An Anti-Libertarian FAQ Worth Talking About?

[foo barf]

you're right the government through fractional reserve banking retained control of inflation but, the 'new right' at the time had little motivation for retaining much aside from control of that. the successive governments spent most of their legislative changes on undoing the mess.

correct you are; our worker rights and labour laws did take a hit, there was introduction of a special 'youth minimum wage' that was effectively slave wages. public land like nature reserves and national parks went up for auction, and abolition of public health-care and education was slated before the brakes were put on the regime. but whats worse is that this same 'new right' type of movement have grip on our current parliament. there is a libertarian party called ACT who are absolutely fucking crazy, racist, corrupt, homophobic and somehow they still get votes. people think they'll get rich by paying less tax probably...

[1713402903]

1713402903

[1713402903]

1713402903

[Anonymous]

If people voluntarily accept "slave wages", how are they "slave wages" at all?

[Garrett Burgwardt]

Again, from what I read the ACT party isn't libertarian, it's simply 'more' free market, though not really.

The important distinction is the moral basis for changes.

I thought this source did a good job explaining things-

http://www.freeradical.co.nz/content/44/sturm.php

[foo barf]

@Atlas; because slaves did voluntarily board boats, were usually paid, fed and housed. what flavour of kool-aid did you get in school?

thanks for sharing that link, and i stand to be corrected. postjudice is important, i'm sure not all libertarians are crazy assholes and i don't wish to make any such impression.

ACT's supporters are dominantly conservative 'new-righters' or self-professed libertarians and what they say is frequently different to what they do - they are corrupt from top to bottom. the Libertarianz party is just a joke that no-one is laughing at, they can't even spell. ACT are free market extremists in economic policy - don't let their stated policy fool you, and they are amoral as that essay points out. it is this amorality derived from a 'survival of the fittest' attitude inherent in libertarianism that i take exception to. this cannot be logically excluded without undermining the basic tenet of liberty it endows.

to say rogernomics was not libertarian just doesn't meet with the reality, if one argues that it was too 'watered-down' in economic policy to be libertarian and that the reforms of rogernomics did not go far enough, it just emboldens the problems with free market policy and libertarianism, some need reminding, is free market extremism with a dash of liberty-flavoured kool aid.

[Anonymous]

New Zealand had a government the whole time. Thats the reason for the whole mess not the "free market".

This allows corporations to control the policies of the country imo.

With no state you dont have to worry about the "nwo"  either.

Libertarianism has been co-opted these days by the mainstream political parties and stands for nothing. Look at Bob Barr in the US for example - a former mainstream politician = fail.

It is used to dirty the name of true liberty and market freedom - a false flag if you will.

[marcus_of_augustus]

foo barf is full of crap ... NZ had its best economic growth in decades after the free market reforms ... only since the heavily communistic Labour has come to power for 9 years of stick-your-nose-up-your-neighbours-bottom has standard of living gone backwards again.

... central planning doesn't work foo barf, Soviet russia was a complete failure, get over it, communism lost ... socialism is bullshit too ... there is no incentive for the individual to excell when everybody owns each others shit, come back into the real world ... get off the dole and get a life. Socialist bludgers blight NZ, we have more than 10% of the population on some sort of "social welfare" and god knows how many working in useless govt. departments that do nothing ... and they are always screaming for more hand-outs and more taxes ... it really is theft ... but the bludgers who don't earn it don't see it like that ... no surprises there.

foo barf is an embarassment to NZ, he should move to N.Korea where socialism is working out the way he likes.

[foo barf]

New Zealand had a government the whole time. Thats the reason for the whole mess not the "free market".

This allows corporations to control the policies of the country imo.

With no state you dont have to worry about the "nwo"  either.

Libertarianism has been co-opted these days by the mainstream political parties and stands for nothing. Look at Bob Barr in the US for example - a former mainstream politician = fail.

It is used to dirty the name of true liberty and market freedom - a false flag if you will.

thanks for jumping into the discussion, but holy crap, you're quite wrong and i'd like to tell you why. some prerequisite study may be required, adam curtis has a number of documentaries that may enlighten you. i recommend 'the century of the self', and by the way, Alex Jones' filmography is not a reliable source for anything other than claims of "OBAMA BLEW UP THE TOWERS" or "THEY TOOK MY JOBS", "DERKA DERR", etc.

