Libertarian RMB

WA Delegate: The Confederation of Paul Marks (elected )

Founder: Whipjangle

BoardActivity History Admin Rank

Lowest Overall Tax Burden: 301st Rudest Citizens: 547th Largest Pizza Delivery Sector: 663rd+17
Largest Soda Pop Sector: 787th Highest Crime Rates: 983rd Nudest: 1,014th Fattest Citizens: 1,061st Highest Economic Output: 1,109th Most Armed: 1,128th Most Rebellious Youth: 1,187th Largest Retail Industry: 1,213th Highest Workforce Participation Rate: 1,245th Most Nations: 1,304th Highest Wealthy Incomes: 1,318th Largest Trout Fishing Sector: 1,344th Largest Gambling Industry: 1,440th Most World Assembly Endorsements: 1,454th Greatest Rich-Poor Divides: 1,667th Most Politically Free: 1,731st Largest Populations: 1,771st
World Factbook Entry

Visit a region where you can gain the benefit of a small group of like minded players, but with no other restrictions, where your rights end at the tip of the other guy's nose and where smaller government is better government, and no government may be best of all.


Embassies: Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, USSF, The Red Fleet, Benevolent Capitalism, Libertarian Capitalist Zone 716, The Mystical Council, Peoples Federation of Qandaristan, Dill Country, The Jedi Council, and ACA.

Tags: Small, Social, Casual, Featured, Password, Conservative, Liberal, Libertarian, Founderless, and Serious.

Libertarian contains 10 nations, the 1,304th most in the world.

Password required

Today's World Census Report

The Most Subsidized Industry in libertarian

Nations ranked highly spend the most on developing and supporting industry, a practice known as 'corporate welfare.'

As a region, libertarian is ranked 13,332nd in the world for Most Subsidized Industry.

NationWA CategoryMotto

Regional Happenings

More...

Libertarian Regional Message Board

Conservatism is about limited government and the Rule of Law.

People who do not know what the "Rule of Law" is (who confuse it with every arbitrary COMMAND of the state) have no business here.

The followers of Thomas Hobbes (and other "Legal Positivists") have no business here.

I remind people of the name of the region.

The name is "Libertarian".

I remind people that this conversation started with the question of Patrick Buchanan.

Patrick Buchanan is an evil man (the word "evil" is meant) - who pretends that Treblinka was just a "transit camp" and so on.

It was DONALD TRUMP (only a few years ago) who correctly described Mr Buchanan as a "Hitler Lover".

Now Mr Trump accepts the support of people such as Mr Buchanan - people who should have the Mark of Cain upon them.

At the start of this conversation it never occurred to me that people such as Snifkowland actually shared such Nazi opinions that physical violence should be used against judges who would see to defend Civil Liberties (indeed the Rule of Law itself) against the actions of the Executive.

If anyone had told me that Snifkowoland shared these opinions - I would have denounced that person as a liar.

I am very sorry indeed that Snifkowoland has gone that way.

And I hope, indeed pray, that in time he repents of his conduct.

my view on the current times is that after gfc, and i guess the age demographic change, there is a hard core shift in growth away low and middle waged incomes. True, there is a foolish view that complains about the rich getting richer. the rich getting richer is a good thing! they are getting richer! but, the reminder of society getting poorer is an issue. i reckon, that because of this, the majority are getting miffed. due to uk higher percentage migration compared to investment compared to infrastructure, health etc, the gdp per capita is going down. it certainly is for NZ, a high growth nation. where the gdp per capita decreasing due to high immigrant growth, it would seem logical to recent migration. although this can be viewed as a nazi backlash, i view it as more a backlash of a the less rich majority. it seems quite simple. am i not stating the obvious? hello?

I do not fully agree FJK - there may be real economic effects at work, but a lot of this is Credit Money bubble effect.

Richard Cantillon understood (as far back as the 1700s) that expanding the credit-money supply even to "keep the price level stable" (as Irving Fisher was to claim in the 20th century - but others had claimed long before) tended to enrich the rich at the expense of the poor - that even after the boom-bust had worked itself out the effects of increasing inequality would remain.

Max Keiser of Mr Putin's RT is a shameless liar - but not everything he says is a lie (the best propaganda mixes lies with the truth). And he is right to say that the international financial system (the banks and so on) are a vast scam, supported by the government Central Banks.

And it is a scam that aids, mainly, the rich - at the expense, mainly, of the poor.

Lending should be 100% from Real Savings - the actual sacrifice of consumption, in cash money. Not the expansion of credit - and certainly not the expansion of credit backed up by government (Central Bank) interventionism.

Sadly the international economy is now in much the same position it was in 2008 - accept that the Capital Structure is even more distorted now than it was then.

The governments of the world have carried on this farce much longer than I thought possible for them to do.

But they have carried it on at the expense of a hopelessly distorted Capital Structure - and radically (and artificially) increased inequality.

good stuff. i do, to a degree, agree with the monetarist approach, and have stated this before on this forum. the issue with it is the velocity of the cash! any way, most reserve banks deal only with the price of money (interest) not the supply of money=what bretton woods did given trade/capital flows based on us$ based on fort knox. during that period, cash was hard to find, and there was zero finance issues with bank failures. although the past was awful, that aspect was excellent. the idea of moving to 100% reserve ratio, given that the current ratio, i am guessing, was 7% back on the 90s, now i would guess is like 5%? moving to 100% would stuff the entire world. stupid but sounds nice.

I do not agree FJK rants - indeed increasing the credit money supply in order to "maintain a stable price level" is exactly the mistake that both Benjamin Strong made in the 1920s and Alan Greenspan (and those who have come after him) have made. Prices must be allowed to fall gradually over time - pumping up credit to try and prevent this leads to massive distortion of the Capital Structure.

As for the gold market (Fort Knox and so on) - we all know that the gold market is a massive FRAUD (the word "fraud" is not too strong) as much of the "gold" traded in New York and so on - does-not-exist.

Mrs May and yet more "social justice" in Britain.

Wild monetary policy and deficit government spending in Japan.

And a "choice" (which is no real choice) between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the United States.

If there is any hope in the world I can not see it.

what i see is that since the gfc, there has been a massive increase in money supply and debt and house prices/asset price inflation. this seems inherently foolish and bad policy. yet no one says anything. i should do some more research to find the percentages. where i live, house asset inflation is 55% from may 2011 to may 2015. debt would have gone up a similar level. this scream alarms in my thinking, but maybe it is just growth.

July 1st

The Council of FJK Rants wrote:what i see is that since the gfc, there has been a massive increase in money supply and debt and house prices/asset price inflation. this seems inherently foolish and bad policy. yet no one says anything. i should do some more research to find the percentages. where i live, house asset inflation is 55% from may 2011 to may 2015. debt would have gone up a similar level. this scream alarms in my thinking, but maybe it is just growth.


The powers that be fear that if they stop pumping out credit the system will bust.

Sadly they are correct - but it will but anyway.

As you know - I thought it would collapse years ago.

The establishment have delayed that bust with their Credit Bubble policy - kept up asset prices (real estate, shares and so on).

But they have also made the bust worse.

Forum View

by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics