Capitalism as pictured by Adam Smith:
"Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man, or order of men. The sovereign is completely discharged from a duty, in the attempting to perform which he must always be exposed to innumerable delusions, and for the proper performance of which no human wisdom or knowledge could ever be sufficient; the duty of superintending the industry of private people, and of directing it towards the employments most suitable to the interest of the society." - Wealth of Nation, Chapter 9.

How to be free from debt slavery? Ron Paul Secretary of State and Lew Rockwell (NOT Jacob Lew) at Treasury

David Friedman - Libertarianism: Machinery of Freedom 2nd edition: Daviddfriedman.com

Two Treaties by John Locke - Socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill - Bit.ly

The Use of Knowledge in Society by Friedrich Hayek - Bit.ly

--

Rise of the Cultural Libertarians - Breitbart.com

Ayn Rand - Objectivism vs Altruism - Moddb.com

What Is the Alt-Right? - Moddb.com

Ron Paul and the six kinds of libertarianism - Youtube.com

Economics in One Lesson by Walter Block - Youtube.com

Scandinavian Unexceptionalism: Culture Markets and the Failure of the Third Way Socialism - Iea.org.uk

Most influential 'tid bits' of wisdom concentrated into a small number of books.

Balthazar Grecian - 'Manual Oracle' and 'Criticon',
Eich Fromm - 'Escape from Freedom and Mentally Healthy Society',
Laroshfuco - 'Maxims and Moral Reflections',
Blez Pascal - 'Thoughts',
Jean de Labruer - 'Characters',
V. - 'Mafia Manager',
Bernd Conradi and P Talkenberger - 'Spitzenvercaufer',
Sayings of Confucius
Marcus Aurelius - Meditations
Sun Tzu - 'The Art of War'
Machiavelli - 'The Prince'
Plato - 'Meno' and 'The Republic'
Aristotle - 'Politics' and 'Rhetoric'
Friedrich Nietzsche - 'Thus Spake Zarathustra'

Jean-Louis Panné - 'Big Black Book of Communism'
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - 'The Gulag Archipelago'
-note: since the left could no longer win, they decided to import people who will reliably vote left (ie Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965).
Dr. Joseph Goebbels - 'Communism with the Mask Off '
Gunter Reimann - 'The Vampire Economy'
Carroll Quigley - 'Trajedy and Hope' - freely available here
Sam Walton - 'Made In America'
Ayn Rand - 'Atlas Shrugged'
Jim Nelson Black - 'When Nations Die: Ten Warning Signs of a Culture in Crisis'
The Truth About The Fall of Rome: Modern Parallels | Stefan Molyneux
G. Edward Griffin - "The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve"
Ellen Hodgson Brown - "Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth about Our Money System 5th Revised ed"
John Perkins - "Confessions of a Economic Hitman"
Thomas Sowell - 'Intellectuals and Society'
-note: reveals how few intellectuals have changed their views, even after evidence has firmly contradicted their views & produced major consequences in the pursuit of those views.
Vox Day - Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America
CULTURAL MARXISM: The Corruption of America
M. Stanton Evans - 'Blacklisted by History - the Untold Story of Senator McCarthy Evans'
Ann Coulter - 'Mugged'

Murray Rothbard - 'An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought'
-note: teaches the core concepts of economics from a historical perspective.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe - 'The Economics and Ethics of Private Property' & ''Democracy: The God That Failed'
-note: This is the author that made the basis for the argument of physical removal.
Michael Huemer - 'The Problem of Political Authority'
-note: NAP has exceptions, but the author assigns the burden of argument to anyone who wants to justify aggression. It's up to people to justify why any number of state programs they would recognize as immoral for an individual are somehow moral for a state.
The Evolution of the Parasitical Class: Past, Present and Future |Stefan Molyneux
Peter Schiff - 'How an Economy Grows and Why it Crashes'
Mary Ruwart - 'Healing Our World' (new edition is called 'The Compassion of Libertarianism')
-note: explains how govt healthcare has been killing people for over 50 years.
Milton Friedman - Socialized Medicine
Charlotte Iserbyt - 'Back to Basics Reform or... OBE *Skinnerian International Curriculum?'
The Facts About Spanking | Stefan Molyneux
The Truth About Single Moms | Stefan Molyneux
Towards an understanding of Mental Illness - Thomas Insel TEDTALKS

Aldous Huxley - 'Brave New World'
-note: warned of 'scientific dictatorship', despotism under technocracy, it was based on real illumanitism, social darwinism and globalist idealogy.
H.G Wells - '1984'
-note: less refined version of globalism that warned of censorship, secret police, surveillance state & thought control.
Dr David Duke - 'Jewish Supremacy' & 'The Secret Behind Communism' links here and here
Protocols of Zion - 1903
Hitler - 'Mein Kampf' (Ford Translation)
Tacitus - 'Germania'
Julius Evola - 'Revolt Against the Modern World' and 'Ride the Tiger'
Steve McNallen - 'Asatru: A Native European Spirituality'
William Gayley Simpson - 'Which Way Western Man?'
Kevin MacDonald - 'Culture of Critique'
Yuri Slezkine - 'The Jewish Century'
William Morris' - 'News From Nowhere'
Francis P Yockey's - 'Imperium'
Corneliu Zelea - 'Codreanu's For My Legionaries'
Mike King's - 'The Bad War'
David Irving - 'Hitlers War'
Viktor Suvorov - 'Icebreaker' & watch his lecture
Arthur Kemp - 'March of The Titans'
Leon Degrelle - 'Story of The Waffen SS'

