995
996

/pol/ on the Libertarian utopia. (i.imgur.com)

MarginalRevenue/pol/ が 投稿

全 163 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]BasicallyADoctor/fit/izen [スコア非表示]  (23子コメント)

Libertarians are so stupid. If there was no state then how would I be able to survive when I'm perpetually unemployed?

[–]aaveq [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Milions of syrians are asking themselves the same question everyday in germany.

[–]OnTheJobRedditor/sp/artan [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Why hasn't Germany set up programs to have refugees fuck their women? IT'S 2016 PEOPLE!

[–]TheGreatSwissEmperor/b/tard [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The EU actually has such a program! It seems to be called "reFUCKees" and progressed really well until they had their first trial runs the last New Year's eve which took place in several european cities, the largest trial run beeing the one in Cologne! They somehow didn't generate the results the EU aimed for, which angered not only the people in the EU but in the whole world!

The problem seems to be that they didn't inform the participating women that they are participating, but this seems to be more a problem of the racist and xenophobic mindset that we Europeans sadly have.

But I have faith in the EU and Fräulein Merkel that they can not only correct the flaws of "reFUCKees" but also chance our mindset to better! :)

[–]ibtrippindoe [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

They do have that program. It's called Merkel's immigration policy.

[–]Gilbanator/fa/g [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

edgy bro xD boy u sure showed them!

[–]Hydrocoded/k/ommando [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Libertarian

Anarchist

Pick one

[–]Charles_McManson [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Those are anarchists, friendo

[–]Myaccountforpics [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

I think that's anarchists. I'm sort of libertarian and I love most of the government services. I am more concerned with social liberalism. Things like less gun control, and less drug laws, and eliminating private prisons.

[–]threetoast [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

What does eliminating private prisons have to do with libertarianism?

[–]832drip [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Yeah that seems anti-libertarian. Public prisons = bigger government.

[–]jezuitx [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Actually it's not. Government has to give them prisoners to house so it's an extension of big government. The reason we need private prisons is due to the fact we filled up the others.

We're imprisoning record numbers in America. That indicates there's a big flaw somewhere. That flaw in this case is the war on drugs.

[–]BoojumG [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Then why not just say "ending the war on drugs"? The incarceration rate is driven by that more than by whether the place you put criminals is public or private.

[–]jezuitx [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

True but privatizing our own subjugation just isn't a path I want to see played out either. There's a bunch of shit we need to fix. Sometimes determining what to fix first is kind of tough.

[–]BoD80 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So true but yet we are busy talking about restrooms right now and how to get more free stuff. Public transportation will soon be just go pick out a new car and charge your EBT.

[–]ItSaidMakeAUsername [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Private prisons gives incentives to have prisoners. The prison owners and the officials they pay off win off the misery of others. With public prisons, everybody loses so there would be less incentive to lock people up for stupid shit like drugs.

[–]MedicusQuis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No that flaw was/is allowing hordes of uneducated peasant-class Mestizos into the country. Drug laws are just a way for the government to cope with that flaw and keep them out of the public sphere.

[–]DrWhiskeydick/r(9k)/obot [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think it has to do with corporate welfare or something

[–]th30be/diy/ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Nothing. He just thinks being a cool label is cool.

[–]IranianGenius_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Privatising prisons is more efficient and allows better value for the consumer

[–]Feshtof [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Wastes taxpayer money, higher recidivism rates, more inmate deaths.

[–]Griff_Steeltower [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The last two are liberal positions and the first is an uncontested position except maybe in very violent cities

[–]RadioHitandRun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's usually the far right that are beholden to corporate culture and small government...

[–]Gib_es [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

😂

[–]jboleky [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Great post so much salt here woowoooowooow

[–]Benlarge1/gif/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

LEAVE LIBERTARIANISM ALONE!!!

[–]swagnarok69 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Sounds like all these libertardians could us a...NAP! GET IT!?

[–]GueroCabron [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Without government, people wont follow morals and since we are all idiots, we will all die of eating toxic food, just like all the other countries without USDA inspections.

