上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500

[–]wicked-dog [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Why wasn't OP born rich? What a fucking retard.

[–]o2toau [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

But what if I tickle your balls and whisper "the free market" in your ear?

[–]jboleky [スコア非表示]  (62子コメント)

Great post so much salt here woowoooowooow

[–]skilliard7 [スコア非表示]  (32子コメント)

I'm a libertarian but I found it funny and laughed, its good satire.

But in all seriousness, what he described would be like describing communism when discussing socialists/democrats.

Most libertarians don't believe in no government, they believe in limited government. We can seriously cut our spending without becoming an anarchy. We spend too much on military just to deal with other country's problems, we spend too much on welfare/social programs, we incarcerate too many low-risk criminals for long periods of times which costs taxpayer money, etc.

Most modern libertarians believe in reducing government spending and reducing taxes. There's many ways we can do so without destroying our country.

[–]SisterRayVU [スコア非表示]  (25子コメント)

That's not even American "libertarianism". That's just being a Republican who wants to spend less.

[–]Fletch71011wee/a/boo [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Republicans are socially conservative and generally spend a ton on military. Libertarians views are very socially liberal and against large military spending.

[–]skilliard7 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I identify as a libertarian because I believe in the government staying out of things. A lot of republicans believe in increased military spending on foreign affairs, banning gay marriage(as opposed to the government staying out of marriage entirely, which is my belief), are opposed to criminal justice reform, etc.

[–]FriedBananas96 [スコア非表示]  (18子コメント)

Republicans are libertarians who got taken over by "Christian" faggots who think they're still libertarians but really all they do is make America look bad.

[–]BasicallyADoctor/fit/izen [スコア非表示]  (110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]  (32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]  (28子コメント)

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

[–]lt_hindu [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

IT'S 2016 PEOPLE!

Triggered. Implying that some of use identify as "people"

[–]TheGreatSwissEmperor/b/tard [スコア非表示]  (22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! :)

[–]wildcard1992 [スコア非表示]  (21子コメント)

I don't get why these refugees don't stop at other, less war torn middle east nations. Like, why are all of them making the long trek to western Europe when there are like dozens of other countries all over the place.

I'm sorry if this came off as ignorant. I don't know why I'm asking these questions on a 4chan post aggregator.

[–]iShootDope_AmA [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

They do.

 Turkey2,748,367 (registered, 3 March 2016)[3] .
Lebanon1,500,000 (estimated arrivals Dec 2015) 1,048,275 (registered)[4] .
Jordan1,265,000 (census results Nov 2015)[5] 642,868 (registered)[6] .
Germany600,000 (registered by April 2016)[7] .
Greece496,119 (arrivals to May 2016)[8]54,574 (estimated in country May 2016)[8] 5,615 (applicants to Dec 2015)[9] .
Saudi Arabia420,000 (estimated overstays2015)[10] .
Macedonia400,000 (estimated arrivals)[8] 2,150 (applicants to Dec 2015)[9] .
Serbia(incl. Kosovo)313,314 (applicants to Dec 2015)[9] .
Iraq(incl. Iraqi Kurdistan)239,000 (estimated in Iraqi Kurdistan) 6,000 (estimated rest of Iraq March 2015) 246,589 (registered)[11] .
United Arab Emirates242,000 (estimated overstays, government source, 2015) .
[12][13] Kuwait155,000+[10][14] (estimated overstays to June 2015).
 Egypt119,665 (registered)[15]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War.

Sorry for the shit tier formatting. I've got some dope to shoot.

[–]pikk [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

because if you're forced to move from Absolute Shithole 1, why stop at "sort of shithole", or "not as much of a shithole", or "basically decent", when "fucking great" is only another 200 miles?

[–]quelques_heures [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

It's a bit of a polluting the commons problem though. 1,000,000 people have the idea of trekking to an advanced country, thinking 'oh things are great there, I'll have my own BMW in no time!'

Of course now this country has to deal with an influx of 1,000,000 poor, unskilled people who don't speak the language, which creates a situation where they're living under deplorable conditions, can't find work, and the authorities are overwhelmed with all of it.

tl;dnr: People think they're moving to a paradise, but the fact of them moving there makes it a shithole.

[–]Hodor_The_Great [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Germany is not becoming a shithole. A bit worse than it used to be but miles better than Poland or Greece or Turkey or any other country the refugees passed.

[–]Fluffynation [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Because if they did the shit their doing in Germany in a middle eastern country they'd get executed but no one in Germany will persecute them because that would be "intolerant"

[–]Hydrocoded/k/ommando [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Libertarian

Anarchist

Pick one

[–]Zifnab25 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Nah, see, Anarchists have a strong respect for property rights. Says so right here in my copy of Reason Magazine.

[–]Brobi_WanKenobi/pol/itician [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Confirmed: Libertarians are anti-/comfy/

[–]Myaccountforpics [スコア非表示]  (54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]  (30子コメント)

What does eliminating private prisons have to do with libertarianism?

[–]832drip [スコア非表示]  (16子コメント)

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

[–]jezuitx [スコア非表示]  (11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]  (6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.

[–]ItSaidMakeAUsername [スコア非表示]  (2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.

[–]FreeBroccolinor/mlp/erson [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

With public prisons, everybody loses

Except public prison guard and police unions, which rival private prison companies in how much they lobby to keep the war on drugs going. Curiously, the left-leaning civil libertarians who make a big deal about private prisons never mention them.

[–]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.

[–]R3D1AL [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Despite them being called "private prisons" they aren't operating in the private market. The only "consumer" is the government, and as we've seen in other private-public transactions the government has no incentive to demand low prices and tends to overpay for goods and services.

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

Because he isn't a libertarian, he just has absolutely no idea what he's talking about

[–]eggoChicken [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

he just has absolutely no idea what he's talking about

Yeah libertarian

[–]Brobi_WanKenobi/pol/itician [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh yeah good point, what's the difference

[–]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]  (2子コメント)

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

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

Yeah. Libertarianism is similar to classical liberalism. Si that kind of makes sense. I also am against gun control which is pretty conservative

[–]SenorMcGibblets [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

Anarchists arent against those sorts of services, they just want people to have direct control over them rather than having a government run them. Anarchists are classical libertarians. Libertarians (with a capital L) tend to be against any sort of social services ran by the government, and think those things should be handled by private charity.

[–]Zifnab25 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm sort of libertarian and I love most of the government services.

UR DOIN IT RONG

[–]RadioHitandRun [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

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

[–]yoy21/x/phile [スコア非表示]  (20子コメント)

All the people here saying that private companies would just start up and they would fix the problems being created by mega corporations:

Explain the time period between the industrial revolution and the 1930s. Explain why people didn't start their own small businesses to deal with all the bullshit that large corporations were causing. All the factories that dumped shit into local rivers, no regulation of seatbelts, selling meat tainted with tuberculosis, cramming as many people as you can into a mineshaft with no ventilation. Why didn't other companies spring up to fix that? Why did the government HAVE to step in?

Why was unemployment 25% before the minimum wage?

[–]DrDerpberg [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Though I agree with you, the argument is that there would be private licensing bodies. I guess meat producers would have to pay Joe's Meat Inspection Agency to certify their products.

Depending how libertarian you are I'm not sure what's stopping the meat company from just slapping Joe's approval label on their meat. I guess you'd have to go to the approval agency before buying any products and seeing if they approved of that brand.

IMO the whole thing breaks down very quickly, but the gist of it is that private overseeing agencies would also exist and compete

[–]unixcorn [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Kind of how like private credit rating agencies gave AAA ratings to the highest bidder of junk mortgage bonds during the 2008 crisis?

[–]DrDerpberg [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Well again... I don't believe in this stuff, but the argument is that such organizations would be less trusted and therefore outcompeted by better ones. So if you certify a product that poisons people, your certification isn't worth anything.

My biggest beef with this type of system is that it essentially requires everyone to be an expert and do in-depth research on everything they buy. If you're going to buy eggs, you need to do your research on what verification agencies do a good job on eggs. If you want to redo your driveway, you need to find the trustworthy agency that reviews the manufacture of pavement and gravel. If your kid is sick, you need to check that the bottle of Tylenol you're buying isn't counterfeit and go through all the same agency verification as every other product.