Edward Feser - 'Scholastic Metaphysics' and 'Aquinas: A Beginner's Guide'
Michael Augros - 'Who Designed the Designer'
Thomas Aquinas - 'Summa Theologica'
Cicero - 'On the Nature of the Gods'
Bahagahtvah Gita
Patraic Colum - 'Nordic Gods and Heroes'
Homer - 'Iliad' and 'Odyssey'
Grimm's Fairy Tales

  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
Post article RSS Articles
A few thoughts about money...

A few thoughts about money...

News 8 comments

First article yay =)! Baby steps... What defines money? Is money the root of all evil, and if so, what is the root of money?

Comments  (0 - 10 of 57)
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

stock crash incoming: Businessinsider.com.au and ObamaCare bubble: Thehill.com

Reply Good karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

What's the answer then? De-regulation? Isn't in there something substantially wrong? I mean how do you actually prevent a crash? Is it not by avoiding it? Then why so many dogmas around the benefits of laissez-faire and the evilness of the State? Don't we all know already what the years of the Irish famine were? Liberty above all - for those who died from starvation in there maybe. Minarchism? Sure. Where did it happen? How it will be enforced? Didn't the American anarchists tried an economical alternative and failed in 3 months? Not even to mention the Paris Comune (is there a better historical example of an actual free market? Just think about it first...).

I feel there is too much David Ricardo BS combined with an irrational Say's Law in this so called "libertarianism" - bottom line: it's nothing else than ideological Neo-Liberalism (ipsis verbis) where the moral and philosophical principles are already in Lock's "Two treaties".

I really would like to know how the State will be removed without any kinds of Mafia taking place. What is the State to be replaced with? Kantian Ethics?

Thank you

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

Capitalism has always worked mate. Socialist Anarchist have had a few societies, some lasted a hundred years but most not so much. Arguments against communal distribution economic & worker based political alternatives w/o govt is fine arguments but I'm not too interested in that. Don't care so much about those anarchist arguments because I'm far more libertarian/ancap, border security, protectionism, objectivism & identitarianism ie I'm talking about private property rights, golden rule and a duty to uphold contracts, as well as a preservation of western culture/race against those who try and undermine it, ALOT of enemies of specifically anti-white in nature and massive hypocrisy going on criticizing white ethno-nationalism but not asian ethno-nationalism or black nationalism etc.

The propaganda against de-regulation, that deregulation was behind financial crashes is false. The same people that are against de-regulation of businesses are the same ones for 'free trade', open borders & other anti-freedom positions. They are selective about what should be regulated and what they don't want for good reason. They pretend that all this regulation is necessary while selling out all of the jobs overseas to the 1% & hiring cheap labor. Even when refugees/migrants do increase wages, due to a massive increased in inflation we see that adjusted for inflation... wages GO DOWN. Its the same reason why I argue that we haven't become more wealthy due to massive reduction in purchasing power parity and massive rise in debt, personal, public & private. We've never had capitalism without corporatism ie govts giving favours to big business, why they are keeping their anti-competitive edge is explained by game theory. Always looking for differential advantage and being in bed with govt provides a MASSIVE return for the time investment because thats how much power govt has.

The way that liberty is enforced is by the govt not regulating the private businesses except protectionism from foreign competitors & MNC's who are just as bad as govts. ie The ability for people to freely enter into contracts and seek resolution through private courts/arbitration. There is zero reason to have the govt enforce contracts & torts, to be involved at all with business. Its all an excuse to get campaign donations and to keep a small minority of elite in power. The way that you keep capitalism aflot is by maintaining a high IQ mostly ethnically homogeneous society. Without the govt fueled media propaganda machine, jew controlled hollywood and zionist central bankers who maintain their monopoly through the Federal Reserve act & liberal controlled universities who get massive grants/subsidies from the govt hence their pro-govt leaning, then this pro-freedom oriented values can be maintained.

The only reason it moves left slowly over time is because of govt involvement, well that conservatives haven't really had identity politics until recently with the alt-right and nationalist uprising going on right now world wide. The libertarians wish to take govt out by spreading values, morals, criticising statism (theres alot to criticise there :D) and wise freemarket economics .... not to be confused with 'free trade' a globalist propaganda that is inseparable from free movement of people ie their real agenda that is totally for the benefit of the 1% and connected to economic unions which turn into political unions like EU to erode sovereignty. Do I know for certain that a lasseiz fair system can work? No, but I do know that capitalism works, its the only way to stop intergenerational poverty. The single biggest predictor of intergenerational poverty is single motherhood. Thats due to welfare incentives, a disincentive due to pro-mother bias in the family court system & state incentives to rule in favor of one person in disputes when that should be 100% about EQUAL CUSTODY, & I also know that neo-liberalism has caused unemployment of more than 15% due to its free trade aspect & never getting rid of the regulations entirely that make it hard to compete. Taxes is theft but to maintain protectionism/border security we can still have tariffs which has worked in the past & historically had little opposition.