[–]Civil_Barbarian [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Have you seen what corps try to get away with even with all the regulations? The government, even with how shitty it is, is still a better deal.

[–]IsAnyoneHungry/r(9k)/obot [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But who would build the roads

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes because corporations can't deceive people using their money and power.

Remember big tobacco?

[–]3manyhumans [スコア非表示]  (25子コメント)

so in this anarcho-capitalist utopia, instead of governments ruling, its corporations.

such wow

[–]HotWeen [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

I don't know if youve noticed, but people on /pol/ dont know what they're talking about. Libertarians are usually just states rights guys, or small government advocates. they're not anarchists who think government should be abolished. Thats a hugely important distinction that /pol/ refuses to learn about for whatever reason.

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

To be fair to OP, the libertarian party in the US has historically had large and loud support from anarchists, to the extent that the "hard line" party members booed Gary Johnson at the latest primary because he said that the blind shouldn't be allowed to drive. So it's an easy mistake to make.

[–]Hitlerlover_88 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

OP also appears to be Australian so this could be based on our liberal party.

[–]eyelikethings [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Which is Liberal in name only.

[–]mrducky78/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Economic liberalism, social conservatism.

Its liberal in its actions. Just not in social policies.

[–]FalseCape/v/ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Okay? And the fucking KKK supports the republican candidate? Judging a party by their most extreme supporters is fucking retarded. Naturally anarchist would support libertarians because they are the only party that isn't advocating for a massive increase in government.

[–]swagnarok69 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

On the doll, please point to where the government oppressed you.

[–]Kinetic_Card [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

people on /pol/ dont know what they're talking about

You mean people on 4chan are children who aren't nearly as smart as they think they are? You don't say.

[–]time_to_despair [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But even somewhat mainstream GOP candidate Rick Perry said he wanted to abolish several agencies. Wasn't it Education, Environmental Protection and... ? Oops!

[–]Gushin_Granny_4u/fit/izen [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

/pol/ is one person

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He's taking it to an extreme to prove a point.

There are obviously ways in which this manifests itself in every day life if libertarians actually got everything they wanted

[–]adocdt [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

so in this anarcho-capitalist utopia, instead of governments ruling, its corporations.

I agree philosophically with anarcho-capitalism, but it's not something that I think would ever work on a practical level.

That being said....

A corporation cannot "rule". A company has no power of its own. Any amount of "power" that they are given is going to be given to them by consumers.

In today's system major corporations use their wealth to lobby the government and get special rules and regulations passed that favor them, while harming their competition.

With no government, corporations would have to compete with each other through offering the best product and or service possible at the most reasonable price. If they failed to do that, they would fail as a company.

There's so much wrong in the OP.

no internet because DARPA wasn't funded

Really? All the technological advancements that have been made throughout history by private entities, there's no possible way someone else would have created the internet?

Hope I don't die of heavy metal poisoning because there are no regulations regarding food safety

Because the best way to make money is for a company to willingly provide an unsafe product that literally kills their consumers?

Hope I don't get hit because there's no regulations requiring seat belts or airbags

It's ridiculous to think that not one single company would sell cars with safety features if the government didn't mandate it. If Company A decided to sell cars with no seat belts and airbags, but Company B did, who's car are you going to buy? Sure some people might go with Company A because the car may be cheaper and they want to save money. But those people have made a conscious choice to ignore their own personal safety.

Only make $800 a month because no labor laws.

Why do some fields today pay more than minimum wage? If labor and specialized skills had no inherent market value, wouldn't every company just pay the minimum wage? Why do doctors, engineers, computer scientists, teachers, etc. get paid well above minimum wage?

I'm not going to reply to every single point, but I think you get the picture.

[–]AnalInferno [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Cars had airbags, seat belts, ABS, etc... well before they were mandated.

[–]FalseCape/v/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

arguing with idiots that don't know the difference between ancap and libertarian

Don't even waste your time m8. These guys are far too addicted to the state's cock.

[–]Kinetic_Card [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Leaded gasoline? That was a pretty big one. In that case, the companies have a vested interest in keeping the buyers in the dark.

Cigarettes is another big one. Tobacco exes stood up IN COURT and said they did not believe cigs were addictive. There's no way an average joe could stand up to big tobacco's lawyers, he'd get steamrolled. Anarcho-capitalism is as big of a fantasy as John Lennon's "Imagine."

[–]Feshtof [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Nope, computers stopped sucking because of NASA, internet was a DARPA baby, companies as a rule don't innovate into new fields, too dangerous/not cost-effective. What the do specialize in is enhancing, and making more efficient and expanding current technologies.

[–]WereCarrot [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

companies as a rule don't innovate into new fields, too dangerous/not cost-effective.

yah, where would we be if the government hadn't invented the car

[–]time_to_despair [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It's more like where would the car be if the government hadn't purchased them by the millions and built roads all across everywhere for them to drive on?

Public transportation is not hard to build, but the US barely has any because the car companies literally paid off local governments to not build them.

[–]WereCarrot [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's more like where would the car be if the government hadn't purchased them by the millions and built roads all across everywhere for them to drive on?

The number of cars the government has purchased is is irrelevant relative to consumer purchases. Not only that, but there is no proof that government can be the only/most efficient provider of public roadways.

Public transportation is not hard to build, but the US barely has any because the car companies literally paid off local governments to not build them.

There are many other more important factors for the decline of the public streetcar system in the US, corporate opposition is neither the sole nor most important reason. Its also possible that public transportation simply isn't efficient. Comparing the US to areas where public transportation is highly prevalent is borderline fallacious.

[–]Rock_Carlos [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah, because companies definitely haven't tended toward price fixing and monopolistic practices when left to their own devices.

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Are you literally retarded? There is a long long history of large corporations taking advantage of people in order to make the largest profit.

If it was more profitable for a company to not put seat belts in cars, they wouldn't. They don't give a fuck about safety. Have you seen that fight club scene where the main character is working at an insurance agency and he has to weigh the costs of lawyer fees vs. the cost to recall cars in an instance where cars has a defect and they'd spontaneously catch on fire and kill people? Stuff like that actually happens.

Companies literally have 1 goal and that goal is to maximize profits. This fantasy that somehow the free market will do what's best for the people is literally exactly that, a fantasy. It's insane. My grandpa lost his arm in a factory accident and he was paid $1000. He had to work the rest of his entire life

[–]godplaysdice_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You seem to be assuming that every consumer under libertarianism would have the ability to make completely informed and rational decisions, which is a pipe dream. How would you know it was food xyz that killed your child unless they collapsed at the dinner table? What if the food was full of garbage that took years of accumulation in your system to kill you? For that matter, why on earth would you want to live in a society where you the consumer are responsible for safety testing every product you use?

[–]time_to_despair [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

A corporation cannot "rule".

Are you sure? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_rule_in_India

[–]RadioHitandRun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The faggotry is strong with OP.

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (52子コメント)

presumes that the average man opts out of all of these things because he cant afford it.

these businesses still exist

these fucking retards are so entrenched in their communism they sincerely dont know how a free market works.

[–]TheEpicKorvix [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

triggred

[–]Jwolf19 [スコア非表示]  (41子コメント)

A truly free market requires regulation.

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

what I described happens even in regular markets

company sells product

nobody buys product for whatever reason

company dies (or if it was a bigger company focuses on there other ventures more)

[–]BoojumG [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Get back to us when you've read about the basic history of the Industrial Revolution and why we have labor and safety regulations today at all. The feedback you describe is inadequate.

[–]chbrules/o/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The government stepped in to wave hands after things were already getting better. Case and point, the workplace accident rate was on a steady decline prior to OSHA, and for decades after has not shown any better downward trend of workplace accidents.

The industrial revolution was a stepping stone in an evolving economy, much to what China and India are seeing now. If anything, government stepped in and held back the progress of worker success. Case and point, the minimum wage law. Know why we have it? Because NYC construction unions didn't want to be undercut by cheap black labor from the south early last century.

Yes, minimum wage is rooted in racist law. It still is. It hurts the poorest of blacks the most. If your labor isn't worth at least what the minimum wage is, you don't get to work, even if you want to.

Government took over private charity to give inefficient and shit handouts that promote not finding work. Case studies of welfare from Europe to the US show that workers either immediately find jobs after they're fired, or wait till the very end of their unemployment benefits to find work, regardless of length. As for general welfare in the US, it often pays out more than an entry level job could, and disincentivizes people from finding work because they might go homeless waiting months to get back on welfare if their job doesn't work out for them. The irony is that most people begin making more than the minimum wage quickly after starting work, and would outpace the welfare rate.

[–]______LSD______ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Stepping out of the 4chanjerk for a sec, it's really sad how millions of people hold the same views as that guy and even scoff at understanding basic history.

[–]spilurum [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

There's a difference between labor and safety regulations, and economic regulations on the market (taxation, grants, subsidies). When most people talk about the "free market" and deregulation, they're not talking about safety.

[–]mrducky78/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Safety would be a loss. Shit like EPA largely drive shit like exhaust levels getting shat out by your car, level of toxic waste you can dump in a school playground (no more than 2 barrels), etc.

Unions were integral for fighting for worker rights which isnt just the 40 hour work week, or sick leave and shit, it was also about safety and pushing that "my workers dont want to do this dangerous shit without X provided by the company". You see OSHA violations in all those shit countries because regulations arent being kept too. Whereas in orderly big government worlds where people come around and fine your company for not sticking to the set regulations set by big brother, people tend to be safer.

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

im not saying the libertarian ideal is a good thing you fucking retard, I am saying the guy who wrote up this text does not know how a free market or even a "free" market works

if nobody will buy your product you get no money.

[–]Trodamusfa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This presumes there are immediate, verifiable effects.

To whit: insurance companies. You pay up front with the hope that when something bad happens, they will help you pay for it.

If a company went maximum overfuck and rewrote contracts so they'd barely have to pay out anything, they'd make tons of money before anyone realized they weren't insuring shit.

Plus a little footnote that says you can't post bad reviews about them online or face stiff penalties.

Now let's pretend the story is talking about "crime insurance" instead of "private police force" and the entire thing is basically feasible in today's regulated market.

[–]tysonmoorewood [スコア非表示]  (30子コメント)

Nigger what?

[–]Jwolf19 [スコア非表示]  (28子コメント)

Otherwise monopolies would run rampant and become so powerful they could take liberties from people. In my opinion, a truly free market requires loads of competition which would be difficult to achieve without regulation.

[–]Kinetic_Card [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Not only competition, but a lot of transparency and information. And sometimes, it requires people unionizing and bitching about working conditions to make others aware there is a problem at all.

If you're selling brand new video games for $100, someone will go that's stupid, Amazon has it for $60 because everyone has INFORMATION. Then the buyer and seller agree on a price because it's what "they can get away with" knowing what else is out there. Employer working conditions are rarely so transparent.

Remember the whole EA wife scandal? Think anyone wanted to work for EA after that? Scandal or no, it provided a window into employers being shitty -- which they will try to do, with or without regulation. Then other employers will look at EA and go, whoa, hey we don't wanna be those guys. Employees will know to ask in interviews about working conditions and expectations. This level of information sharing is required for any sort of market economy to function. Otherwise it's all smoke, mirrors, and abuses because one party wants to hide information from another.

[–]jezuitx [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

You know how the first monopolies were made? They were business men who paid off the government to impose regulations that drove competition out of business. In a truly free market the best product survives.

[–]hooplathe2nd [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

There are ways to monopolize an industry WITHOUT running directly to the government. When they ran to the government, it was more to remove regulations designed to keep the industry competitive. Without regulation, a bigger corporation can always buy you out or seize your service even if you have a better, cheaper product. Regulation is vital. Don't just negatively label regulation because it is a regulation, the content is what it's merit should be based on. A truly free market allows for unlimited corporate expansionism.

