So, let me get this straight...

[Anonymous]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

Some kids get mad and they are protesting Wall Street for playing by the rules?

...and getting bailed out by the same government that's supposed to be keeping them in their place?

Yeah, it makes perfect sense. It's not like the government is supposed to be a force that's accountable towards its constituents or anything.

Let's all play victim with the government included and beg our corporate masters to set us free.

[1713253583]

1713253583

[1713253583]

1713253583

[FirstAscent]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

So you're in favor of regulations if they do the right thing, then?

[Anonymous]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

So you're in favor of regulations if they do the right thing, then?

They won't ever do the right thing. If you have a monopoly on force, it's just a magnet for manipulation. Regulations will only be social engineering to create bigger companies and bigger bureaucracy. A regulation today is just an exemption and a monopoly for somebody else.

Look at our drug wars. The asinine violence and murder only continues because the cartel lobbies the politicians to keep the status quo in place.

The rules are created only for those who desire power. The people will only be given the upper-hand when order is not determined by a purportedly wise few but directly by the populace itself; not through direct mob-rule democracy but by where all whims are addressed in terms of accountable and sustainable value.  

[NghtRppr]

Who has more time, money and incentive to lobby politicians, the fascist corporations or Joe Q. Everyman?

[Rassah]

Sounds about right to me. Nice was of putting it, too.

[Andrew Bitcoiner]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

Some kids get mad and they are protesting Wall Street for playing by the rules?

[Political theater.]

...and getting bailed out by the same government that's supposed to be keeping them in their place?

Yeah, it makes perfect sense. It's not like the government is supposed to be a force that's accountable towards its constituents or anything.

You have to be kidding me.  Government isn't accountable to anything but an act of God (a legal term).  And their will still be a government long after everyone have departed the earth.

[hmongotaku]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

Some kids get mad and they are protesting Wall Street for playing by the rules?

...and getting bailed out by the same government that's supposed to be keeping them in their place?

Yeah, it makes perfect sense. It's not like the government is supposed to be a force that's accountable towards its constituents or anything.

Let's all play victim with the government included and beg our corporate masters to set us free.

Wall street never played fair man. The banks were hiding the mortgage debt as write-off and selling them as loans. Insider trading scandals, phone hacking. . Obese car industry whom fail to get with the times. Selling SUVs and trucks when no one can afford gas. America sold Wall street awhile ago if you didn't hear the news, and never hit 20,000 since.

[FreeMoney]

And their will still be a government long after everyone have departed the earth.

I'm really having trouble picturing this. Like other species will wear uniforms and boss each other around?

[Anonymous]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

Some kids get mad and they are protesting Wall Street for playing by the rules?

...and getting bailed out by the same government that's supposed to be keeping them in their place?

Yeah, it makes perfect sense. It's not like the government is supposed to be a force that's accountable towards its constituents or anything.

Let's all play victim with the government included and beg our corporate masters to set us free.

Wall street never played fair man. The banks were hiding the mortgage debt as write-off and selling them as loans. Insider trading scandals, phone hacking. . Obese car industry whom fail to get with the times. Selling SUVs and trucks when no one can afford gas. America sold Wall street awhile ago if you didn't hear the news, and never hit 20,000 since.

The banks wouldn't have the incentive to do that if the government wasn't their to bail them out. Insider trading is only enabled by government regulation. It's not a crime unto itself. If people want SUVs and trucks, that's what they will buy. If the government didn't subsidize oil and bail-out failing car companies, we might have more diverse customer interest.

[FredericBastiat]

They won't ever do the right thing. If you have a monopoly on force, it's just a magnet for manipulation. Regulations will only be social engineering to create bigger companies and bigger bureaucracy. A regulation today is just an exemption and a monopoly for somebody else.

Look at our drug wars. The asinine violence and murder only continues because the cartel lobbies the politicians to keep the status quo in place.