Historically the 'big bosses' have gained power through politics & police corruption brought about through policies like prohibition and later 20th century war on drugs. These policies failed because they cannot be enforced, and even if they could the private market could regulate its production/use rather than having only the criminal element control everything & those positions of 'legitimate' use of force. Fraud and ponzi schemes can be exposed as they are with any system that can freely distribute and access information.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

We had something close to minarchism basically before 1913, it has not been a constitutional republic of small govt since then with central bankers funding all of the wars. Isolationism or no foreign entanglements was a fine idea ruined by old money & money printing backing all of the major wars. Allowing a small elite to continually re-enter politics and keep power without the trouble of having to gain public favor since they can always get financial support & go on a insane govt spending spree to buy votes. Essentially everything they promised for everyone, including the regulations/taxes big businesses want since they can avoid them through legal expertise or through loop holes while their competitors CANNOT. Due having no solvable gold backed currency but rather a debt based one, this madness continues. Since there is no freemarket of currency, everyone has to deal in national currency, that is until crypto-currency but there are insidious attempts at trying to regulate that too by the EU. Marxism, political correctness and multiculturalism, its all Democrats and jewish zionist lobbyist organisations pushing this agenda & its not for our benefit.

What replaces the statists with the guns? A people that can keep them in-line. That hasn't happened in the US. We're going to have increase our IQ further and accept objectivism. Ayn Rand makes a incredible case for it in practical examples within Atlast Shrugged. Its why I always recommend it and one good book on economics. I agree with you on Lock's Two Treaties, though he was wrong about free trade. I probably should have recommended that as well. The closest to a freemarket is Switzerland, Chile, & a couple of other small governments in Scandinavia. Iceland has a freemarket for over a thousand years but they did have a govt court but it did not enforce its measures, instead its decisions basically was a way to hurt reputation by ostracism, and we also have whats already used currently with credit rating (refusal of services) and rule of repeat dealing.

I don't think anyone ever said anything about crime disappearing, thats not a argument against free market capitalism. There is no set amount of crime, just like there isn't a set amount of poverty or welfare use. Its the incentives and disincentives in place due to the nature of the system that keeps those things rising or maintained. Crime can be solved by modifying the parenting styles that lead to harm, moving from imprisonment to community responses and other agencies and NGO's to take of children. It minimizes criminals, it doesn't eliminate it I don't think. Giving a monopolistic entity all the guns and power leads to greater abuses, so either way if there is a pessimistic human assumptions being peddled then that works against the statist argument.

However, I do not propose to remove states but rather relegate them to protectors against outsiders & criminals. The state cannot use force against their citizens except against those who initiated force, like criminals or deportation of illegal immigrants. Criminals violate NAP by fraud or force which legitimizes self-defense for some form of justice & laws which the people decide through political representatives and private human rights protection NGO's. Illegal immigration is a violation of NAP. Firstly it violates NAP because if states place a whole bunch of people into someones private land/property without invitation that violates his property rights for the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions, freedom from trespass and arbitrary use of executive state power & if they are put into govt programs that take resources from the majority and gives to minority groups which reduces white birth rates, increases the national debt & taxes of most honest tax paying citizens, 2ndly it breaks immigration law which people place trust in to protect the western culture, values, political system and the economy. Its the same right of self defense that citizens have. That is, a military, borders patrol & customs and a single layer of regulation for foreign competitors. The right to bear arms, independent media, individual responsibility, innate rights, clear limits on the legitimate role of govt, and a freemarket orientation whose basic principles most can agree on, be it Kantian or Locke, all of that protects against the growth of states. What is likely to change that is foreign entities, corporations and govts hijacking our institutions which is what has happened.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

You have valid points, but the core issue remains:

I think you beleive that humans tend to behave in a way and there is no need to start a war against "Human Nature". People are greedy (just for the sake of the argument) and that's positive if a free-State market ever takes place. Then how are economic cycles taking place? Your answer was simply by mixing everything up and blame jews, marxism, the democrats and so on. If people behave, there are no crashes. Since it is not happening yet, you guys blame on someone (and yes liberals are dirty bastards, but get empirical here!).

Well, I have a novelty for you. The actual true Left is against PC, against the expansion of any state by military means (includes Israel). But we are on the side of reason, experience and pragmatism. We actually read Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Malthus and so on. We read then we criticize. What did you read about Marx in the first place to join him and the experiences of Socialism with SJWs, PC, etc? You are simply calling cultural marxism because you don't realize that communists (the true marxists) hate it.

While you support your views by calling conspiracy theories, and using info from FB and other social media, you are not adressing the issue I'm pointing out. how in hell are we supposed to avoid crashes? Kantian Ethics? Where everybody should behave nicely?

I do understand that libertarians are fighters for free info. i'm on your side right there - the bitcoin experience should inspire revolutions.