[–]boggleogle [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

less regulation can mean more competition look at uber

[–]hooplathe2nd [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Less competition-restricting regulation yes. That's a great example of deregulation proving useful. But again so many believe that's all regulation is. That any regulation regardless of content is too restrictive of the free market. But it's not. It's just rules. A regulation saying Taco Bells is the only place allowed to serve Mexican food is bad. A regulation saying Mexican food shouldn't kill people is good. It's not terribly hard to see the difference. You could respond that the free market would take care of that as people wouldn't buy stuff that kills you but how would you know? It's absurd to believe consumers are even 50% knowledgable as to where their product comes from. We rely on the government to ensure that businesses are free to expand and create as much as they want as long as they adhere to rules concerning consumer and market safety.

[–]BoojumG [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

No regulation also results in monopolies.

There's a middle ground.

[–]sami27 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

What about the regulation of having one firm supply water/power/internet etc... Sometimes it's beneficial to have a regulated monopoly.

[–]WereCarrot [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

examples?

[–]BoojumG [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Mining towns. In some cases the entire local population was essentially owned by the company. You often weren't even paid in dollars, but rather in company scrip that could only be spent at company-owned stores. That's called a truck system, and they are illegal now.

And when the miners try to unionize and fight back for better treatment? Just hire a private army to literally bomb them.

Just look up the history of labor and safety regulations in general and you'll find they stems from rich men fucking everyone else over because no one could stop them.

For the meat-packing industry, look up the real things that Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" was based on. It led to the formation of the FDA.

[–]tigerbait92 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

No regulation also results in monopolies.

Implying monopolies are a bad thing. Plenty monopolies are good for consumers

[–]WildShenanigans [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

What are you, dumb? Corporations LOVE regulation because it allows them to stomp out smaller competitors. Regulations are gay

[–]Jwolf19 [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

What about anti monopolization laws?

[–]faggot_reddit_sucks [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Good in theory, but in practice it's always a small minority of laws.

[–]Shark_Porn [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The ones that haven't been enforced since 1940?

[–]Ragnarok550 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

What about lobbying? Hell it's interesting that anti monopoly laws apply when two service providers try to merge (merged they would still be smaller than the larest provider.) because of monopoly laws. Monopoly laws that help enforce the monopoly.

It's all about lobbying. Where do you think 90% of our laws come from? Big corporations.

[–]ma70jake [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Japan is doing doing fine without them

[–]rathyAro [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Making sweeping generalizations about regulations is probably not useful.

[–]Omgyd [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Regulations are fine the problem is having honest people to enforce said regulations.

[–]bllasae [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

he's a troll

[–]jezuitx [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yeah it does by a healthy judicial system that insures no harm comes to people and property.

[–]MarginalRevenue/pol/[S] [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

/pol/.

Communist.

Pick one.

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

its 4pol, they have been completely subverted.

[–]BansheeBomb/pol/ack [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

implying there's a big difference between NatSoc and communism

[–]swagnarok69 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

There is. One has niggers and doesn't work, the other has no niggers and should work just fine.

[–]Hodor_The_Great [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

look at American healthcare

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

insurance pays, so people go.

if insurance didnt pay then less people would go, and when they go despite not affording it the debt ends up being uncollectible and worthless.

this is why john oliver was able to buy up so much debt, it was literally worthless.

[–]Fig_Newton_/sp/artan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The free market is to capitalism as Marxism is to communism. You'll never see either in practice because real people don't work like that.

[–]TheInternetShill [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

presumes a business needs to cater to the average man to survive

You're fucking retarded but because you don't even know how markets let alone free ones work.

[–]LickitySplit939 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Just cause this one guy can't afford coverage doesn't mean plenty of other people can't. The idea here is that huge numbers of poor people will simply be left behind - like in lots of African countries (think Somalia) where there is basically no government.

[–]Markioperpe [スコア非表示]  (16子コメント)

needs regulations to tell him to wear a seatbelt

There's no regulation saying you have to wipe your ass. You must smell like shit man.

[–]jars_of_feetwee/a/boo [スコア非表示]  (15子コメント)

there needs to be regulations to put seatbelts in cars in the first place you retard.