Repeat this at every step of everything you do in a day... society would break down as people start getting poisoned and falling off poorly assembled things and certification agencies duel with each other to appear credible.

[–]Beej67 [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

But without government, who would paint the dead skunks?

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

[–]boogiemanspud [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Am I the only one thinking OP making $800 a month is too high for this scenario? Hell, here in the U.S. we have people making that (probably part time but still).

[–]h35grga [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Just create a new cryptocurrency and premine it and sell it for btc and sell that for USD so you can go to the good hospital, retard.

[–]edxu25 [スコア非表示]  (80子コメント)

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

[–]VodkaBarf/sp/artan [スコア非表示]  (24子コメント)

Gary Johnson is barely a libertarian. He got booed at the convention for saying that people should need a license to drive. He's a Republican thats cool with legalized pot.

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

More than just pot but yeah basically, I think the whole anti-NSA stance is his next best selling point.

[–]seb_fisher [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

He's a Republican that's pro pot, pro gay marriage, pro-abortion and anti-War. Or you could say he's a Democrat that doesn't like spending money.

Either way it's the best of both worlds.

[–]roflz [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's usually called pro-choice, but I get where you were goin'.

[–]Leaves_Swype_Typos [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Except he also wants a flat tax on consumption. That's the big thing scaring me away from him more than any other disagreement. Something like that gets passed, and it'll be hard to fix after it wrecks our shit into an even worse oligarchy.

[–]Plutonium_man [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Are there seriously people out there who think just any random person should be able to drive a car?

They should go live somewhere else

[–]axisofelvis [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Any person can drive a car, on private property. A driver's licence is for driving on municipal property.

[–]wicked-dog [スコア非表示]  (41子コメント)

Libertarian: Everyone should be free to do whatever they want!

Rational Person: What about food safety?

Libertarian: Oh, of course the government would stop people from making poison food.

RP: Are you just going to rely on the government for each thing I bring up, except for the few things you don't like?

Libertarian: Maybe.

RP: Why don't you just argue against the few things you don't like?

Libertarian: Because being a Libertarian is cool.

[–]CalicoJacksRevenge [スコア非表示]  (16子コメント)

You should change 'libertarian' to 'frustrated republican who isn't religious'

That would be more accurate with respect to mainstream libertarianism.

As far as the food

Grow your own. Supplement with food bought from local or other trusted sources.

[–]NicolasMage69 [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

So..what are people in apartments supposed to do? Or people in Arid places that dont have locally grown product?

[–]Akilroth234/fit/izen [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

Starve for being retarded enough to live in New Mexico.

[–]oldneckbeard [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

hey, new mexico is cool. shit all over arizona and texas if you need to shit on someone.

[–]NerfJihad [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Then they hit the other libertarian philosophy:

You starve and die

[–]Tubaka [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

RP: Why don't you just argue against the few things you don't like?

It males them feel smarter than the two party cucks

[–]PaperDesknor/mlp/erson [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

why don't you just argue the few things you don't like?

That's exactly what they're doing. I don't understand what point you're trying to make.

[–]winkingwalnut [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

The point he's making is that libertarians say they essentially want 0 government involvement in the economy and personal lives of citizens, but fail to realize how much the government actually benefits their lives in ways that aren't as controversial

[–]educatethis [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Libertarianism has many crackpots. But in principle, the goal is create laws under which every race and creed can live under, and only works if people are ok with each other being different. Humans are too tribal and barbaric at this time. Ironically, the Libertarian Party shits on anyone in the party that doesn't tow the line. Libertarianism is an unripe fruit at this time.

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

Being a libertarian who recognizes that there are essential functions to a state that only something as large as a government can serve

Being a jew who believes in a flying blue Elephant named Dweezil

[–]NateY3K [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But he does believe that if there's a profit to be made, companies should be able to capitalize on it

[–]Robotigan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Anarchy is the absence of hierarchical power structures, not the absence of government. There can be lots of rules and regulations as long as everyone votes in favor of them.

