departments are paid for by local taxes. Paul and other libertarians are generally against the income tax but are fine with local taxes since the funds tend to be better spent. You;re mistaking libertarians for anarchists
@bschou wait, now government HAS a place? Libertarians in one breath want to end the income tax, yet in the next say, "Hey it's governments JOB to protect MY property rights!". With what? Magic beans & happy wishes? You just ended the $ supply paying them to do it. Circular irrational argument. The unregulated unrestricted Free Market would eat you for breakfast, & be back for seconds after lunch
Yeah I'm libertarian and I hate the poor. Got any more dumb questions like: When did you stop beating your wife? Or: Why did libertarians help gas the jews?
yeah, libertarians, who's policies would create countless job openings for the poor, suddenly must hate them for wanting to do that. SNORT
Welfare and government keeps people down. There's no argument about that. Add in corporate influence, and you can see why small businesses aren't hiring.
That's nice. So you can get rid of the NRC so that energy companies don't have to spend all that money to make sure their Nuclear plants don't seep radioactivity into the air. & they can dump their fuel rods wherever is cheapest for them. One big fuckin' zero regulation free for all. Sounds like paradise. We can get rid of CPS & the FAA too. Anyone can fly. Regulations on aircraft, pilots, etc. The FAA infringes on freedom. Freedom of people who don't know what they are doing to cause crashes.
@Friedstuffsable Strawman argument followed by a strawman argument followed by another strawman argument. Nobody said anything about getting rid of the NRC or CPS or FAA. The Constitution clearly gives Congress authority over interstate commerce (electricity) and travel
@electrictroy2010 "Strawman argument" the favorite term of libertarians when someone makes fun of Libertardian ideas that other libertardians have had. I listen to you tools all the time. The majority don't want just a libertarian economy, they want all government to be shit canned. It isn't a strawman argument. I hear this shit from LIbertardians everyday. "We have the freeeedumb to not have building codes! The freedom to not have water standards! Freeeeeedumb" All sorts of crazy bullshit.
@Friedstuffsable Calling people names like "libertardians" hardly constitutes an argument. How old are you? Building codes and water standards once again usually fall under local government which most libertarians are okay with. There's many types of libertarians. Once again, you seem to be mistaking libertarians who favor smaller local government with anarchists who favor no government
@bschou None of the ones I ever hear from have any moderate ideas. It is all a bunch of "We don't need the E.P.A." garbage. Or that we should get rid of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission & energy companies can do whatever they want with their used fuel rods. & the coast guard should not pull people out of the ocean, because helicopters & fuel are expensive. "Rawwrgh da gubbament is making me use a more efficient light bulb! NO FREEEDUMB!" Stupid bullshit like that.
I don't think she's endorsing total minarchism. I know that at least for Paul, he wants all that stuff left to the states. It's a compromise but it's better than federal tyranny.
Compare that to a pure socialism which doesn't even warrant a police force.
@Samsgarden I have to deal with the FAA on a regular basis. They are some of the most professional people I have ever dealt with. Mistakes are kept to a minimum. That organization is proof that federal agencies can be competent & effective. If it was reduced to a state level, poorer states would have less ability to regulate aviation standards. The local jackass officials would likely skimp on the money it takes to run such an organization.
@Friedstuffsable err, Yes, the grassroots of the project were under the Nixon administration and wasn't enforced until 1985 under the Reagan administration. Anyway, the point of my original refute was to show you that de-regulation proves your point about why is is efficient.
@obeyyourcapner Carter signed it 1978 Next you're going to tell me that Bush signed NDAA not Obama. Chronology is a real thing. It actually exists. & Your Libertardian brethren are not advocating simply deregulation the private businesses that federal agencies deal with. They want almost all federal agencies to be shit canned. The EPA CPS FDA all of it. They can just sit back in their deregulated utopia & burn a joint while they ride off into the sunset on a unicorn with Ron Paul
@Friedstuffsable What are you talking about? I'm Republican, not Liberatarian. Bush did sign a NDAA, there have been multiple NDAA's executed, Obama has signed one too. If drugs were legal would you do them, no? Neither would I. And RP activists are not interested in closing all branches of government, but because they don't (have no motivation too) operate efficiently , they should remain small. the FAA was a very crooked organization before it was de-regulated in the 80's.
@Friedstuffsable There were only a few trunk airlines that were allowed to fly out of their own state, not country, state, as a result of the incompetetant FAA. So they began their business flying inside of large states to opposite sides, like Texas and California - see Southwest wiki page for more detail on court cases and such - And that is the point of the argument, that all Federal arms of government need to be heavily re-examined, as the airline industry was.
@Friedstuffsable Uh, are you retarded? The free market is a tougher regulator than the slime bags who are bought and sold to regulate for the highest bidder. Tell me, who writes thousands upon thousands of these regulations. Do you know?
You cannot damage property, you cannot pollute freely. You cannot commit fraud and harm others. You cannot PAY TO POLLUTE, like our system has allowed.
@xKenseixX You are the retard. Without laws, AKA Regulations companies would do their operations in whatever manner is cheapest for them. Your tired North Korea line is as played out as the comparison of things people don't like, to Hitler/Nazis. It takes no thought. Just as your simple little libertarian brain doesn't think. The clean air act (regulations) was effective. It reduced air pollution because companies faced fines if they did not comply.
@Friedstuffsable The market decides what is and isn't allowed, in restriction to not committing FRAUD, hurting others or damaging property ect.. You cannot by pass these key principles, and that is what government is there for, to enforce THAT. Not to allow regulations that do jack shit, pile paper work for little guy and allow pay to pollute and other slippery slope sections of regulations that big corporations can use. Youre so naive and un-educated. The clean air act isnt what were discussing
@Friedstuffsable The free market handled enron just fine and many others. Government role is to protect the individuals right, not be in bed with corporations. Corporations can simply pay off fines and find loop holes. WHY? Because morons like you support regulatory douche bags writing in favor of those that pay them.
Another loon who doesn't realize that private groups and charity have done far more for education, poor and environmental concerns than government ever has.
@xKenseixX The free market didn't fuckin' "handle Enron" IN your fantasy land insider trading would be completely legal because your simple little libertardian brain would think that there shouldn't be any laws against it. Or that the "free market would work itself out" No.. No it wouldn't. Just like this bullshit about how "Oh.. if a company pollutes.. No one will buy their products! YAY!" People will still buy their stuff. & it wont stop until regulations are made & enforced.
@Friedstuffsable When a company is brought to court to face their crimes, that is the free market working. Government exist to protect those rights. Cannot commit fraud, pollute ect..
Yes, please tell me from the billions spent and thousands of pages of regulations didn't prevent the fraud of Enron, WorldCom ect. There was certainty no huge lack of regulations. Or do you still live in fairy land where regulators aren't bought out by corporations. All while little business suffers from the rules
@Friedstuffsable Has nothing to do with not wanting laws. It's about basic principles that regulations shouldn't LEGALIZE for profiteering corporations in which you support.
You clearly are...a fucking retard. Not buying a product isn't the consequences for free markets. The company faces repercussions from being sued and from government for committing fraud, damages on others or property ect.. It's stricter than now, where they can pay money or slip by regulations and face no issues.
@Friedstuffsable Clearly you are a delusional moron who doesn't understand that the free markets have certain things that cannot be "bought" to be ignored. There for, it's stricter. There cannot be regulations to allow certain things like now, because in a free market, you cannot do certain things that harm, damage, and so on. So, any regulation to attempt to legalize those things like now, wouldn't be allowed. You support corruption and pay to do what ever you want. Congratz.
@xKenseixX Oh really? "things in a free market can't be bought" - Kenny boy. Just shut up dumbass. SO what would happen when an energy companies fly ash pond leaks into the the tap water, & there is no one to do an investigation, no one to shut down the plant, nothing. Is the community going to boycott them? HAHAHAH You fucking man child. Go outside & see how the world works asshole. We can't have a functional society with no regulations. Go roll up in your Gadsen flag & cry.