• having less, or no government cements the power of financial institutions and corporations.
• zero government means zero public opinion in matters of public interest
• the NWO is not (originally) a government organisation, it comes from economic schools of thought and actually opposes government regulation of financial markets
• with no state to keep them in check, the NWO or any other syndicate, like the many before and after Leo Strauss and NWO, are free to reign

what do you think the real problem is in institutions? it's power and it's misuse, not the fact the institution exists, saying that is just naive.

[foo barf]

foo barf is full of crap ... NZ had its best economic growth in decades after the free market reforms ... only since the heavily communistic Labour has come to power for 9 years of stick-your-nose-up-your-neighbours-bottom has standard of living gone backwards again.

... central planning doesn't work foo barf, Soviet russia was a complete failure, get over it, communism lost ... socialism is bullshit too ... there is no incentive for the individual to excell when everybody owns each others shit, come back into the real world ... get off the dole and get a life. Socialist bludgers blight NZ, we have more than 10% of the population on some sort of "social welfare" and god knows how many working in useless govt. departments that do nothing ... and they are always screaming for more hand-outs and more taxes ... it really is theft ... but the bludgers who don't earn it don't see it like that ... no surprises there.

foo barf is an embarassment to NZ, he should move to N.Korea where socialism is working out the way he likes.

hey moa, it's nice of you to offer your input too, even if you're totally wrong to define 10% of the country being on social welfare as a "blight". kia ora.

it's a shame that you're not willing to gain insight into the world of economics, politics and the corridors of power. i'm proud to speak my mind, accept when i am wrong and not regurgitate the same ad hominem that was cliche even in the 1950s. if you want to be proven wrong, stick around and i can teach you about New Zealand's biggest success story, Fonterra, and how it used the Rochdale principles that were derived from socialist -style policies to build it into one of the worlds most influential corporations... or just go back to your forex trading.. quick, a domestic inflation rate changed!

[kiba]

i live in a small country that for nearly a decade tried in earnest (against the wishes of the public) to reform it's economic policy towards that of full-free-market economics. we were an experiment for the NWO in the 1980 and 1990s and we suffered. a direct consequence of this free-market reform was falling wages, soaring unemployment and social disorder. thats right, i live in a place where libertarian-style free market economics is widely known to be a failure, except in libertarian groups... forgive me for being so passionate, i intend no insult, it's just that this crazy idea of 'free' or completely deregulated markets actually cost many hard-working people their livelihoods.

If you don't try to explain why it doesn't work, then it's not a good argument.

if you're insulted by a tricky question, that reflects more upon your character than mine, i was asking sincerely why you believe in libertarianism.

I can't exactly read your mind, here. Just know that I don't consider it nice to insult other people's position in a rational discussion.

Libertarianism is what I considered an ethical philosophy that's somewhat cohorent. As a result, I derive voluntarism from there.

My real loyalty lies with rationality above all else. I must learn the truth.

and what exactly would satisfy you in your quest for examples and proof? is logical deduction from fact not enough? is scientific method, experiment, observation and re-modeling of the hypothesis not enough? is quoting Albert Einstein not enough? (you missed that lecture apparently) i don't consider you my opponent either, but drawing lines is exactly the type of behaviour that degrades this discourse.

You didn't supplied logical deduction or anything. Emperical evidence doesn't mean much to me if you don't explain what's going on there. You supplied a conclusion. All I am asking you is to back it up with a mechanism to explain why is it happening.

[kiba]

New Zealand had a government the whole time. Thats the reason for the whole mess not the "free market".

This allows corporations to control the policies of the country imo.

With no state you dont have to worry about the "nwo"  either.

Libertarianism has been co-opted these days by the mainstream political parties and stands for nothing. Look at Bob Barr in the US for example - a former mainstream politician = fail.

It is used to dirty the name of true liberty and market freedom - a false flag if you will.

You're just stating stuff without backing your argument up.

[kiba]

it is this amorality derived from a 'survival of the fittest' attitude inherent in libertarianism that i take exception to. this cannot be logically excluded without undermining the basic tenet of liberty it endows.

This is simply a nonsensical attribution to libertarianism. I don't take that position and I am not aware of libertarians in this forum taking this position.