The rules are created only for those who desire power. The people will only be given the upper-hand when order is not determined by a purportedly wise few but directly by the populace itself; not through direct mob-rule democracy but by where all whims are addressed in terms of accountable and sustainable value.  

I like that, "one man's regulation is another man's monopoly".

It ought to give pause to all of those politicians out there who think they're doing society a favor, when in fact the laws they write, do nothing more than accrue power to the (s)elect few.

[johnyj]

Current law does have some justice when it comes to force, it can protect people with less force, but it can not protect people with less intelligence, so in that sense human are still very savvy, slaughter each other by using intelligence

[GideonGono]

The government forms some regulations over the past century or so and by coincidence or some act of misfortune, the corporations--the same ones to be impeded by these regulations--use them to their advantage and fuck everybody else over.

Some kids get mad and they are protesting Wall Street for playing by the rules?

...and getting bailed out by the same government that's supposed to be keeping them in their place?

Yeah, it makes perfect sense. It's not like the government is supposed to be a force that's accountable towards its constituents or anything.

Let's all play victim with the government included and beg our corporate masters to set us free.

Not to mention the govt then sends out it's henchmen Kops to beat the shit out of said protesters.

[JA37]

Who has more time, money and incentive to lobby politicians, the fascist corporations or Joe Q. Everyman?

According to you in a few previous threads that would be "Joe Q. Everyman".
I distinctly remember that "Big Bad Security Inc" would be outmatched in every way by "Nice Peoples Security Inc" if we ever got to a libertarian society.

[NghtRppr]

Who has more time, money and incentive to lobby politicians, the fascist corporations or Joe Q. Everyman?

According to you in a few previous threads that would be "Joe Q. Everyman".
I distinctly remember that "Big Bad Security Inc" would be outmatched in every way by "Nice Peoples Security Inc" if we ever got to a libertarian society.

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

[JA37]

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

So in an libertarian society people do have a chance to stand against large, well funded organizations, but in the current society it's impossible? Correct?

[NghtRppr]

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

So in an libertarian society people do have a chance to stand against large, well funded organizations, but in the current society it's impossible? Correct?

It's not impossible, just a lot harder. When power is concentrated in the hands of a select few people, it's a lot easier to bribe them all.

[Hawker]

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

So in an libertarian society people do have a chance to stand against large, well funded organizations, but in the current society it's impossible? Correct?

It's not impossible, just a lot harder. When power is concentrated in the hands of a select few people, it's a lot easier to bribe them all.

But the rich will have their own armies in a libertarian society, possibly funded by foreign powers. 

[NghtRppr]

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

So in an libertarian society people do have a chance to stand against large, well funded organizations, but in the current society it's impossible? Correct?

It's not impossible, just a lot harder. When power is concentrated in the hands of a select few people, it's a lot easier to bribe them all.

But the rich will have their own armies in a libertarian society, possibly funded by foreign powers. 

And? What's your point?

[Hawker]

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

So in an libertarian society people do have a chance to stand against large, well funded organizations, but in the current society it's impossible? Correct?

It's not impossible, just a lot harder. When power is concentrated in the hands of a select few people, it's a lot easier to bribe them all.

But the rich will have their own armies in a libertarian society, possibly funded by foreign powers. 

And? What's your point?

Good luck lobbying people with guns.

[NghtRppr]

That makes no sense. Lobbying politicians isn't something that can happen in a libertarian society because there would be no state. How can anyone be better in a nonexistent activity? Derp.

So in an libertarian society people do have a chance to stand against large, well funded organizations, but in the current society it's impossible? Correct?

It's not impossible, just a lot harder. When power is concentrated in the hands of a select few people, it's a lot easier to bribe them all.

But the rich will have their own armies in a libertarian society, possibly funded by foreign powers. 

And? What's your point?

Good luck lobbying people with guns.

What's that supposed to mean? Can you please put forth a complete thought?