I don't folloow you on Iceland. Freemarket there? Are you sure? Could you explain? You are pointing out Social Democracy, not freemarket capitalism, but in a way, the so called cultural marxism you want to abolish. Iceland controls its own currency, that's why they went out of the crisis and we (portuguese) have not yet. That's all about the course EU has gone since the 90's - Corporative Capitalism, and not the Jew by himself and if some Jews are part of the corporation, then we are not blaming Judaism and jews for that. it's just 1-0-1 nonsense. It's economics and not religion here. You should not be surprise why the Alt-right is called fascist. You are diggin on nonsense here.

Assuming you are American, we in Europe banned guns (only the State can use it) and crimes where never so low. There is, in my simple view, an extreme corporative interest around guns in USA. Being able to buy bazukas and all sorts of guns is medieval. The Fathers were from the age of Reason, The Elightment. They are saying you have the right to rebel against injustices and Tirany. It doesn't mean you should eat corporative propaganda to a point you are afraid of Jews. Sounds like Paranoia.

The thing about crime disapearing is just an argument favouring the State, again related to gun control and so on. you say Switzerland is almost a free-market ideal, then you should know how many regulations and little laws against behaviour is the State in there actually imposing on people (for instance, did you know that if you spit on a street, you pay really high amounts of money in there?). I mean, it's not the disgusting thing, it's the prohibition itself. Again, where is this free-market? Sounds Social-Democratic to the core.

«However, I do not propose to remove states but rather relegate them to protectors against outsiders & criminals.» This is the goal of Communism, if you really read the texts and not the propaganda (banish all sort of problems by actually promoting peace worldwide and a deep sence of Humanity). You are implying that these massive wave of migrants issue should have been adressed correctly, I agree, it was stupidity in the EU. We might be in the same page by blaming Liberals for the imperialist deeds in the Middle-East. Was stupid and we are warning something like these would happen since the fall of the Soviet Union. The only problem is that you blame them for running out of a war they did not start. I don't know if you think Human Rights are also Jewish constructs...

I keep saying: Say's Law BS in libertarianism. it is not true when small economic problems are fixed, the big are fixed as well (or vice-versa). See China: they are autoritarian and Capitalist. There was never a single place on earth with so much massive economical productivity in the history of Capitalism (with all big state aparatuses, the big problem) while economical disparities are inhuman(between individuals, the small problem).

I'm not sure you guys understand how populism is taking over on your wishes. The Tea party will continue to High-jack your institutions! What happened to that part of the American Revolution and the Glorious Revolution (English) that was promoting reason? That I would support, but instead you offer ultra-conservatism - not to call something else out of a thin respect i keep from everybody I talk online.

I'm sorry about my orthography.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

"See China: they are autoritarian and Capitalist. There was never a single place on earth with so much massive economical productivity in the history of Capitalism (with all big state aparatuses, the big problem) while economical disparities are inhuman(between individuals, the small problem)."

You probably should read about the Gulag Archipelago and the Big Black Book of Communism before praising it. Basically Communism massacred over a hundred million people, thats roughly twenty times as much as fascism is accused of doing. China also engages in mass human organ trafficking, murdering thousands of people every year. China has massive amount of state enterprise and state ties with businesses (rent extraction where a percentage of business profits are given directly to govt personnel).

Their problems however are multitude and quite problematic, firstly their pollution is huge, they have used up all their forests for wood, they are using close to 100% of all agricultural land, they have a aging population which will cause massive issue once they become dependent on social security, such massive miscalculation of what this industrialization does & population growth in a short time period has caused 60% contamination of water supply with heavy metal pollutants and 20% reduction in arable land. The people in charge of China suffer from the same problems of centralized power, central planners cannot anticipate problems the way a freemarket can, the way it would be able to reflexively respond to rising demand rather than being artificially set up for low-skilled manufacturing that is almost entirely based on exports. Their economy technologically speaking, which is necessary for increasing real wages from productivity advancements and bringing the poor up into the middle-class and therefore increase domestic demand, is absolutely terrible something from the 1970's. Even militarily they are behind all the major powers especially technologically, sure they have been spending more but still nothing compared to how much Russia and US spend. This major inefficiency in economic allocation and technological capability is due to decades of Communist rule that Russia also suffers from. China also depends almost entirely on exporting to US and its allies which makes atleast 50% of employment & 25% of its growth dependent on keeping that going. If the US decides to spend more on Indian goods instead of China, and if US investors stop investing in the China, we would see the rise of all its separatist groups and probably its split into various independent states. The only chance China has is try and keep the gravy train going with the west, eventhough the west hates China & so does every other state in the world.. and their own people for goodness sake. The Muslims, Christians, Tibetans, increasingly marginalized farmers that still constitute atleast a portion of exports, and dozens of other groups want democratization and more freedoms. China is not the super power that everyone makes them out to be, they are only treated as such because of being propped up by the west and due to their nuclear arsenal & constant egotistical threats and naval posturing. The govt will fall in the next 20 years probably.