[kiba]

foo barf is full of crap ... NZ had its best economic growth in decades after the free market reforms ... only since the heavily communistic Labour has come to power for 9 years of stick-your-nose-up-your-neighbours-bottom has standard of living gone backwards again.

foo barf is an embarassment to NZ, he should move to N.Korea where socialism is working out the way he likes.

Poor argument against foo barf. Just statement of conclusions.

[kiba]

hey moa, it's nice of you to offer your input too, even if you're totally wrong to define 10% of the country being on social welfare as a "blight". kia ora.

it's a shame that you're not willing to gain insight into the world of economics, politics and the corridors of power. i'm proud to speak my mind, accept when i am wrong and not regurgitate the same ad hominem that was cliche even in the 1950s. if you want to be proven wrong, stick around and i can teach you about New Zealand's biggest success story, Fonterra, and how it used the Rochdale principles that were derived from socialist -style policies to build it into one of the worlds most influential corporations... or just go back to your forex trading.. quick, a domestic inflation rate changed!

Don't just say that your economic policies is successful. Explain why and prove us wrong.

(for the record, I do not have opportunity to look through the wikipedia article...will soon)

[marcus_of_augustus]

I'm just happy that a hard crypto-currency like bitcoin has become a reality.

It will end all the socialist schemes and communistic central planning (banking) nightmares we are living through (Greece, Ireland, Portugal, USA, China). They are all based at their root on stealing other people's earnings and the way they get that is primarily through fiat currency and central banking. Otherwise they will need to use taxes and guns and today's socialists don't have the guts to get behind a gun and demand the gold like their evil founders and predecessors did.

Bitcoin spells the end to coercive socialism and for that I am thankful, it is the beginning of the end for a black period in human history.

Btw, Open Country is kicking fonterras sad socialist bum in the provinces, do your own research with the real farmers.

[kiba]

Btw, Open Country is kicking fonterras sad socialist bum in the provinces, do your own research with the real farmers.

If this Open Country is kicking fonterras sad socialist bum...why don't you supply us with information? If he's wrong, it should be no problem for you.

I still am trying to consume TheKidz's article. Also, wikipedia doesn't not gave me much other than bad consequences of said reform.

[foo barf]

If you don't try to explain why it doesn't work, then it's not a good argument.

you've been told; what, why, where, when and how! i'm not sure what else I can do to satisfy your thirst for esoteric proof. this is not wikipedia or an essay, this is a discussion forum and I am free to divulge fact and history without footnotes. i'm not presenting a typical argument here, either. these are just cold hard facts. moa would probably tell you Rogernomics was great for New Zealand, the spend-up on infrastructure got us well-engineered roads and did away with some frivolous bureaucracies (like a politically independent treasury.....), the welfare sponges are useless eaters, ayn rand was a good author, etc. it's truely saddening to see people such as moa, so eager and willing to repeat history's mistakes.

issues with roger douglas' free market first became serious when restrictions on offshore investment were removed. there are books on this subject in new zealand libraries. with the advent of forex and 24 hour trading, HUGE short positions were taken on the new zealand dollar sending it down and putting food prices into uncertain territory. our current prime minister, John Key, at the time an investment banker, had a personal hand in these short positions that damaged our exchange rate. it doesn't stop there though, building standards were lowered in the interest of liberalising the market which lead to cheap houses, so poorly constructed they are unfit for habitation; and it's still a problem today. we know for fact, the cost of free market economics is greater than what it saves; there is no ROI for your taxes in such a system. but, free markets are supposed to be good and introduce efficiency, right? is the claimed efficiency worth it when you wake up in a hospital bed with a $20,000 bill because the nearest hospital was private?

I don't consider it nice to insult other people's position in a rational discussion.

well we can't be logical all of the time, its a socratic problem. faith is an illogical belief, and unless you can justify every point of logic to an ideology you are relegated to having faith in it. i don't mean to insult, in contrast i welcome people to question my beliefs.

libertarianism is illogical in the context of human values because of it's lack of social policy other than "just don't steal" - which isn't very anarchic anyway. prohibition is required in society, it means i can't rape your wife. libertarianism isn't all crap, it just totally fails when it comes to policy on altruism, finance, deviance and crime, and only faith in the ideology can tell you otherwise. the logic to omission of prohibition does not conclude that every individual would not engage in a deviant activity if permitted to do so. therefore, you need police, social welfare and et cetera or you have anarchy, in a non-philosophical definition. don't get me wrong i love molitov's as much as the next guy, but personal wealth (ie; greed) should not cost social disorder.