[–]XxX420noScopeXxX [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Without the government, how will we attach a 6ft polyester strap to a chair!? Government please help!

[–]jars_of_feetwee/a/boo [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

You got me there mate ggggggggggggggg What about the air bags though?

[–]YamiNoSenshi [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You'd still have those lovely Takata shrapnel shooters.

[–]DrWormwaffle [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

The free market would likely fix the problem without regulation because people would likely have a higher demand for cars with seat belts than those without and would either be willing to pay more for a superior product or would purchase more of the superior product at the same price providing a large incentive for companies to provide seat belts in cars whether or not there is regulation.

[–]Griff_Steeltower [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Used to be companies thought they made cars look unsafe so the gov't had to force them to do it, you're right that we're used to them now but in the theoretical it's clear that government never existed in this America because there was never a DARPA and therefore never an Internet.

[–]saptsen [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No it wouldn't. Seatbelts only exist in cars in the US because of government regulation you fucking idiot

[–]accountnumberseven [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Or they'll put in shitty airbags and seatbelts to give consumers peace of mind while skimping on the actual safety/effectiveness because no third parties are going to bother testing them to see which cars are actually the safest. The middle class and lower can't afford to buy new cars every year so their power as consumers on future cars is weak, and if one brand/model gets a Pinto reputation they'll just drop it and make a different one.

The rich can just have their personal cars remodelled from the ground up for safety and tested by third parties under supervision, but they won't be sharing the results so only certain wealthy dynasties will possess vehicles with safety features on par with modern cars (which people still die in all the time.)

[–]micahmanyea/pol/ack [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Also most businesses don't want to kill the people that pay their paychecks.

[–]mrducky78/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

There is always the incentive to cut corners and pull a little more revenue.

Most businesses wouldnt want to kill the people buying their products, but they wouldnt want to implement tens of millions of dollars of safety requirements if the costs are just a couple out of court settlements for hundreds of thousands and using your lawyers to strong arm people.

Safety shit costs money. Money that could otherwise be profit.

[–]TheMagicAdventure [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Ahh just like the tobacco industry!

[–]jars_of_feetwee/a/boo [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So what? I'm not arguing one way or another I'm just pointing out the dude can't read

[–]time_to_despair [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You're probably too young to remember, but most people used to think seat belts were useless or "lame" or even a dangerous trap in emergency situations.

If the gov't didn't set up independent testing and require safety standards, lots of people would just go around YOLOing through town, killing their friends and neighbors and costing everyone in additional medical expenses for the uninsured.

[–]Markioperpe [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

That's not what they said though. God you're fucking dumb as shit.

[–]jars_of_feetwee/a/boo [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

hope i don't get hit because there is no regulations requiring seatbelts or airbags.

[–]Roommates69 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Obviously the only alternative

[–]edxu25 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Theres a difference between libertarian and anarchist. This is anarchy. Gary Johnson actually says he supports most government organizations.

[–]Beej67 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But without government, who would paint the dead skunks?

http://wfsb.images.worldnow.com/images/8298595_G.jpg

[–]chumpwithnoname [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Somalia is a true libertarian utopia. No government, no laws, no shitty regulations, shit ton of guns for everyone. Why you libfags don't go and live there?

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Anarchism and Libertarianism are not the same thing. The former want no government at all, while the latter is a belief that the ideal government would be as limited as possible, but that there generally needs to be someone to enforce property rights and national sovereignty at the minimum.

[–]JonPena [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

A libertarian utopia would include the NAP you retarded sophist

[–]swagnarok69 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Every time I hear NAP I want to beat the person to death with a rock and steal all of their things.

[–]river_of_karma/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

Actually everybody would die after a week from food poisoning because food wouldn't be safe to eat without the state.

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

Yeah, if the government wasn't there to tell us what is okay to eat, everyone would buy poisonous food. There definitely wouldn't be a market for edible food that would provide huge profits for the first companies to start selling food that doesn't kill customers.

[–]godplaysdice_ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Nobody would knowingly buy poisonous food. The problem with libertarianism is it seems to hinge upon the assumption that all consumers have the ability to make completely informed and rational choices.