Marxism doesn't work in practice because it was never about any evidence, its all about convincing people of greed/oppression that doesn't exist except when there is a big govt coopting big business or govt without limits on what it can do with the free market. I can't believe I'm talking about freakin communism in the 21 century, there are books over 60 years old that destroy it from top to bottom better than I can in the limited 5000 characters I got. The fact that liberals criticize bank bailouts, criminalization of drugs, surveillance state, war profiteering, or in the past where fighting for free speech is not good enough. Not by a long shot. That fact you agree mass migration could be handled better doesn't give me any shred of hope (ie keeping refugees/illegals out), liberals are worthless when it comes to actually reducing the problems inherent to crushing boot of govt on the freemarket. The massive regulations/taxes and open borders.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

"How are economic cycles taking place? Your answer was simply by mixing everything up and blame jews, marxism, the democrats and so on."

Of course people who support big govt are to blame for big govt. That should be obvious. I only pointed that out because not many people know its mostly pushed by zionist organisations & those heavily tied to the govt. Human rights are innate, they are not "provided by" governments. Either the govt doesn't infringe on your rights or they do.

"how in hell are we supposed to avoid crashes? "

We recover very quickly from a depression or crisis without any govt involvement. Iceland had no govt to enforce contracts for over a thousand years. I say Switerzland is relatively free market compared to other states, thats why it has amazing growth & theres nothing wrong with having a liberal democracy aslong as its not using force against its own citizens and there are still limitations on govt. True lassiez fair doesn't exist today except for instances of anarchist societies in the past like in Iceland for over a thousand years. The reason why they worked is all explained in the Machinery of Freedom. Its a fairly long read and slightly difficult to follow at times but worth the time.

"Iceland controls its own currency, that's why they went out of the crisis and we (portuguese) have not yet."

Iceland got out of the problem because they did not interfere with the freemarket. The central bank basically just sat on their *** like the US has done in the past before the great depression.

"Assuming you are American, we in Europe banned guns (only the State can use it) and crimes where never so low. There is, in my simple view, an extreme corporative interest around guns in USA."

You haven't done the research if you think that guns are the reasons for crime. Its blacks that are mostly the ones behind crime in the US. You see similiar crime rates for black people of 85 IQ in every other country like the UK. As soon as you remove that element from the equation, the US crime rate is normal compared to the international rates, read Color of Crime. If you also take out the gangs of illegals roaming around the eastern coast, you take away 90% of gun violence in those select few cities according to the FBI Gang Report 2013.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

just some more things then:

Massive debt: where has the USA actually paid its debt? It's always ending in haircuts, as you know. We are the ones that must eat your trash everytime! And that is to blame Globalization, that is Global Capitalism.

Global Trade: I'm sincerely shocked you say that neo-liberalism and globalization destroyed wealth and jobs. We are saying that since the 90's, but what is your position then? National-Capitalism? That is against all that was ever happen in its History. I tend to criticize those "Robinsonade" falacies (Marx pointed against Adam Smith, for instance).

State incentives: so you beleive in national economical protectionism (I beleive that is more than necessary too) but you don't beleive in protecting your own citizens from disease, earthquakes, or help the elderly, give them and income for their jobs or force the prices of the food to go low, so everybody can aford a living without being from a family already in advantage (economicaly speaking)?

I beleive many aspects in your theory are up-side down. if you protect the nation, you protect your people with State-services that everybody pays for, including the wealthy (as in Europe). If you are against globalization, you are against Capitalism, if you call for more freedom, the Law must be present all times to assure it does not become the Law of the Wealthy.

illigal immigrants: No one has ever answered this, i think, but the communists: Why don't you, intead of stigmatize a group of people, actually work out to end the flow of people that goes to your country because they need to survive? Build the wall? Why don't you stop the economical conditions that cause that migration in those countries? Even Fascist and Colonial theory agrees on this.

Last: what if, the so called freedom you are aiming at (don't get me wrong you have the right to be ****** off) is just but freedom for the very few who can afford it? If so, you are simply being misguided by a bounch of people with personal agendas, the same links with wallstreet, the same military and expansionist interests, the same global elite, this time, lead buy the Tea Party. In that case is the Capitalist system that is rigged! the false double party BS you got in USA, that promotes different faces for the same evil, everytime, every each 8 years!

The Chicago School in no better than the Frankfurt School. it's Ideological soup for the masses. it's the same food, made by different people. Libertarians think outside the box, it's true. But why keep pretending Capitalism isn't the problem?

you call for RCT (Rational Choice Theory), that implies kantian ethics! kantian deontology! How in earth can you accept the basic premises of RCT? just look around. It is not true that economical agents are rational, otherwise why would have been the 2008 bubble? People knew they were buying invisible golden eggs, did they not? Was not greed the factor here? And then, what about regulation? If we beleive in the rationality of agents, why are these crashes happening? it is easy to blame the 1% or whatever you want to call, but are they not part of the RCT issue? Aren't they, in their stupidity causing these troubles to happen? - that's a reading from the hard-core left.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

" How in earth can you accept the basic premises of RCT? just look around. It is not true that economical agents are rational, otherwise why would have been the 2008 bubble? People knew they were buying invisible golden eggs, did they not? Was not greed the factor here? "