You didn't supplied logical deduction or anything. Emperical evidence doesn't mean much to me if you don't explain what's going on there. You supplied a conclusion. All I am asking you is to back it up with a mechanism to explain why is it happening.

deduction is simple reasoning. sorry if i havn't supplied enough for you yet.

[kiba]

you've been told; what, why, where, when and how! i'm not sure what else I can do to satisfy your thirst for esoteric proof. this is not wikipedia or an essay, this is a discussion forum and I am free to divulge fact and history without footnotes.

You didn't told me how. You told me your interpretation of what's happening in Zealand! I still don't understand what's going on. They are merely mysterious answers to mysterious questions. Not acceptable.

but, free markets are supposed to be good and introduce efficiency, right? is the claimed efficiency worth it when you wake up in a hospital bed with a $20,000 bill because the nearest hospital was private?

Again. They are results. You didn't explain why it's going down. Why did the market fail to provide regulations of building code?

well we can't be logical all of the time, its a socratic problem. faith is an illogical belief, and unless you can justify every point of logic to an ideology you are relegated to having faith in it. i don't mean to insult, in contrast i welcome people to question my beliefs.

This is a non-issue. Do you wish to be rational about this discussion or not?

libertarianism is illogical in the context of human values because of it's lack of social policy other than "just don't steal" - which isn't very anarchic anyway. prohibition is required in society, it means i can't rape your wife. libertarianism isn't all crap, it just totally fails when it comes to policy on altruism, finance, deviance and crime, and only faith in the ideology can tell you otherwise. the logic to omission of prohibition does not conclude that every individual would not engage in a deviant activity if permitted to do so. therefore, you need police, social welfare and et cetera or you have anarchy, in a non-philosophical definition. don't get me wrong i love molitov's as much as the next guy, but personal wealth (ie; greed) should not cost social disorder.

How does libertarianism totally failed on altruism, finance, deviance, and crime? What's deviance to you?

deduction is simple reasoning. sorry if i havn't supplied enough for you yet.

Look, either you provide the goods, or you do not. You didn't, so your arguments suck.

[foo barf]

I'm just happy that a hard crypto-currency like bitcoin has become a reality.

It will end all the socialist schemes and communistic central planning (banking) nightmares we are living through (Greece, Ireland, Portugal, USA, China). They are all based at their root on stealing other people's earnings and the way they get that is primarily through fiat currency and central banking. Otherwise they will need to use taxes and guns and today's socialists don't have the guts to get behind a gun and demand the gold like their evil founders and predecessors did.

Bitcoin spells the end to coercive socialism and for that I am thankful, it is the beginning of the end for a black period in human history.

Btw, Open Country is kicking fonterras sad socialist bum in the provinces, do your own research with the real farmers.

just how is Bitcoin/<crypto-currency> going to kick the asses of these 'communistic' keynesian systems?
yes... taxes bad guns good and weak socialists bad, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed apparently.

[foo barf]

Again. They are results. You didn't explain why it's going down. Why did the market fail to provide regulations of building code?

Because of an ideological push for free market reform that comes from camps like libertarians. I linked 'Rogernomics' to you, I suggest you read it before claiming I didn't provide you with enough proof. A truely free market would have zero building codes, and permit this type of scenario to continue unabated.

Look, either you provide the goods, or you do not. You didn't, so your arguments suck.

libertarianism is a childish philosophy that will get society nowhere. you're either part of the problem or part of the solution, i choose the latter.

[kiba]

Because of an ideological push for free market reform that comes from camps like libertarians. I linked 'Rogernomics' to you, I suggest you read it before claiming I didn't provide you with enough proof. A truely free market would have zero building codes, and permit this type of scenario to continue unabated.

I read the wikipedia link. It was not very satisfactory. I want to know an account of why is it happening, not just what happening.

Also, home insurance companies can provide building code, because it's in their interest in reducing the likelihood of a fire so that they don't have to pay the homeowner. They could increase premium if homeowner do not have a house that comply with the building code. They will reward homeowners that comply with the building code of the company. So the whole idea of free markets don't provide regulations is a bunch of nonsense.

libertarianism is a childish philosophy that will get society nowhere. you're either part of the problem or part of the solution, i choose the latter.

You can keep saying it's a childish philosophy. That doesn't make it true.