[–]Xerxesthegreat48/co/mrade [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

This is Black/Yellow politics right here. So yes you are right. It's just there's a name for these policies.

[–]hamsterboy56 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

get taken to the hospital for a small fee of $3000

don't get treated and am left for dead because I don't have the right insurance

Oh wait, that's actually a thing in America. Oops

[–]3manyhumans [スコア非表示]  (59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]  (30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]  (18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.

[–]The-Doctor-94 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think it's because they see libertarianism as the logical step between what we have and what they want v

[–]Hitlerlover_88 [スコア非表示]  (6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]  (5子コメント)

Which is Liberal in name only.

[–]mrducky78/pol/ [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Economic liberalism, social conservatism.

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

[–]MrPibbWasBetter [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Economic liberalism, social conservatism.

As an American, what the fuck? I can't even comprehend that.

[–]FalseCape/v/ [スコア非表示]  (4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]  (1子コメント)

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

[–]pikk [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

They held a gun to my head and took 30% of my earnings! It was LITERALLY theft!

[–]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!

[–]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.

[–]bored_oh [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

ya, just read the wiki page, most are d with governmental institutions like fire dep, police, military and shit

[–]shark127 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You miss out on one major point of the political school of thought on anarchy. In the utopian model the government does not exist because mankind is capable of taking care of themselves without a governing authority. In layman's terms there is no IRS to collect taxes and no cops to arrest you when you don't because society is aware and willing enough to pay for a road due to a common understanding of commune goods.

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

people on /pol/ don't know what they're talking about.

It's called politically incorrect for a reason. The entire point of /pol/ is to offend people. The posters who honestly support Trump and follow the /pol/ hivemind are the ones being trolled.

[–]chumpwithnoname [スコア非表示]  (46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]  (6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.

[–]NorthernLight_ [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Somalia is the opposite of a libertarian utopia. It is the result of so many warlords wanting power that they actually chopped up the country into small blocks mostly controlled by Muslim extremism. Complete totalitarianism for many years followed by corrupted government after a civil war failed to acknowledge a victor, resulting in many governmental people claiming they won and taking up arms in each part of the country and drawing lines.

The only reason people view it as a lawless state was because fisherman got screwed by international governments who made rules that they themselves didn't follow about fishing in Somalia waters, and the Somalian's turned bandits in response-- you have much more organized crime in 1st world countries, doing much worse things.

[–]mortalkonlaw [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

You're right, Somalia's a bad example.

The correct example is Honduras, where ex-Reaganites successfully pushed to enact massive legislation to turn the country into a Libertarian experiment.

It's now the murder capital of the Western Hemisphere.

[–]NorthernLight_ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Are you sure about that? Honduras has a president that is both the head of state and head of government. The power could not be more concentrated. It's current party (Liberal Party of Honduras) has supported vast liberal policies expansions, and the previous 6 presidents have all been liberal in the expansion of government powers and systems. The only thing you said that was partly accurate was that the US helped overthrow the government in 1963. It kicked off a string of military governments (opposite of libertarianism), and is currently a Liberal policy stronghold. It has been called one of the most indebted countries by the World Bank because it took out so many loans (opposite of Libertarian ideas). No where close to anything Libertarian.. maybe you meant another country?

[–]dwarvist [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Somalia is a failed Socialist state undergoing a civil war fought among statists like you. Saying it's libertarian is like saying the rubble of a toppled mosque is 'atheist'.

[–]_BearHawk/b/tard [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

"Excuse me, but this is anarcho capitalism. Please educate yourself on all of the different political systems. God, people are so ignorant."

Wow, I wonder who a lot of people in this thread sound like...

[–]Spitzenhundbi/gd/ick [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

As if a Libertarian society wouldn't just turn into a anarcho-capitalist shithole. Look at the gilded era bro. 4 men had more wealth than the USA and would hire PMC's to kill workers who went on strike.

[–]GueroCabron [スコア非表示]  (63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.

[–]DrinkTheSun [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

just like all the other countries without USDA inspections.