No, it was the guarantees for a bank bailout that caused the speculative & risk based bank decisions to give out sub-prime loans. Money printing causes inflation, ie 10'000 dollars increased to 20'000 money supply will double the price of items. Minimum wages reduces the value of employment which reduces the demand for employment. Hence why there is massive stagflation during a depression where nobody can get any work eventhough lots of people want to work. While there are all these price controls and other regulations hamper growth. If demand is high and the business cannot increase its prices then more farmers will choose not to plant crops or sell crops (and if the farmers land get seized and given to govt workers or rebels supporting the govt not experienced in farming) ie case in point, Venezuela & mass starvation. Money printing & stimulus package is detrimental because of the inflation, it might mean cheap money lending but nothing tangible occurs in terms of productivity, investment or hiring in the market and therefore little consumption. It just becomes not worth hiring anyone. Demand/Supply side issues remain, businesses can't trust the economic market indicators because the central bankers manipulate them which create a false impression of consumer demand thus alot of market misallocation occurs and we get more bankruptcies which are usually already fairly high at around 70%. You don't want more of that during a depression of all periods...

The way to avoid the problem of big govt is all the reasons I already outlined, you may not care much at all for my suggestions and dismiss it as 'ultra-convervatism' but the elements of my argument stand on their own. Its called ethno-nationalism or identitarianism that just about every North Asian state has, be it South Korea, Japan or Islamic states like Saudi Arabia, except I would pair it with a lasseiz-fair domestic market that means common people will not have to be jailed for victimless crimes, become political prisoners & crushed underneath the steel boots of govt power in the form of overburdening regulations/taxes. My simplestic form of governance and freemarket could work given a people ready to defend themselves against expansion of govt.

If you want to know why Socialism doesn't work just read one of the most comprehensive studies of Scandinavian countries: Stratfor.com
If the distribution of resources or wealth has been shown not to work, completely deteriotating a previously strong work ethic under capitalism, why would massive distribution under Communism suddenly be any better? It disincentives employment & productive work. About 70-80% of the money given to the govt ends up being wasted or not spent on the poor. What little is spent basically goes towards keeping people dependent on govt support. These "public services" are about votebuying, always was and always will be. Why waste 80% of money and have 20% used to keep people depedent when you can just give 100% of it to a charity you trust? Its because we have statist dipshits constantly being indoctrinated in state run schools and heavily subsidized universities uncritical of govts. China is a house of cards propped up largely by the west, with little opportunities for reversing its slow down. You sound like you've been under decades of indoctrination.

As for debt, you really want me to explain everything? The central banking cartel are private businesses but they have a deal to provide money to the govt with interest. The money is not backed up by anything, they can continue printing it until we lose purchasing power completely, govt bonds are no longer bought, and we will be forced to default on the debt. That is what fuels the uncontrollable spending and inflation. Since the interest on the debt is now becoming a problem to pay back. China buys alot of bonds & the US has forced alot of pensions into the stockmarket which is scary since it could wipeout our retirement funds in the event of a stock/bonds crash (which is imminent). Nationalized bank would fix the issue but so would a 100% freemarket for currency. Theres plenty of books here and videos on the subject, debt slavery is one of the largest subjects. I'm not going to explain all of it here.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

" If you are against globalization, you are against Capitalism, if you call for more freedom, the Law must be present all times to assure it does not become the Law of the Wealthy."

Not sure what that means. The govt does not provide freedom, the govts only takes it away. Innate rights do not include economic guarantees, the state may provide some forms of security but largely it should not be involved in economics except against globalism. Capitalism and heavy protectionism is perfectly compatible, thats why we see alt-right championing it & some libertarians economists discussing it. The govt has no place in using force against domestic businesses. How do you think the wealthy get powerful? They don't want to compete anymore once they become millionaires. Its by using govt power to enforce regulations and taxes detrimental to everyone else that they can actually keep a monopoly going. They never last without such govt backing because as soon as one company says "I don't agree to sell at this price anymore" they will end up snatching up all the customers. I'm pretty sure I covered this already. All they have to do is donate a truck load of money and nobody in the freemarket can object to it because the govt will simply allow the private businesses or state owned enterprise to do it which is backed by 'legitimate force'.

If a noisy airport gets built nearby a bunch of homes, the people will have to move. In a private freemarket the neighbhourhood can at the very least bargain with the owner of the to-be-built airport, since their contracts will have stipulations against any increase in 'pollution' like air and noise, as would insurance companies that make sure the air is clean for monthly premiums, which would mean the airport would have to basically pay everyone to build there otherwise a lawsuit would mean even more money being wasted. Under govt, you get politicians using public funds for these airports as an example, that citizens may object to but it will get created regardless (eminent domain, lobbyists getting special permits/licenses/contracts & govt mandates). Sure citizens may voice their displeasure by voting in the next election cycle but politicians can just lie and ignore the voters for the next 4-8 years again. You get more taxes overtime due to those envious people who are not productive or working wanting more welfare.

"instead of stigmatize a group of people, actually work out to end the flow of people that goes to your country because they need to survive?"