@Friedstuffsable You clearly are fucking retarded. Again, government enforces the protections of rights. You're delusional if you think the process consists of people having to try to investigate the source of pollution, spend money fighting in court to be screwed up by regulatory loop holes like today.
THE GOVERNMENT GETS INVOLVED TO PROTECT THOSE INDIVIDUALS RIGHTS. THAT INCLUDES POLLUTION. Boycotting was never said to be the solution. You fucking child. Comprehension of a fucking 5 year old.
@xKenseixX You have the world view of a toddler you dumb shit brained Libertardian. Thankfully, your Zero regulation fantasy will remain just that: A Fantasy. & yeah. the E.P.A. aka Big Scurry Gubbament, Does investigate sources of pollution. Do you have diarrhea right now Ken? If not thank that government for keeping your water free of chromium & listeria. Nobody else has the power to do that. Why don't you quit mooching, get the water our of the river & filter it yourself?
@Friedstuffsable EPA? Dude, we get sprayed with chemtrails every single day. Jon Corzine was financial adviser to the EPA and he stole Billions from broke farmers who lost everything cuz of him. Our skies are sprayed with crap that leads to Morgellon's disease every single day and the EPA has done nothing. Not to mention the EPA has seized private property and then, sold it to rich developers. The EPA is full of shysters and scam artists.
@biozamadotcom Yes. So lets replace them with a for profit entity that exists only to make money. I'm sure they will be less corrupt, because you know? There isn't any corruption in the private sector, they are just swell business men looking to help the community.
@Friedstuffsable No argument with some assertions, but the point is that the EPA has already operated massively for profit. Same thing with the food supply being imported from third world with less standards and illegals coming from those places. Plenty of outbreaks and diseases are occurring. The point is that the government has become a corporate entity and has not done it's job, so should perhaps be terminated and replaced. Just a consideration.
@biozamadotcom The only way to combat that kind of bullshit is to make Laws that say private business entities, & Government organizations can not collude together. Then, when someone from either side breaks those Laws, they can be tossed in prison just like an insider trader. The only way to make that happen is a functional federal government, not an abolished federal government as many Libertarians are suggesting.
@Friedstuffsable Not arguing with u at all, but states rights kind of do make sense as the Federal govt has failed and continues to now slide in standards due to changing populations, but you do make a very fair point. Unfortunately, after all the concessions that have been made to federalists, it is now very clear that the citizens are last in line and being exploited.
@Friedstuffsable No, the company won't stop selling their stuff until the people near the plant start dying and making news. That's 100% free market at work. I'm for 98% free market, and regulation for the bad companies.
@TheArfdog Sucks for the people who die, get sick, have their land ruined, so we can find out who the "bad" companies are. Regulation is preemptive. Like for example: B.P. is not a "bad" company now is it? Nope. Still in good standing after destroying the fishing industry in an entire region. Wanna know what might have prevented that? Inspectors.. enforcing regulations. Now what is the one & only entity that can force company to comply? Uh oh... Big bad gubbament.
@Friedstuffsable Sorry, I'm not a Libertarian. I'd like an alternative to Fed govt control in many matters however. I feel Dr. Paul would be a good start, at least we'll be free to come up with new ways to the common good. But, why bother-- judging by your foul language and worn-out rhetoric you are even more annoying than the woman in this video.
@j0eX The term "Worn our rhetoric" is Worn out rhetoric & it doesn't make you sound smart. Either way, you're the type of punk that thinks we don't need someone regulating the water quality. It somehow infringes on your fucking stupid sense of freedom If you can't get Typhus. Idiot. Go roll up naked in your gadsen flag & cry yourself to sleep.
@xKenseixX Do you want to know why you cannot do, all those things you listed that cannot be done? Because there are fucking laws that say they cant be done. Duh.
@Friedstuffsable If we followed property laws and laws that protect indivudials that are even in the constistution. For example you cannot harm other people, their property, or even damage their property. What happens now if a company gets in trouble environmentally a fine which is nothing to a giant corp. If we followed more basic laws and rights that everyone has companies couldnt do what they wanted if it harmed anyone or anyones property they would face serious legal consequences not a
@Friedstuffsable slap on the wrist, think about it you cant dump your trash on my lawn and neither should a company. You can pollute now just pay the right person that shouldnt happen and to shrink the power that these giant corps have would be to put them on the same level as us, follow the same laws that we all have to, do what you want to your property but if it hamrs anyone else(s) your going down. There would also be many groups that could monitor the envir. people who would want to
@305catsquid "Many groups who could monitor the environment" & how would that work? A private "Environmental monitoring" company? Who pays them? What incentive would companies have to allow their inspectors to inspect their operations? They would have to be legally required to do so. These companies don't care about anything other than their profit.
@Friedstuffsable these groups could monitor the envirnonment rivers strems etc not the companies themselves, there are a lot of organizations that do this now that arent govt created, states could create their own departments to monitor envirn. and it would be constitutional, I would have no problem with that either as long as these companies/corps or whoever dont have any more privallages than anyone else thats the problem. No one should be above the law, that would help solve the problem
@Friedstuffsable if a company would face serious consequences not a fine but serious consequences they would think twice before polluting rivers or blatantly damaging our surroundings. Weve got to make them accountable by putting them on the same level as us. Enforce property rights and individual laws, noone can be harmed by another as well as their property do what you want on your section of land but if it hurts anyone else/property you cant do it.
@305catsquid Do you know what happens when one of these private enviro watchdog groups finds an infraction? Nothing. Chesapeake energy that does fracking & pollutes the groundwater laughs in their faces while they gear up their army of high dollar lawyers. VS. The small groups tiny law firm that won't even have the balls to go up against them. It took the EPA to shutdown a fracking well that caused damage. A private group already knew it was going on for 2 years & nobody cared.
@Friedstuffsable that is the system we have now where nothing does happen to them exactly, we need those companies to have no more privallages than the rest of us simply by basic property rights laws and individual rights laws, we need to enforce those kinds of laws and let no one stand above
@Friedstuffsable im not saying they do, im saying that the same basic laws, example you cant throw your trash on my property you cant harm me or my property should be enforced and it would help the environment,no company should be above these laws, if they do break the rules they should be punished the same as an individual would, with real consequences not a fine or some bogus regulation that only hurts their smaller competition.
@Friedstuffsable In Canada their is quite a large lawsuit panning out over property damages incurred through fracking. If they lose the settlement you can bet your top dollar that they are going to have to rethink their strategy. No EPA or EPA like organization required, just an enforcement of property rights.
@LeonTheMortgageAgent The problem with this, is that you would have to prove your damages are the direct result of the actions of Company X, which when it comes to pollution or environmental degradation is next to impossible.How can you prove the smokestacks down the street gave you cancer and something else didn't? Never mind the fact that if we just regulated these companies we could prevent such pollution in the first place. It gives a company free reign to pollute then just buy everyone off.
@Friedstuffsable I honestly want to help but i think something closer to what I said would work better. Animal species have been saved and brought from the brink of extinction by enforcing property rights, read some about that its interesting. Thanks for listening and being respectful most people on YouTube are not haha
@Friedstuffsable (1) Don't you obey the Law? It is very clear. The tenth amendment in the Bill of Rights says Congress does not have unlimited power to do whatever it wants. That's called federalism (division of power between congress and the 50 Legislatures). The European Union has a similar system
(2) You committed a strawman argument. At no point in her video did she say she wants to get rid of NRC, FAA, or CPS. Please don't put words in people's mouths they never said
@harleykman That is what Ron Paul wants to do. Why the fuck do you think their is this resurgence of Libertarianism? Because of Ron Paul. If it wasn't for him running, this video would have never been made. Who creates these regulation of things like Nuclear energy? The federal government, that's who. If it wasn't for them, nuclear waste would be buried on site, because sending it to Yucca Mountain is expensive. They would do whatever is cheapest if there weren't any regulations.