Yeah, in Europe we have even higher standards without USDA.

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

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

Remember big tobacco?

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

It could be a lot worse is the point.

[–]aa24577/mu/ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

i thought the point was that somehow the FDA and food inspection is bad because

muh libertarianism and free market

[–]0342narmak [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It's certainly more common in less developed countries. I mean, Bayer didn't purposely sell HIV tainted products to Americans, after all, just to places like South America and Hong Kong that had much looser regulations. Well, mostly anyways.

The whole thalidomide incident was avoided in America because of the FDA, but thinking about it that was mostly luck. Huh. I can't actually think of a very good success story from the FDA. Actually, they're one of our more mishandled agencies. But they do do a lot better than the slightly more corrupt government agencies in less developed regions.

[–]Civil_Barbarian [スコア非表示]  (34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]  (6子コメント)

But who would build the roads

[–]GueroCabron [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Were there any roads built before countries?

[–]Norgenigga [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Pretty much no, if you mean roads as in trading/travel routes, there has always been a governing or protecting force.

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

if there is a road that is useful and no government controlling it bandits will put a toll on it.

if nobody successfully steps in to stop the bandits they are the government.

its a pretty neat relationship.

[–]MrPibbWasBetter [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Name the countries with little or no food safety laws that aren't complete shit holes.

Go on. We'll wait.

[–]Markioperpe [スコア非表示]  (68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]  (58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]  (20子コメント)

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

[–]easy-morning-rebel [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

It's just a coincidence that seatbelts weren't in cars until regulations were put in place, then suddenly seatbelts were in all cars, completely coincidentally.

[–]mirrorwebcam [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

Volvo and Mercedes were not developing safety equpment because of government regulations that weren't even in place at the time

[–]mortalkonlaw [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Most consumers totally had access to those.

[–]reddeath82 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

You're right they did but did they have access to the amount of money needed to buy those cars?

[–]NateY3K [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Because most people drive Volvos and Mercedes

E: and companies will skip the whole seat belt thing if it means they'll punch a couple extra bucks per car

source: all the car companies that didn't put in seat belts until after it was regulated

[–]ginja_ninja [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

More realistically, seatbelts would turn into a luxury addon. Guarantee your children's safety for only an extra $299! Then again it would probably only take one company to have a commercial campaign about how they "can't put a price on your children's safety" and all models come standard with seatbelts to force every other manufacturer's hand on it, so maybe nothing would change after all.

[–]reddeath82 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Most likely what would happen is the other companies would launch a campaign saying how seatbelts actually kill more people than they save. It's cheaper to slander the other company than it is to put seatbelts in cars and people would fall for it.

[–]mortalkonlaw [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

The railroads refused to invest in the modern railcar coupling system (the "handshake" thing) until forced to by law, even though it saved them money in the long run (it's a stronger connection than the system they'd been using, so you can have longer trains pulled by one engine).

Market failures are very real, and libertarians' usual answers to this are either hand-waving or disingenuous claims that "of course we don't mean that."

[–]zeperf [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

All those CSX train crashes! Everyday! I wish they would try to save money in the long run like you say so that they could be as safe as New York public transit.

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

libertarian utopia

anything being privatised

Has this guy even heard of politics?

[–]aqouta [スコア非表示]  (14子コメント)

anarcho capitalism =/= libertarian. What a load.

[–]NateY3K [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

letting rich people control the market with little to no regulation

not turning into an anarcho-capitalist country

pick one

[–]quelques_heures [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

But you people don't understand!!! Society will be based on mutual contracts and your reputation!!!

/s

[–]Avizard [スコア非表示]  (143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.

[–]Jwolf19 [スコア非表示]  (120子コメント)

A truly free market requires regulation.

[–]jdepps113 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm a libertarian and actually agree with this. And most libertarians would agree, I think, although the anarchists are a very vocal minority.

There has to be a framework of law and order and some kind of government that provides it. I'm a minarchist, and I think anarchists are wrong. Power abhors a vacuum and if you had no government at all you'd just be taken over in short order by a government you don't want, from within or without.