Theres nothing stopping Mexico or another socialist hell hole from taking on a American model (though preferably without the presidential system, use a parliamentary system for the liberal democracy). You and everyone else always point to white people & US and say "me, me, me, me, me, me" "gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme" how about you learn how to help yourselves and stop asking for handouts and freerides/parasitism. The govt cannot support that, the alt-right & libertarians seek to end it. The US cares about fixing its own problems first. Stephan Molyneux highlights the issue of immgiration: Youtu.be
Everything else comes second, we have zero obligations to anyone else. Preferably we don't ever have to fight any more wars. With free market & without a central bank to print money, the US will not be in any position to start wars. Its mostly due to neo-cons that war monger anyway, a very particular political mindset that most people have no enthusiasm for and a small govt would never be able to afford it.

"Fractional-reserve banking" is an act of fraud and therefore the entire banking industry should be imprisoned or executed for their crimes. Your obviously not well versed in the Austrian School of economics ie Rothbard & Hoppe. I've recommended books by both of them.

"I believe many aspects in your theory are up-side down. if you protect the nation, you protect your people with State-services that everybody pays for, including the wealthy (as in Europe)."

The state doesn't protect domestic industries from each other. It fosters only anti-competitiveness & increases the barriers to be successful in the freemarket over time. Its quite clear to me that temporary governance (4-5 year terms) creates incentives for the creation of welfare states in order to make people dependent on govt support, in essence its about buying votes for re-election and expanding the power of government. This is a negative impact on the tax payer due to the frequently large budget deficits. A lack of accountability on this is a pretty big problem, aside from limiting governance or no govt, there is no other solution to that.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

*TheUnbeholden*
Can't really accept some parts of your thinking, especially things related to IQ, Zionism, Black people, and so on (You sound really reactionary in there for no reason). Althought I will certainly get into more detail on Austrian Economics - won't dismiss reading when it is absolutely outrageous, such as J. Evola.

I just don't get why you need to scratch prejudice to defend Capitalism "with Human values" It's neo-con policies, now domestic.

If you have valid points is ok to talk, but when you compare the socialist experience of the URSS, you cannot tell it did not work. The whole point was to destroy private property and make the State the only man in town. In less than 10 years the Soviets thrived during the "Plans" in all social and economical measures. You can't compare with Capitalist experiences there. you can't simply say Socialism did not work because in capitalism you already tried a distributive project. it's all around the existence of private property.

«The state doesn't protect domestic industries from each other.»
Well, it does (it did until 1953 in URSS) under socialism, with no private property and no corporations, that's the thing. There is no middle term here. Either Socialism destroys private property and builds up a new economical reality State based (and then you can really can call in "work ethics" there, not arbitrary bosses fooling around with the color of your skin or your IQ) or it is not Socialism at all but rather Social democracy or Christian Democracy (like Europe after WW2 and the new Deal and so on).

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

«Theres nothing stopping Mexico or another socialist hell hole from taking on a American model»
There is: NAFTA! you say it destroyed American capitalism, we also say it destroyed Mexican traditions and economic relations. It's not the Mexican people who are benefiting from the production taking place in Mexico (the David Ricardo BS), same thing in the careebean Islands where people were autonomous in terms of food (rice particularly) and now they import everything else. NAFTA implementations means some will work and others will not, because you destroy the traditional economy and people have nothing to do. So poverty over poverty means something for them. Why are drug cartels running wild in Mexico? people have to survive in any way. See how things are so messed up there that druglords are actually providing Social benefits (that should be the job of the State!). in the end Latin America is at war with north America, thus the ALBA project. I don't beleive you can't understand why there is so much anti-American feelings overseas. bottom line it becomes a racial and national struggle, if you follow me. You are the ones causing troubles on our countries, people work more than 10 hours a day, pay lot's of taxation and see their own wealth going overseas. That is Capitalism working friend. To be a socialist it means you destroy those conditions, something you guys are not interested (internationalism and cooperation should be the way, not competition). You are just blaming Mexicans for being Mexicans, as they will do the same towards Americans. but what we call economic imperialism (NAFTA is one case) remains. Why do you think 80% of people in Venezuela were living under poverty for decades (same ****** programs as NAFTA, all imposed by neo-cons) and in Chavez time some could get out of slums and start their own buisiness? it was the STATE providing their start up! Ok i was critic of Venezuela afterwards (depending on oil and etc) but the problem remains here: one huge powerfull country (directly or not) tells all others what they should produce, and in a couple of decades these small countries are ruined and can't compete the global economy, it's nothing to do with IQ or race, is just basic thievery, why do you think they went back to their own anti-colonial fathers (Bolivar for instance)?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

There is much from stopping Mexico becoming on their own feet, if you trully care, then you should not blame them for struggling. I care less if it is the white man or the green man. It's American external relations policy promoting National-thievery and in fact doing it via those projects. You need to see the whole picture man, it's not white genocide, it's F. imperialism! You have the power to stop that. how will it be? You will protect your own now, Trump says. Then promote new understandings on your borders. You cannot simply blame others for your Ricardian experiments! That is what I say, when you are anti-globalization you are anti-capitalist. law must be present to protect freedom, not to ensure freedom of the opressor. That's simple and has been around for decades. The American people should know these things, and in the process actually lead the world, not sack it damn it! you see what globalization did to these countries: less govt means tolerance to powerfull countries to rip off our own economy. Can you see now why I'm not pro-capitalist? It is only benefiting some people. Me, me, me? of course man! It's my f. life! If you WASPs have influence in your country and speak up when you feel it's going in the wrong direction for you, why shouldn't we do the same?