Do do want to know, about libertarians thought on the poor who want to work, yet there are no jobs for that poor person. i find minimum wage is not enough to do any thing on. i could not rent an apt on minimum wage. I worked minimum wage when I was in high school being supported by my parents. People have to work 2 minimum wage jobs just to keep a roof over there head. How would eliminating this help those people who would get a lower wage now and not be able to support them selves?
When government deregulates itself into powerlessness, no one will stop business corruption. The free market can't stop monopolies or fraud. The housing bubble demonstrated that the ratings agencies were giving a AAA rating to junk bonds for the right price. You don't want government picking the winners. OK. What keeps the winners from taking the power to pick themselves winners over and over?
For the cold war propaganda version of what you just said watch this: watch?v=nHDyE954l4U.
@RakaTheTenacious Clearly you don't understand how the system works. Business corruption occurs because of what we have. Not because of free markets. Corporatism and government interventionism is what we see today. They are intertwined together, hence the corruption. The housing bubble and the ratings are perfect examples on why we need free markets. You're simply making our case. These things occur because of the federal reserve, regulators working for the corporations and gov. backing it.
@xKenseixX Good post. I think people who attack libertarianism as a philosophy are mostly just ignorant about what the philosophy is about and the strong intellectual arguments for a libertarian society.
@RakaTheTenacious What world are you living in where free markets can't handle fraud ect.. The free market is 100x more harsher than regulations. We have thousand upon thousand of regulations. Huge books, have you even seen them? There is no dearth in regulations, yet all that happens is corporations pay to pollute, pay to commit fraud while the little business owner is swamped with paper work and complicated regulations. In free markets, you cannot commit fraud, damage property, ect..
@RakaTheTenacious The government is there to enforce that. That is it's role, to enforce what is already there. Enron scandal ect.. was handled just fine by free markets. They were prosecuted and sent to jail. In the free market, it's pretty clear cut. The government enforces the law in regards to fraud, theft, harm ect.. Not regulators with zero over sight, bailing out companies with tax payer dollars ect.. Regulations are not the cure, they are currently the problem.
@RakaTheTenacious The consumers pick the winners. Clear and simple, and that is freedom. If we didn't have a system that didn't allow the small guy to thrive, we would have better competition. If consumers like something, and pay for it, those companies deserve to be winners. If a company has poor service, consumers choose to not to use it or buy it. If the company goes bankrupt, that happens. No bail outs, no tax loop holes, no pay to pollute or damage. It's clear cut.
@RakaTheTenacious Good point about monopolies. But listen, if you look at the history of businesses in the United States. ALL monopolies are the direct result of government regulations, subsidies and favoritism. For example, the railroads attempted price fixing to garner higher profits but were completely unable to because their competition kept muscling them out. It wasn't until the CEOs went to Washington to demand legislation which would set prices for them did they get it
@bschou Natural monopolies do exist. Consider the case of the California electricity deregulation (late 90's). There is strong evidence, including recorded conversations, that power producers were restricting production to manipulate market prices to maximize profit. Essentially a private embargo for profit. That's another example of business corruption. I don't trust government either, but I trust the utopia of "the free market" less.
As for charity the great Nicolo Machiavelli wrote himself "A man will rather forgive his own fahers death rather then a loss of inheritence."Hope that sums it up nicely;-)
In my country(and what evil socialist country it is) authorities of one city had a great idea how to utileze a group of people forced to live off the welfare.They paid them few extra bucks gave them shovel,pitchforks,etc(no torches thou;-) and told to clean the streets from garbage,tream the bushes etc.In the end the taxpayers did benefit from tha evil goverment conspiracy that is welfare by having their city clean agian.And everybody lived happly ever after.
Typical libertanian rumbling,reminds me of commie "arguments" for spreading the red plauge.Taxes are obligatory because the goverment requiers a source of incom in order to fund it's agiencies.Be it Law Enforcement,Defence or healthcare.These are all the services provided to the citizens.You're to scared goverment will "steal" from your pocket and give it to
an "undeserving bumb" well here's an idea from real life make them work for it.
ending the fed will do nothing and it won't stop inflation. banks counterfeit our money in the form of loans using fractional reserve lending, in ratios exceeding 300:1, thus banks control the issuance and the QUANTITY of our money and credit, so they're responsible for inflation, which technically isn't a tax--it enriches the usurers, not government.
sozfan1 1 day ago
@sozfan1 inflation caused by private banks enriches government indirectly in the form of bribes. it's how usury bankers control our government.
sozfan1 1 day ago
by the way, there's no such thing as a free market. we need fair trade, which necessitates the use of force by representative government against those who would otherwise exploit and rob from you.
sozfan1 1 day ago
libertarianism without monetary reform is pure hatred for the poor. it allows banks and other predatory entities to exploit their labor and rob them continually. our costly welfare system is necessary because usury bankers go unchecked--the recent bailouts make this obvious. if you're a real libertarian, then vote for Bill Still and watch his award-winning docu, "Secret of Oz" (channel is bstill3). otherwise, you're a cold heartless bastard.
sozfan1 1 day ago
"The free market helps people rise out of poverty. "
Sure is easy to tell that this stupid skanque has never read a single book by Charles Dickens.
MiHiVidz 3 days ago
"libertarian" is just an excuse to be an all around, laissez-faire capitalist dickhole
MiHiVidz 3 days ago
@MiHiVidz I guess wanting Social and Economic Freedom for all is a dickhole move.
KurzLuppii 1 day ago
@KurzLuppii Destroying Social Security and condemning millions of helpless elderly & disabled to homelessness isn't "freedom". It's a death sentence.
You so-called "Social and Economic Freedom" is just a candy coating for wanting to be a selfish heartless asshole.
MiHiVidz 1 day ago
@MiHiVidz It would be phased out over a decade or more... I am not for destroying it in a year. It'll be unfair to those who already paid into it even if its in the red the past few years. Though please agree that Social Security is the worse kind of Ponzi scheme. A person can save their own money better than a Government Official.
KurzLuppii 1 day ago
@KurzLuppii The fact is that you types want it gone, period.
What would happen to those in the future? Do you think libertarianism is so wonderful that it will prevent people in the future from becoming old or disabled?
MiHiVidz 1 day ago
@MiHiVidz There are already solutions to everything you said. Insurance (For the disabled part) and Saving (For the getting older part)
KurzLuppii 10 hours ago
@KurzLuppii No, there's not. You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
For one thing, my Grandparents got totally hosed by Enron about 10 years ago. They tried to save & invest, and they got robbed. That's what they got for trying to build their own nest egg.
Had it not been for (YOU GUESSED IT!) Social Security to fall back on, they truly would have ended up homeless in the final years.
Now try telling me that they should have just died in the gutter, asshole!
MiHiVidz 7 hours ago
@MiHiVidz Its called diversification. Thats the first rule any investor would tell you.
I have stocks in most industries, gold, silver, nothing exclusively tied to anything. Your grandpa and ma, sorry were morons for placing all their hopes and dreams in one company. They wouldn't die in the gutter... they have family like you and their children to take care of them. ITS CALLED FAMILY!!! you supposed to look out for each other!