Capitalism works when you have laws and protections, regulation that provides a fair and level playing field, courts where grievances/contract disputes/etc. can be addressed, etc.

A lot of regulation that exists harms the market because it's bad regulation, or overregulation, but that doesn't mean regulation is itself a bad thing. I support sensible environmental regulation, for example. It's necessary.

I'm only on the same team as the anarchists at the moment under the libertarian banner because we all believe in capitalism and want to move things in the same direction, toward less government and more freedom, lower taxes and spending, freer markets. But there would come a point where we'd have to part ways if we started getting what we want past a certain point.

[–]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.

[–]In_Defilade [スコア非表示]  (47子コメント)

Yep. People are rotten. My primary issue with libertarians is they seem to ignore the fact that we are all crooked to some extent.

[–]TheDemonClown [スコア非表示]  (42子コメント)

Same. They say, "Let the free market decide!" on every fucking issue, but they forget that that leads to 80-hr. work weeks, constant poverty wages, and murdering workers who tried to strike, because almost no corporation treats their employees well unless forced to.

[–]Martial_Artiste [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

The thing is, though, most libertarians (full disclosure: I am one) will happily admit that we do need government regulation of the market. What they don't want is the government controlling more than it needs to. Small, limited government, but still government.

[–]PipingHotSoup [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Most libertarians would not happily admit we need regulation.

[–]cysc83 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes they do, look at the current platform on immigration. It's all about regulating it and making it easier to allow workers to LEGALLY work in the U.S. Libertarians are NOT in favor of total government shut down. They want to streamline the processes and keep the government out of our private lives. Really the modern Libertarian platform is more in line with classic Conservatism at least on the economic issues.

[–]Hydrochloric [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

You think this because fucking Anarcho-capitalists are an extremely vocal minority in every libertarian group despite the fact that they do not belong there.

[–]Ligaco/int/olerant [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

People like Milton Friedman argued that crooks are kept in check by other crooks in a free market.

[–]LickitySplit939 [スコア非表示]  (4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.

[–]TheInternetShill [スコア非表示]  (1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.

[–]Hydrochloric [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Average = majority

Do you seriously believe that literally ZERO businesses would be started up to cater to the needs of the majority of the population?

The poor folks are obviously fucked, but the average man would at least have options. If you weren't surviving off of NEET BUX and your parents you would understand this.

[–]Hodor_The_Great [スコア非表示]  (2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.

[–]Diplomjodler [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Wow. That sounds downright sane by 4chan standards.

[–]oiwin123nor/mlp/erson [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Holy shit i dont want to be a libertarian anymore

[–]Charles_McManson [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

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

[–]parko4 [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Lol 4chan is so autistic they don't know the difference between anarchy and libertarianism.

[–]thermitethrowaway/g/entooman [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Simple: Anarchists think no one should be in charge. Libertarians think someone should be in charge, but in charge of nothing.

[–]dwarvist [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Right, because without government:

no one would bother to take the next logical step in improving telecommunications, in spite of the massive profits to be made.

food companies with a reputation for poisoning customers would get LOTS of repeat business.

people worried about getting in car accidents would choose not wear a seat belt just because it isn't 'required'.

with more job choices available, people would naturally accept worse terms of employment.

with greater competition in the marketplace, education, unlike literally everything else, would become less available and more expensive.

private police would have no incentive whatsoever to protect you, in spite of the fact that this is the ONLY reason anybody hires them. Unlike government police, who get paid the same whether they protect you, ignore you, or shoot you in the back.

the lack of labor laws would cap your income at $800 a month exactly, and wouldn't make it easier for employers, especially small ones, to hire you. You would obviously choose to work for the company that offers to treat you the worst.

private police wouldn't always stop you from getting stabbed, unlike government police, who are literally jumping in front of blades all the time. Totally no stabbings when there's a government.

40 private hospitals show up on google maps but naturally you'd pick the one that has only one star due to poor sanitation.

who the hell else would be willing to enforce fraudulent employment contracts?

/S

[–]Kitkat69/pol/itician [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Wow didn't know libertarians were anarchists. Thanks for the info OP!