Capitalist Libertarian Freedom RegionBoard

As for the book rant about inequality and "low" taxes on the rich.

Taxes on "the rich" and "big business" are actually very high in the United States - especially in California and New York City, it is the poor who are not paying their "fair share" of tax. Indeed half the population do not seem to be paying any (net) Federal tax at all.

As I have said before - if people are concerned about "extreme artificial inequality" they need to look at the Credit Expansion (the Credit Bubble) - the "low interest policy" that has been pushed since the early 1990s.

It has been know since the time of Richard Cantillon (1700s) that credit expansion tends to benefit the wealthy at the expense of everyone else - yet the modern "Social Justice" Keynesian crowd are cool with Credit Bubble "monetary easing".

They need to revise their view of monetary policy - not just endlessly talk nonsense about taxation.

Gurkland wrote:

Scientifically speaking, this illusory belief that gives enjoyment is part of the placebo effect. An enjoyment that comes from delusions and not from reality.
To some extent the use of placebo involves deliberate deception and exploitation of the mind of a person. The use of an enjoyment that is part of a lie is questionable as it compromises the dignity of the voter and his right to financial and job security and this illusion undermines his/her standard of living. Libertarian policies are ineffective and even harmful for the quality of life of the government worker, but the enjoyment of voting for it derived from this illusion.
All of this is truly self-defeating for the government worker and it's really sad to know.

I don't think most people define themselves by their jobs.

Some may even think that certain policies are more important than their immediate job security or quality.

Hey guys!

Gurkland wrote:

It is collective ownership that is a natural right as well as an inviolable human right. The apotheosis of private property is the direct result of capitalism and neoliberalism.

There is no such thing as "natural rights." Don't think so? Ask the gazelles how they feel after the lions feed.

Gurkland wrote:

Quote from a constitutionalist in my real life country.

Hopefully that bit of fertilizer didn't come out of anyone with the power to invoke it.

Gurkland wrote:

The political programs of libertarians and anarcho-capitalists parties provides for a mass layoff of millions of public workers and massive welfare cuts that target needy families in order to balance the budget. Not to mention the public school system where workers send their children that would fall into ruin with libertarianism.

I agree. Voting libertarian is voting to elect Hillary which is bad for everyone.

However, getting rid of a bunch of bureaucrats and shoving welfare back off on the private charities where it belongs is not a bad idea.

Reed audio wrote:

but why is no one playing the Hillary Clinton recordings on national (and international) television? The recording of Hillary Clinton laughing about a 12 year old rape victim she (Mrs Clinton) had just destroyed with legal trickery. Mrs Clinton clearly knows the little girl had been raped and does not care - indeed it amuses Mrs Clinton.
And the "mainstream" media totally ignore the story. As they do all the other Hillary Clinton scandals.

Because that would be counterproductive to the current goals of most of the media.

Tsurara shirayuki wrote:

I don't think most people define themselves by their jobs.
Some may even think that certain policies are more important than their immediate job security or quality.

I have to disagree. The surest way to ensure that a problem persists indefinitely is to establish a government bureaucracy to solve it, Take a look at teen pregnancy, poverty, education, social services, etc, etc, etc. All of these people know that if they solve the problem, they won't have a job anymore.

Libertatema wrote:

Hey guys!

-and-

Talalupia wrote:

Hi guys. Happy to be here. Hopefully this region is more active than my previous one.

Greetings newcomers. Enjoy.

I snapped this picture on the outskirts of Kansas City yesterday. Just thought I would leave it here for comment:
http://imgur.com/M73AZoz

Talalupia wrote:

http://www.infowars.com/report-hacker-claims-racist-hillary-tape-set-to-be-released/
Have you guys heard about this? If so then what do you think about hacking in politics (such as this election) to gain information on the opponent? Even if it is a non affiliated third party.

Political espionage has been going on since the concept of campaigning for elections first came to a group of people. The ancient Roman senate was rife with spies gathering information on political opponents and allies alike. Nothing new here in concept. Just a slight difference in technology.

As for infowars... right up there with the National Enquirer or Weekly World News.

As for Hillary making racist statements? Almost certainly. Whether or not this hacker delivers is another story altogether. My belief is if the hacker had the product, it would already be out there. However looking at this logically kind of fails. How does an e-mail hacker lay his hands on a damning video? I suppose someone could have e-mailed it and he got it that way.

My assessment is more smoke and mirrors.

Hello, I just arrived and would like to engage in a verbal fight.

Automatedmessage wrote:

Hello, I just arrived and would like to engage in a verbal fight.

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Sociopia wrote:

Private property is theft.

How in the name of anything logical did you arrive at that?

Automatedmessage wrote:

Hello, I just arrived and would like to engage in a verbal fight.

You may have come to the right place.

Statist say that free market is prone to monopolies, how do i respond to that?

Is it too late to swap out Pence for Giuliani?

Sociopia wrote:

yeah.

It is not a true free market if monopolies are allowed to form

There have been very very few true free market monopolies. The only I can think of was Alcoa (Aluminum Company of America). They were so large that it took a court case that went up to the Supreme Court (who declined it and referred it to a Circuit Court) to actually break the business up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alcoa

The thing is that Alcoa had been very good to the consumer. They offered such a superior product at such a low price, no other company could compete with them. In fact, once Alcoa was broken up, the price of aluminum went up and the quality of it went down.

Free Market Monopolies and Government-Created Monopolies (where the government grants one company exclusive rights to something) are entirely different. Because they have to keep other businesses out, Free Market Monopolies must keep their prices low and quality high or else another company could come in with a good substitute and get an edge in on the market. Meanwhile, as they are guaranteed to have no competition, Government-Created Monopolies can charge exorbitant rates for their product. Take for example any pharmaceutical drug. Patents and other artificial ways to stifle competition are ultimately bad for the consumer