KurzLuppii 5 hours ago
I've never heard of liberitarians being accused of "hating the poor." I've debated many leftists and have never heard that. May I ask where exactly have you heard this misconception?
summercures2 4 days ago
@TokenLibertarianGirl yeah all those free market libertarian ideas sound great on paper but dosen't work in real life. just the 2008 financial crises. libertarians always blame the goverment while the deregulation, tax cuts etc has led to more inequality. there are stats that show how big government improves life. after 2008 libertarians blame the gov for bailing out the banks, when, after deregulation, the banks nearly bought down the world.
slightsociopath 5 days ago
@slightsociopath *just look at
slightsociopath 5 days ago
This girl is well-intentioned, but I think I'm going to stick to watching videos that feature Milton Friedman. Milton Friedman was one of the greatest economist of the 20th and 21st century (he's now passed on). He explains economics plain and simply and also has debated political idealists with socialist view points. Put simply, Friedman let's the facts and research speak for itself.
Search for Milton Friedman on YouTube if you really want to learn about liberitarian views.
summercures2 2 weeks ago
@summercures2 But ignore his monetary policy views :)
TokenLibertarianGirl 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TokenLibertarianGirl: You said "But ignore [Friedman's] monetary policy views."
I've watched most of the videos featuring Milton Friedman and have read books by Thomas Sowell (another great economist who he taught and mentored). In my opinion, all of the ideas conveyed by Friedman are great. But if you disagree, then feel free to discuss it with me.
By the way, I've never heard of liberitarians being accused of "hating the poor." I've debated many leftists and have never heard that.
summercures2 1 week ago
@TokenLibertarianGirl As somebody with Aspergers I'm a Libertarian I need help with certain things I don't complain about my disability.I drive have a hs diploma and college degree.
stlouieramfan123 1 week ago
@summercures2 EXCELLENT RECOMMENDATION!
A few years ago I did research Milton Friedman & it was so eye opening to "economic truth" (a phrase I coined). More great research includes Ludwig Von Mises, Peter Schiff & Ron Paul (non-political economic interviews), Peter Schiff's book "How an Economy Grows & How it Crashes".
I still think she's cute stuff. Peace.
shawso7 1 week ago
@summercures2 Avoid Friedman if you are looking for consistent Libertarianism. His monetary policy wasn't consistent with Libertarian principles. Read Mises, Rothbard, Bastiat, Hayek, and Hazlitt. Check out mises dot org they have free pdf and audio versions of many of the classics written by the previously mentioned Economists. Mises and Bastiat are the most challenging reads. If your a good reader start with "Human Action" by Mises. Also check out praxgirl here on youtube.
SocietyIncollapse 4 days ago
@SocietyIncollapse: You said, "[Friedman's] monetary policy wasn't consistent with Libertarian principles."
First of all, we must clarify that Milton Friedman was not a politician. He was only an economist (an internationally known economist). So he didn't exactly have the authority to impliment whatever monetary ideas he had. Secondly, Friedman always advocated less government spending. And he wanted to cut unneccessay gov programs. What part of that is not consistent with liberitarianism?
summercures2 4 days ago
@summercures2: You said "Avoid Friedman if you are looking for consistent Libertarianism."
Milton Friedman was one of the greatest champions of liberitrianism of our time (probably one of the main economists to popularize the idealogy in the mainstream) and is well respected by many scholars and economists. In a debate, he could metaphorically beat up any leftist with both hands tied behind his back (and politely at that). But lets set all talk aside and let his vids on YT speak for themself.
summercures2 4 days ago
Plus you actively ignore the fact that the average quality of life for the poor is many times better in countries with a strong welfare state then in nations that neglect their vulnerable. All your arguments are theoretical, ignoring the fact that there are numerous precedents and case studies that show your assumptions are wrong.
multitudinal 2 weeks ago
You don't hate the poor, you just understand nothing of what its like to be poor, or how people end up being poor. Your attitude is patronising, ignorant and overly simplistic.
multitudinal 2 weeks ago
I don't know if libertarians hate the poor - but I'm poor and hate libertarians.
32peartree 2 weeks ago
Boy she's stupid. Is there a libertarian on the planet that understands there is this thing called REALITY that OPPOSES their insanity - look google 'The Authoritarians' and find out all about their logic... The last 30 years is the LIBERTARIAN revolution and they have fucked up everything - PLEASE WAKE UP...
StunnedByStupidity 2 weeks ago
@StunnedByStupidity
so tell me who do vote for?
ssj4gogetassj4 1 week ago
@ssj4gogetassj4 This is SUCH a bizarre question. In the soviet union they had ONE party yet had a vote. Now using your insane logic, if I criticise totalitarian communism, and am a Russian, all my arguments are rendered invalid because there is no one else to vote for?... My mind boggles trying to understand you lot. Obama is fucking shit , but is LESS bad than the protofascists like Paul, Santorum and Romney - therefore...
StunnedByStupidity 1 week ago
@StunnedByStupidity
Im just asking a question. dont get your panties wet.
Obama is a lier who murders other people (Libya)
Santarum and Romney are Christian Zionist Neocon warmongers.
They would attack Iran the second AIPAC barked at them.
They would gladly attack Iran (which has done almost nothing bad especially compared to USA or Israel).
So you go on. Keep voting in circles for the same to parties which love to destroy USA and especially the world.
ssj4gogetassj4 1 week ago
@ssj4gogetassj4 Look, the right wing was TOTALLY wrong footed in the 60's - they regrouped and rethought - at the time they were told it was hopeless because (as is STILL the case now) the American people are left of centre - so YOU give up but that has NOTHING to do with REALITY and ALL the nasty foreign adventures are in the interests of CAPITALISTS - and Ron Paul wants to make SUPER DOOPER capitalists - I'm angry because you have NO idea how evil and bigoted libertarians are.
StunnedByStupidity 1 week ago
You've articulated my own thoughts perfectly. Thanks!
stealth210 3 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Thanks for the video & for spreading liberty
Here's a nice video that might help introduce new people to basics of liberty - /watch?v=psV6pOsW9YY
tjtomkins 3 weeks ago
Never forget welfare robs from the middle class gives to the poor making the middle class poorer and the poor even more poor because now jobs start disappearing meanwhile the wealthy elite bankers always remain in control.
Welfare is not to help anyone because the abuser is offering the solution.
Welfare helps the rich.
fiscalconservative76 4 weeks ago
you know who else was a libertarian? Mark Twain... and we all know how much he hated the poor.
clawtheunconquered 1 month ago
@clawtheunconquered
You know who else is socialist/communist & "loved the poor"? - Stalin, Mao, Polpot, Hitler! Guilt by association does NOT work!
And why can't you see that govt & private sector BOTH are made up of self-interested people, govt power attracts power-hungry people THAT'S WHY there are so many democracies around but people electing corrupt people OVER & OVER
Thing is govt has "LEGAL" authority to ROB (tax, inflation) & SUPPRESS, private sector has no such authority though
tjtomkins 3 weeks ago
@tjtomkins that was sarcasm. mark twain championed the poor and the working class... he also hated the gov and was all about the free-market. read the prince and the pauper, its theme is similar to what u wrote in ur response.
clawtheunconquered 3 weeks ago
It would be nice if everyone would just help others out of the kindness of their heart, but that's too often not the case. If it was, child prostitutes in third world countries wouldn't have to prostitute their selves.because the global corporation that hired them to make textiles would pay them adequate wages for living expenses. Better yet, someone would put them through school.
JNathanK2011 1 month ago
@JNathanK2011 This is what the government is suppose to do: protect individual freedom, liberty, and properties. If these three things are protected, then the nation will flourish with innovations and prosperity. Things like minimum wages, food stamps, or unemployment programs wouldn't even exist.
kokocipher 1 month ago
I'm practically poor and I'm a libertarian lol
I think people should actually learn more about what their talking about before they start talking about it.
DreadHarper3 1 month ago
@DreadHarper3 or at least Econ 101. When someone talks about raising minimum wage or 99% vs. 1%, it tells you how little he/she understands about how economy works.
kokocipher 1 month ago
I'm poor and I'm a Libertarian.
jneil2007 1 month ago
@jneil2007
Can't be that poor if you own a computer + internet.
DarkosApprentice 1 month ago
@DarkosApprentice You can if you are a broke college student. I also disagree with FAFSA. The government shouldn't be paying for people to go to school. That's part of the reason school is expensive and there are too many people with degrees. They are worthless now unless you are in medical, computers, finance, accounting, and some select other fields.
jneil2007 1 month ago
@TokenLibertarianGirl Thank you so much for posting these videos, they've educated me a ton and I've gone from being totally apathetic about politics to becoming a vehement Ron Paul supporter, and have been convincing my friends to do the same!What you're doing is great and I just hope you keep it up.
slimininin 1 month ago 2
@slimininin Thank you so much!
TokenLibertarianGirl 1 month ago
You don't hate the poor.
You just have no idea how to take care of them.
Mectrixctic 1 month ago
@Mectrixctic look up austrian economics, you'll be surprised by what comes up!
slimininin 1 month ago
@slimininin
Austrian economics has never been implemented in real life.
Mectrixctic 1 month ago
@Mectrixctic realize what you actually said, "take care of them." Does that thought even make sense? What do you think the goal of a civilization supposedly is? How exactly do you envision the future?
kokocipher 1 month ago
@kokocipher
The goals of a civilisation changes through time based on the cirmcumstances.
In the future, I hope most people can be educated and wealthy, since unlike the past, they have to be now.
Mectrixctic 1 month ago
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus It is much more complex than that. It isn't like these people die overnight. A small business? So you are for regulation? How else would P.P.G. or Consol Energy be kept from exploding into the giants that they are? & them getting big is a good thing. They employ thousands of people. But consol is not going to be worried that there emissions will kill their customers that consume the energy that their coal produces. That isn't how it works.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable I wouldn't say that we need to trash all oil companies. Petroleum makes more than just fuel. Plastics are a huge part of our life.. Made from petrol. It needs to be extracted correctly, & safely. How do we ensure that happens? Inspectors.. & no, the inspectors can't be from a private for profit company.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus Okay. The welfare state, social security, maybe it isn't good. Libertarians might have a point there. But they do not have a point on shit canning agencies that do a job that simply can't be privatized. There is a reason we no longer have 12 year old coal miners.. Because it is fucking illegal. Who enforces those laws? Free Enterprise? Not possible.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus I speak in reality. You speak in theory. Let's say that a tannery begins operation in your town. Who makes sure they don't dump Chromium into the water? What incentive do the company owners have to pay more to dispose of their toxic byproducts correctly? They don't have one until laws are established that make it so if they don't follow the rules, they lose their business. Now, who enforces those Laws? Private companies do not enforce them. Understand?
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus You never had room to begin with, you obtuse boy. Your zero regulation fantasy is a joke. It will never, & has never functioned in a complex society. How is a private company going to enforce Laws, (A.K.A. Regulations) on other private companies? Explain that. You can't because it is a made up fantasy. The only entity that can enforce Laws is the government. Would you have a private police force not represented by the state giving out tickets? IDIOT!
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
TRUTH FROM THE YOUTH !
OnlyHempFuture 1 month ago
@NietzscheKILLEDjesus You're the one who needs a history lesson on your free enterprise hard on. Do you think a private company has the ability to control the air traffic of an entire nation? Tell me this dumb fuck: How would they make a profit doing that? Would the community come together & donate to them? This completely unregulated wet dream has not existed in any functioning nation in modern history. Even ancient Egypt had state regulations Idiot. Read more.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
why do people always revert to derogatory statements and name-calling in these discussions?
chadimus84 1 month ago
I really don't understand the answer for the libertarians on corporation regulation. You can't just let a corporation test a nuclear bomb as an extreme example.
I think there has to be some kind of balance that keeps the corporations in check and held accountable.
In the case of BP... I guess BP should get the crap sued out of them by coastal residents/businesses, and this example should be enough to keep people from taking shortcuts?
It would seem some shortcuts end up worth it to some.
FiLthaThriL 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul supporters we need to flood the huffington post with support for Ron Paul
glajl 1 month ago
I'm libertarian and I'm poor!!
glajl 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I just have one question...if he is such a good nominee...why is he still not cutting it with the majority of the population?
tbtitans21 1 month ago
In addition, wages decreased for the working classes from the 1970s to the late 1980s. This lack of income also created a situation where the working class had no social freedom, as they were essentially bound by their occupations. Any attempt to leave would be considered financial suicide for an individual.
So, ultimately, a libertarian society will essentially guarantee the financial murder of the poor, and eliminate social freedoms. Pure libertarianism is a pipe dream as much as communism.
IMAGIMATIONanimation 1 month ago
Sorry TokenLibertarianGirl, but the end of welfare programs (and minimum wage) will increase poverty among the working class, and actually discourage social freedom among said classes. Name in point, Chile during the 70s and the 80s. Chile essentially had a libertarian free-market. There were little to no regulations on businesses, and nearly every sector except the military was capitalized. From the 1970s to the late 80s, poverty rates increased from 27% to 40%.
IMAGIMATIONanimation 1 month ago
Comment removed
harleykman 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable - You COMPLETELY missed my point. Current nukes are inherently unsafe. NO INSURER would insure the nuke operators against accidents. So they got the government to do it for them for a token payment. We get unsafe reactors that could poison us and destroy the value of our property, they get free insurance for reactors that SHOULDN"T EVEN EXIST, and would never exist in a free market. You are pretty much wrong.
lifesabeachnj 1 month ago
I believe the exact opposite of this video. If we had no governments, there would still be poor people.In fact I would argue that even more people would be poor, and the disparity would be far larger than it is today.
hawanja 1 month ago
Friedstuffsable - Look up "Price-Anderson". The NRC eliminates the need for nuclear power plants to price the risks of their operation into their product. The government almost completely absolves nuke operators from any and all liability for nuclear accidents, no matter how awful, so they design and build nukes that are inherently unsafe. How does that square with your simpleton conception of government as a "protector"?
lifesabeachnj 1 month ago
@lifesabeachnj NO, they don't. The NRC enforces regulations. How would you have it? A private company hired by their community to go in & check their reactors? Energy wouldn't allow that. You want a profit driven organization who deals with something extremely dangerous to regulate themselves?
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
I like your.....pearls
obeyyourcapner 1 month ago
I also got educated by taking political science classes in college, learning about various ideologies, finding that just because libertarians don't support welfare doesn't mean they hate the poor, or are against them. It's all a matter of ones philisophical position on politics.
IamForever42 2 months ago
I took political theory & did a good amount of extra time studying political ideologies & political philosophies, so I knew libertarians aren't hattin on poor people because they want 2 get rid of welfare. I guess those who judge libertarians just becuase they want to get rid of welfare programs are much more uneducated then anything when it comes 2 politics. Any self proclaimed liberal who hates on libertarians, thinkin their heartless, because they want 2 get rid of welfare R plain ignorant.
coolwhatup3 2 months ago
OK, then let's end all taxes since it's all by force. Which will in turn end the CIA, FBI, DOD, AMA, FDA, BOE, DOC, & all main functions of government. Cool, then our newly found super "freedom" will save us from unlicensed butcher doctors malpractice, chemically infected drinking water, collapsed interstate bridges, a house on fire, foreign invaders, buildings not built up to code, or nuclear spills. Gee, this IS fun thinking like a Libertarian! Holy shit you're fucking crazy
Bolgernow 2 months ago
@Bolgernow Government is there to protect property rights so nuclear spills and air pollution could fall under property rights issue. Fire and police departments are paid for by local taxes. Paul and other libertarians are generally against the income tax but are fine with local taxes since the funds tend to be better spent. You;re mistaking libertarians for anarchists
bschou 2 months ago
@bschou wait, now government HAS a place? Libertarians in one breath want to end the income tax, yet in the next say, "Hey it's governments JOB to protect MY property rights!". With what? Magic beans & happy wishes? You just ended the $ supply paying them to do it. Circular irrational argument. The unregulated unrestricted Free Market would eat you for breakfast, & be back for seconds after lunch
Bolgernow 2 months ago
Smart, and hella cute!!
jimdc75 2 months ago
I doubt you would say that if you were poor.