What if the food has a toxin that leads to cancer 20 years down the road? How would you know your cancer was caused by the food you ate? How would you know what was in the food unless the company selling it told you? They have a vested interest in not giving you that information.

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That's fair. And honestly, even as someone that would identify as libertarian leaning, I think the USDA does some good work, because it means someone else takes care of doing the legwork so I don't have to spend my time finding out which food brands are poisonous. But it's disingenuous to suggest that without governmental oversight, people would be eating nothing but poison, and no companies would put out good food. The people who run and work at those companies are people, too, and presumably they don't really want to eat poison.

That said, most of the problems you mentioned aren't exactly avoided in the world we live in today, even with regulations, which are not enacted and enforced without some cost to the consumer.

You're right that informed and rational consumers are a key assumption to making idealistic libertarian philosophies work, and it's not an assumption that can be made in reality. But I also question the implicit assumption from the other side that a large, impersonal bureaucracy is going to be able to reliably make informed, rational decisions for individuals better than those individuals themselves.

[–]RIF_IN_FECES [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

People are fucking retarded, and there's generally no way for consumer to know what's in their food. Aka lead in lollies, makes it sweet and cheap as fuck

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I have some bad news for you about who works in government... people

[–]river_of_karma/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Also there would be no roads. Like who would even build them? Only the state can build roads.

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Shit man, I don't even know how you'd go about building a road. How do you decide where it starts or ends? Where does the magical black stuff come from? Without the government, I don't think we'd be able to even know how to USE roads, let alone build them!

[–]yungtatha [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

You're right. "Safe" food would just be 10x the cost.

[–]WereCarrot [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Until someone realized that competition drives down prices, whoopsies.

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Long term, that's extremely unlikely. It could be provided at the same price (or, possibly, cheaper) as it is currently, while still providing a profit, since it is currently able to be provided at that price. And since "food" is a generally easy industry to enter, there would be price wars as competitive firms lower prices to increase their market share, until an equilibrium price point is reached where the expected profit from investment is roughly what it would be in any other business.

[–]SRSlyunimpressed [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

So now you have a world full of Little Caesars but no Lou Malnati’s. Why live.

[–]benandorffa/tg/uy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If there is demand for the latter, why wouldn't it exist?

[–]Kinetic_Card [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If the Flint, Michigan water being everywhere doesn't kill you first.

But wait, you say, there's an incentive to provide clean water! Why wouldn't some company come to fill that void? So we need to buy clean water now? Only rich people will be able to afford it. Sorry, poor people, you don't get clean water.

[–]Fig_Newton_/sp/artan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

>>>/gilded age/

[–]DrinkTheSun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Sounds more like capitalistic anarchism.

[–]pussyonthechainwax0 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm pretty sure 3 quarters of people who vote libertarian just don't want to pick democrat or republican, so they can say oh I didn't vote for him or her dahhuuurrrrr

[–]AnalInferno [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Pretty sure 3/4 of people who think of libertarianism think it's anarchy dahhuuurrrrr

[–]FalseCape/v/ [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

TIL /r/4chan is full of liberal cucks who couldn't tell the difference between ancap and libertarianism if their life depended on it. Keep sucking that state cock boys. #Sanders4Prez #PleaseSupportNEETs #Rightscomefromthestates #Whowouldbuildtheroads

[–]Charles_McManson [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Sanders4Prez

REEEEEEEEEEEE

[–]mrducky78/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You know there are other flavors to choose from apart from salt right?

[–]swagnarok69 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Muh free markets tho! All taxation is theft.

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Better than sucking corporate cock

[–]FalseCape/v/ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

He actually believes those are the only two options

laughingschoolgirls.jpg

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You either believe in free market capitalism or something more like socialism. Unless you believe in something weird and fringe like anarcho-syndicalism or something, which is still ridiculous

[–]Charles_McManson [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

As a moderate libertarian, this gives me autism. This is borderline anarchism not fucking libertarianism

[–]bllasae [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Shitty examples.