Robin Hood is a hero. You must be a villain.
Adeikov 2 months ago 2
Thank you for panning-down with the camera and letting us see more of your Russian beauty
.
electrictroy2010 2 months ago 5
@electrictroy2010
Her last name seems Polish not Russian.
(I may be wrong but im guessing).
ssj4gogetassj4 2 months ago
@electrictroy2010 Isn't it polish, though?
carlosandregoes 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@electrictroy2010 EWW.
orange11emilie 1 month ago
Yeah I'm libertarian and I hate the poor. Got any more dumb questions like: When did you stop beating your wife? Or: Why did libertarians help gas the jews?
.
Stupid questions deserve stupid answers
.
electrictroy2010 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If the GOP wants to win, supporting Ron Paul as the nominee is the answer.
DONATE NOW TO DEC 16 MONEY BOMB FOR FREEDOM!!!!
M1k4e 2 months ago
yeah, libertarians, who's policies would create countless job openings for the poor, suddenly must hate them for wanting to do that. SNORT
Welfare and government keeps people down. There's no argument about that. Add in corporate influence, and you can see why small businesses aren't hiring.
chronDiggity 2 months ago
That's nice. So you can get rid of the NRC so that energy companies don't have to spend all that money to make sure their Nuclear plants don't seep radioactivity into the air. & they can dump their fuel rods wherever is cheapest for them. One big fuckin' zero regulation free for all. Sounds like paradise. We can get rid of CPS & the FAA too. Anyone can fly. Regulations on aircraft, pilots, etc. The FAA infringes on freedom. Freedom of people who don't know what they are doing to cause crashes.
Friedstuffsable 2 months ago 6
@Friedstuffsable Strawman argument followed by a strawman argument followed by another strawman argument. Nobody said anything about getting rid of the NRC or CPS or FAA. The Constitution clearly gives Congress authority over interstate commerce (electricity) and travel
.
electrictroy2010 2 months ago
@electrictroy2010 "Strawman argument" the favorite term of libertarians when someone makes fun of Libertardian ideas that other libertardians have had. I listen to you tools all the time. The majority don't want just a libertarian economy, they want all government to be shit canned. It isn't a strawman argument. I hear this shit from LIbertardians everyday. "We have the freeeedumb to not have building codes! The freedom to not have water standards! Freeeeeedumb" All sorts of crazy bullshit.
Friedstuffsable 2 months ago 2
@Friedstuffsable Calling people names like "libertardians" hardly constitutes an argument. How old are you? Building codes and water standards once again usually fall under local government which most libertarians are okay with. There's many types of libertarians. Once again, you seem to be mistaking libertarians who favor smaller local government with anarchists who favor no government
bschou 2 months ago
@bschou None of the ones I ever hear from have any moderate ideas. It is all a bunch of "We don't need the E.P.A." garbage. Or that we should get rid of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission & energy companies can do whatever they want with their used fuel rods. & the coast guard should not pull people out of the ocean, because helicopters & fuel are expensive. "Rawwrgh da gubbament is making me use a more efficient light bulb! NO FREEEDUMB!" Stupid bullshit like that.
Friedstuffsable 2 months ago
@electrictroy2010 Give friedstuffsable a break. He types like a teenager. Don't want to hurt his fragile ego with logic and facts
bschou 2 months ago
@Friedstuffsable
I don't think she's endorsing total minarchism. I know that at least for Paul, he wants all that stuff left to the states. It's a compromise but it's better than federal tyranny.
Compare that to a pure socialism which doesn't even warrant a police force.
Samsgarden 2 months ago
@Samsgarden I have to deal with the FAA on a regular basis. They are some of the most professional people I have ever dealt with. Mistakes are kept to a minimum. That organization is proof that federal agencies can be competent & effective. If it was reduced to a state level, poorer states would have less ability to regulate aviation standards. The local jackass officials would likely skimp on the money it takes to run such an organization.
Friedstuffsable 2 months ago
@Friedstuffsable The FAA is more efficient thanks to the de-regulation initiated by Reagan, it hasn't always been an effective arm of government.
obeyyourcapner 1 month ago
@obeyyourcapner Cater signed the "Airline Deregulation Act." Not Reagan. Not the republican messiah.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable err, Yes, the grassroots of the project were under the Nixon administration and wasn't enforced until 1985 under the Reagan administration. Anyway, the point of my original refute was to show you that de-regulation proves your point about why is is efficient.
obeyyourcapner 1 month ago
@obeyyourcapner Carter signed it 1978 Next you're going to tell me that Bush signed NDAA not Obama. Chronology is a real thing. It actually exists. & Your Libertardian brethren are not advocating simply deregulation the private businesses that federal agencies deal with. They want almost all federal agencies to be shit canned. The EPA CPS FDA all of it. They can just sit back in their deregulated utopia & burn a joint while they ride off into the sunset on a unicorn with Ron Paul
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable What are you talking about? I'm Republican, not Liberatarian. Bush did sign a NDAA, there have been multiple NDAA's executed, Obama has signed one too. If drugs were legal would you do them, no? Neither would I. And RP activists are not interested in closing all branches of government, but because they don't (have no motivation too) operate efficiently , they should remain small. the FAA was a very crooked organization before it was de-regulated in the 80's.
obeyyourcapner 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable There were only a few trunk airlines that were allowed to fly out of their own state, not country, state, as a result of the incompetetant FAA. So they began their business flying inside of large states to opposite sides, like Texas and California - see Southwest wiki page for more detail on court cases and such - And that is the point of the argument, that all Federal arms of government need to be heavily re-examined, as the airline industry was.
obeyyourcapner 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable Uh, are you retarded? The free market is a tougher regulator than the slime bags who are bought and sold to regulate for the highest bidder. Tell me, who writes thousands upon thousands of these regulations. Do you know?
You cannot damage property, you cannot pollute freely. You cannot commit fraud and harm others. You cannot PAY TO POLLUTE, like our system has allowed.
Move to North Korea, you might enjoy it more.
xKenseixX 1 month ago
@xKenseixX You are the retard. Without laws, AKA Regulations companies would do their operations in whatever manner is cheapest for them. Your tired North Korea line is as played out as the comparison of things people don't like, to Hitler/Nazis. It takes no thought. Just as your simple little libertarian brain doesn't think. The clean air act (regulations) was effective. It reduced air pollution because companies faced fines if they did not comply.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable The market decides what is and isn't allowed, in restriction to not committing FRAUD, hurting others or damaging property ect.. You cannot by pass these key principles, and that is what government is there for, to enforce THAT. Not to allow regulations that do jack shit, pile paper work for little guy and allow pay to pollute and other slippery slope sections of regulations that big corporations can use. Youre so naive and un-educated. The clean air act isnt what were discussing
xKenseixX 1 month ago
@xKenseixX You are the idiot. Who created & enforces laws? The "free market"? Or the government?
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable The free market handled enron just fine and many others. Government role is to protect the individuals right, not be in bed with corporations. Corporations can simply pay off fines and find loop holes. WHY? Because morons like you support regulatory douche bags writing in favor of those that pay them.
Another loon who doesn't realize that private groups and charity have done far more for education, poor and environmental concerns than government ever has.
xKenseixX 1 month ago
@xKenseixX The free market didn't fuckin' "handle Enron" IN your fantasy land insider trading would be completely legal because your simple little libertardian brain would think that there shouldn't be any laws against it. Or that the "free market would work itself out" No.. No it wouldn't. Just like this bullshit about how "Oh.. if a company pollutes.. No one will buy their products! YAY!" People will still buy their stuff. & it wont stop until regulations are made & enforced.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable When a company is brought to court to face their crimes, that is the free market working. Government exist to protect those rights. Cannot commit fraud, pollute ect..
Yes, please tell me from the billions spent and thousands of pages of regulations didn't prevent the fraud of Enron, WorldCom ect. There was certainty no huge lack of regulations. Or do you still live in fairy land where regulators aren't bought out by corporations. All while little business suffers from the rules
xKenseixX 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable Has nothing to do with not wanting laws. It's about basic principles that regulations shouldn't LEGALIZE for profiteering corporations in which you support.
You clearly are...a fucking retard. Not buying a product isn't the consequences for free markets. The company faces repercussions from being sued and from government for committing fraud, damages on others or property ect.. It's stricter than now, where they can pay money or slip by regulations and face no issues.
xKenseixX 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable Clearly you are a delusional moron who doesn't understand that the free markets have certain things that cannot be "bought" to be ignored. There for, it's stricter. There cannot be regulations to allow certain things like now, because in a free market, you cannot do certain things that harm, damage, and so on. So, any regulation to attempt to legalize those things like now, wouldn't be allowed. You support corruption and pay to do what ever you want. Congratz.
xKenseixX 1 month ago
@xKenseixX Oh really? "things in a free market can't be bought" - Kenny boy. Just shut up dumbass. SO what would happen when an energy companies fly ash pond leaks into the the tap water, & there is no one to do an investigation, no one to shut down the plant, nothing. Is the community going to boycott them? HAHAHAH You fucking man child. Go outside & see how the world works asshole. We can't have a functional society with no regulations. Go roll up in your Gadsen flag & cry.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable You clearly are fucking retarded. Again, government enforces the protections of rights. You're delusional if you think the process consists of people having to try to investigate the source of pollution, spend money fighting in court to be screwed up by regulatory loop holes like today.
THE GOVERNMENT GETS INVOLVED TO PROTECT THOSE INDIVIDUALS RIGHTS. THAT INCLUDES POLLUTION. Boycotting was never said to be the solution. You fucking child. Comprehension of a fucking 5 year old.
xKenseixX 3 weeks ago
@xKenseixX You have the world view of a toddler you dumb shit brained Libertardian. Thankfully, your Zero regulation fantasy will remain just that: A Fantasy. & yeah. the E.P.A. aka Big Scurry Gubbament, Does investigate sources of pollution. Do you have diarrhea right now Ken? If not thank that government for keeping your water free of chromium & listeria. Nobody else has the power to do that. Why don't you quit mooching, get the water our of the river & filter it yourself?
Friedstuffsable 3 weeks ago
@Friedstuffsable EPA? Dude, we get sprayed with chemtrails every single day. Jon Corzine was financial adviser to the EPA and he stole Billions from broke farmers who lost everything cuz of him. Our skies are sprayed with crap that leads to Morgellon's disease every single day and the EPA has done nothing. Not to mention the EPA has seized private property and then, sold it to rich developers. The EPA is full of shysters and scam artists.
biozamadotcom 3 weeks ago in playlist Hope for the world
@biozamadotcom Yes. So lets replace them with a for profit entity that exists only to make money. I'm sure they will be less corrupt, because you know? There isn't any corruption in the private sector, they are just swell business men looking to help the community.
Friedstuffsable 3 weeks ago
@Friedstuffsable No argument with some assertions, but the point is that the EPA has already operated massively for profit. Same thing with the food supply being imported from third world with less standards and illegals coming from those places. Plenty of outbreaks and diseases are occurring. The point is that the government has become a corporate entity and has not done it's job, so should perhaps be terminated and replaced. Just a consideration.
biozamadotcom 3 weeks ago
@biozamadotcom The only way to combat that kind of bullshit is to make Laws that say private business entities, & Government organizations can not collude together. Then, when someone from either side breaks those Laws, they can be tossed in prison just like an insider trader. The only way to make that happen is a functional federal government, not an abolished federal government as many Libertarians are suggesting.
Friedstuffsable 3 weeks ago
@Friedstuffsable Not arguing with u at all, but states rights kind of do make sense as the Federal govt has failed and continues to now slide in standards due to changing populations, but you do make a very fair point. Unfortunately, after all the concessions that have been made to federalists, it is now very clear that the citizens are last in line and being exploited.
biozamadotcom 3 weeks ago
@Friedstuffsable No, the company won't stop selling their stuff until the people near the plant start dying and making news. That's 100% free market at work. I'm for 98% free market, and regulation for the bad companies.
TheArfdog 1 month ago
@TheArfdog Sucks for the people who die, get sick, have their land ruined, so we can find out who the "bad" companies are. Regulation is preemptive. Like for example: B.P. is not a "bad" company now is it? Nope. Still in good standing after destroying the fishing industry in an entire region. Wanna know what might have prevented that? Inspectors.. enforcing regulations. Now what is the one & only entity that can force company to comply? Uh oh... Big bad gubbament.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable I know, that's what im saying lol.
TheArfdog 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable and you trust them to be totally fair and open about this "compliance" and who is subject to it.
j0eX 1 month ago
@j0eX It is a lot better than your bullshit free for all theory.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable Sorry, I'm not a Libertarian. I'd like an alternative to Fed govt control in many matters however. I feel Dr. Paul would be a good start, at least we'll be free to come up with new ways to the common good. But, why bother-- judging by your foul language and worn-out rhetoric you are even more annoying than the woman in this video.
j0eX 1 month ago
@j0eX The term "Worn our rhetoric" is Worn out rhetoric & it doesn't make you sound smart. Either way, you're the type of punk that thinks we don't need someone regulating the water quality. It somehow infringes on your fucking stupid sense of freedom If you can't get Typhus. Idiot. Go roll up naked in your gadsen flag & cry yourself to sleep.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable Ha ha, at least come up with something new instead of being a cut and paste troll. Got your number now.
j0eX 1 month ago
@j0eX Your story hasn't changed. So the insults stay the same. Fucking libertardian.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@xKenseixX Do you want to know why you cannot do, all those things you listed that cannot be done? Because there are fucking laws that say they cant be done. Duh.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable If we followed property laws and laws that protect indivudials that are even in the constistution. For example you cannot harm other people, their property, or even damage their property. What happens now if a company gets in trouble environmentally a fine which is nothing to a giant corp. If we followed more basic laws and rights that everyone has companies couldnt do what they wanted if it harmed anyone or anyones property they would face serious legal consequences not a
305catsquid 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable slap on the wrist, think about it you cant dump your trash on my lawn and neither should a company. You can pollute now just pay the right person that shouldnt happen and to shrink the power that these giant corps have would be to put them on the same level as us, follow the same laws that we all have to, do what you want to your property but if it hamrs anyone else(s) your going down. There would also be many groups that could monitor the envir. people who would want to
305catsquid 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable and would be a lot more successful than the system we have now
305catsquid 1 month ago
@305catsquid "Many groups who could monitor the environment" & how would that work? A private "Environmental monitoring" company? Who pays them? What incentive would companies have to allow their inspectors to inspect their operations? They would have to be legally required to do so. These companies don't care about anything other than their profit.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable these groups could monitor the envirnonment rivers strems etc not the companies themselves, there are a lot of organizations that do this now that arent govt created, states could create their own departments to monitor envirn. and it would be constitutional, I would have no problem with that either as long as these companies/corps or whoever dont have any more privallages than anyone else thats the problem. No one should be above the law, that would help solve the problem
305catsquid 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable if a company would face serious consequences not a fine but serious consequences they would think twice before polluting rivers or blatantly damaging our surroundings. Weve got to make them accountable by putting them on the same level as us. Enforce property rights and individual laws, noone can be harmed by another as well as their property do what you want on your section of land but if it hurts anyone else/property you cant do it.
305catsquid 1 month ago
@305catsquid Do you know what happens when one of these private enviro watchdog groups finds an infraction? Nothing. Chesapeake energy that does fracking & pollutes the groundwater laughs in their faces while they gear up their army of high dollar lawyers. VS. The small groups tiny law firm that won't even have the balls to go up against them. It took the EPA to shutdown a fracking well that caused damage. A private group already knew it was going on for 2 years & nobody cared.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable that is the system we have now where nothing does happen to them exactly, we need those companies to have no more privallages than the rest of us simply by basic property rights laws and individual rights laws, we need to enforce those kinds of laws and let no one stand above
305catsquid 1 month ago
@305catsquid A fracking operation close to me was shut down.. By the EPA. No private firm has the power to do that.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
Comment removed
305catsquid 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Friedstuffsable im not saying they do, im saying that the same basic laws, example you cant throw your trash on my property you cant harm me or my property should be enforced and it would help the environment,no company should be above these laws, if they do break the rules they should be punished the same as an individual would, with real consequences not a fine or some bogus regulation that only hurts their smaller competition.
305catsquid 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable In Canada their is quite a large lawsuit panning out over property damages incurred through fracking. If they lose the settlement you can bet your top dollar that they are going to have to rethink their strategy. No EPA or EPA like organization required, just an enforcement of property rights.
LeonTheMortgageAgent 1 month ago
@LeonTheMortgageAgent The problem with this, is that you would have to prove your damages are the direct result of the actions of Company X, which when it comes to pollution or environmental degradation is next to impossible.How can you prove the smokestacks down the street gave you cancer and something else didn't? Never mind the fact that if we just regulated these companies we could prevent such pollution in the first place. It gives a company free reign to pollute then just buy everyone off.
hawanja 1 month ago
@LeonTheMortgageAgent That is Canada. In America, who ever buys the officials, & buys the best attorneys, wins.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable I honestly want to help but i think something closer to what I said would work better. Animal species have been saved and brought from the brink of extinction by enforcing property rights, read some about that its interesting. Thanks for listening and being respectful most people on YouTube are not haha
305catsquid 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable (1) Don't you obey the Law? It is very clear. The tenth amendment in the Bill of Rights says Congress does not have unlimited power to do whatever it wants. That's called federalism (division of power between congress and the 50 Legislatures). The European Union has a similar system
(2) You committed a strawman argument. At no point in her video did she say she wants to get rid of NRC, FAA, or CPS. Please don't put words in people's mouths they never said
.
harleykman 1 month ago
@harleykman That is what Ron Paul wants to do. Why the fuck do you think their is this resurgence of Libertarianism? Because of Ron Paul. If it wasn't for him running, this video would have never been made. Who creates these regulation of things like Nuclear energy? The federal government, that's who. If it wasn't for them, nuclear waste would be buried on site, because sending it to Yucca Mountain is expensive. They would do whatever is cheapest if there weren't any regulations.
Friedstuffsable 1 month ago
@Friedstuffsable Simpleton.
ilkhanX 1 month ago
Do do want to know, about libertarians thought on the poor who want to work, yet there are no jobs for that poor person. i find minimum wage is not enough to do any thing on. i could not rent an apt on minimum wage. I worked minimum wage when I was in high school being supported by my parents. People have to work 2 minimum wage jobs just to keep a roof over there head. How would eliminating this help those people who would get a lower wage now and not be able to support them selves?
Dufoth 2 months ago
Personal: 100, Economic: 80. I answered "maybe" on welfare and trade. Not a very good test.
TheRevolution1988 2 months ago
In Florida you actually see on the News. Private charities being fought against by local governments! What is that all about?
Howie47 2 months ago
When government deregulates itself into powerlessness, no one will stop business corruption. The free market can't stop monopolies or fraud. The housing bubble demonstrated that the ratings agencies were giving a AAA rating to junk bonds for the right price. You don't want government picking the winners. OK. What keeps the winners from taking the power to pick themselves winners over and over?
For the cold war propaganda version of what you just said watch this: watch?v=nHDyE954l4U.
RakaTheTenacious 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@RakaTheTenacious Clearly you don't understand how the system works. Business corruption occurs because of what we have. Not because of free markets. Corporatism and government interventionism is what we see today. They are intertwined together, hence the corruption. The housing bubble and the ratings are perfect examples on why we need free markets. You're simply making our case. These things occur because of the federal reserve, regulators working for the corporations and gov. backing it.
xKenseixX 2 months ago
@xKenseixX Good post. I think people who attack libertarianism as a philosophy are mostly just ignorant about what the philosophy is about and the strong intellectual arguments for a libertarian society.
bschou 2 months ago
@RakaTheTenacious What world are you living in where free markets can't handle fraud ect.. The free market is 100x more harsher than regulations. We have thousand upon thousand of regulations. Huge books, have you even seen them? There is no dearth in regulations, yet all that happens is corporations pay to pollute, pay to commit fraud while the little business owner is swamped with paper work and complicated regulations. In free markets, you cannot commit fraud, damage property, ect..
xKenseixX 2 months ago
@RakaTheTenacious The government is there to enforce that. That is it's role, to enforce what is already there. Enron scandal ect.. was handled just fine by free markets. They were prosecuted and sent to jail. In the free market, it's pretty clear cut. The government enforces the law in regards to fraud, theft, harm ect.. Not regulators with zero over sight, bailing out companies with tax payer dollars ect.. Regulations are not the cure, they are currently the problem.
xKenseixX 2 months ago
@RakaTheTenacious The consumers pick the winners. Clear and simple, and that is freedom. If we didn't have a system that didn't allow the small guy to thrive, we would have better competition. If consumers like something, and pay for it, those companies deserve to be winners. If a company has poor service, consumers choose to not to use it or buy it. If the company goes bankrupt, that happens. No bail outs, no tax loop holes, no pay to pollute or damage. It's clear cut.
xKenseixX 2 months ago
@RakaTheTenacious Good point about monopolies. But listen, if you look at the history of businesses in the United States. ALL monopolies are the direct result of government regulations, subsidies and favoritism. For example, the railroads attempted price fixing to garner higher profits but were completely unable to because their competition kept muscling them out. It wasn't until the CEOs went to Washington to demand legislation which would set prices for them did they get it
bschou 2 months ago
@bschou Natural monopolies do exist. Consider the case of the California electricity deregulation (late 90's). There is strong evidence, including recorded conversations, that power producers were restricting production to manipulate market prices to maximize profit. Essentially a private embargo for profit. That's another example of business corruption. I don't trust government either, but I trust the utopia of "the free market" less.
RakaTheTenacious 2 months ago
As for charity the great Nicolo Machiavelli wrote himself "A man will rather forgive his own fahers death rather then a loss of inheritence."Hope that sums it up nicely;-)
Kharmazov 2 months ago
In my country(and what evil socialist country it is) authorities of one city had a great idea how to utileze a group of people forced to live off the welfare.They paid them few extra bucks gave them shovel,pitchforks,etc(no torches thou;-) and told to clean the streets from garbage,tream the bushes etc.In the end the taxpayers did benefit from tha evil goverment conspiracy that is welfare by having their city clean agian.And everybody lived happly ever after.
Kharmazov 2 months ago
Typical libertanian rumbling,reminds me of commie "arguments" for spreading the red plauge.Taxes are obligatory because the goverment requiers a source of incom in order to fund it's agiencies.Be it Law Enforcement,Defence or healthcare.These are all the services provided to the citizens.You're to scared goverment will "steal" from your pocket and give it to
an "undeserving bumb" well here's an idea from real life make them work for it.
Kharmazov 2 months ago
@Kharmazov FUCK YOU!
Shonenut213 2 months ago
@Shonenut213
That's just rich coming from someone with a Pokemon picture channel background:-)
Kharmazov 2 months ago