RCT and debt: it's all a moral issue. The very same thing with invisible hands. It does tend to a progressive lesser state of tension to a point you say, "it regulates itself". The thing is, empirically speaking, not everybody enjoys the fruits of your trees.

«If a noisy airport gets built nearby a bunch of homes, the people will have to move. In a private freemarket the neighbhourhood can at the very least bargain with the owner of the to-be-built airport, [...]»
Sure. same thing with Socialism friend. With no private property, only the state can tell where these things are meant to be (far away from any village I tell you, there is not even a reason to protest).

«[...]it was the guarantees for a bank bailout that caused the speculative & risk based bank decisions to give out sub-prime loans.»
of course, but why they give sub-prime loans? That is my point! Some people deregulate (so to speak) the system itself and benefit from it... And then we are all the ones to pay for their own messing? Why on earth? In Socialism you are forbidden to have that freedom (if you follow the irony). That is all that matters here, if you can't protect some people (via a public institution, or the State itself) because they are "retarded with money", if you should not interveen in there we will know already what it is going to happen man: remember Detroit! We would never let a medieval thing like that happen in Europe. it's insanity. It is Economics for the few. In Liberal Economics you say if people are free to trade, wealth will come. Where is this I keep asking? All I see is big banks dinner with politicians. That is what a Capitalist Dystopia is all about. How are you going to fix this without a massive overturn on Economical Philosophy? it's just not blame the State, it's blaming free trade and private property (again, there are liberal ideas of life and small ownershiping that are still relevant).

I'm sorry to tell you, but we have no illusions about Capitalism. In the books everything should work. There are all other sorts of variables RCT is not allowed to speak. Can't you see that is philosophical positivism applied to fortune? How can it ever work? You and Us have the same way of thinking - Science over all. The problem is Economics is not yet scientific, as other realms and that is because of the randomness of life. You cannot force these things to become scientific, but you have the duty to understand how the rules are made up by people with personal agendas. And that is what Capitalism has become and has been. otherwise we are not talking about Economics but Ethics and Axiology!

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

"when you are anti-globalization you are anti-capitalist. law must be present to protect freedom, not to ensure freedom of the opressor. "

I can be anti-globalist and capitalist because there are countries that are both capitalist and economic nationalist. I never said that there would be no law, I said no domestic regulations/taxes except against international trade & foreign companies that move in. Don't blame me for your lack of understanding. Criminal law can go either way to statist or freemarket. I find it hard to believe that even the most hardened libertarian would want to sacrifice social trust, their low-skilled workers and cultural/racial/religious unity at the altar of economics. Statists get ONLY that right.

"Sure. same thing with Socialism friend. With no private property, only the state can tell where these things are meant to be (far away from any village I tell you, there is not even a reason to protest)."

Socialism runs into the calculation problem, ie there is a massive misallocation of resources. That is likely another reason for the rising aggregate govt spending and debt.. not just due to incentives to votebuying ie the temporary governance that incentivises a moves towards that parasatism/freeriding (socialist countries have massive debt, and the US democrat states that take on socialist policies)
Moddb.com

Its not just the problem that I outlined of people staying in perpetual joblessness & that inter-generational poverty due to welfare depedency and 80% wasted public funds. Being swept up into cheap public service jobs that do not cater to the skill set of those who where out of work like in Sweden isn't an answer. You get the same problems that led to the collapse of soviet Russia, of Venezuela, and now soon to be collapsed China. I don't see how you've made a case against private property. Thank ******* christ that your not still defending Marxism.

"I'm sorry to tell you, but we have no illusions about Capitalism. In the books everything should work."

It does work, all of the horseshit that you outlined IS CORPORATISM or cronyism, its a fascist collusion between big govt and big business which is seen in your bank bailout & financial crisis and economic depression/recession problems and of course the inherent problems of statism like Socialist calculation problem & parasitism. You want to see how great govt spending is when you compare developed OECD countries together by their economic trends?

The Socialist state of Sweden has apparently not as high living standards as people say it does. After taxes (Sweden's 55% income tax) and welfare benefits Sweden's median income is $27'167 which if it was to become a state in the US it would be one of the poorest states.

"These national-level comparisons take into account taxes, and include social benefits (e.g., "welfare" and state-subsidized health care) as income".

"Once purchasing power among the US states is taken into account, we find that Sweden's median income ($27,167) is higher than only six states: Arkansas ($26,804), Louisiana ($25,643), Mississippi ($26,517), New Mexico ($26,762), New York ($26,152) and North Carolina ($26,819)."

"calculate real incomes based on the cost of living in each state... find real purchasing power"

Mises.org
Bullshitexposed.com

Next time people who say that Sweden is so great, the only part of Sweden that is great is what wealth they managed to hang on to before it become a big socialist country after 1950. The golden years of Sweden's growth was when it was relatively free market between 1890-1950, that also is the only time that the poverty rate was dropping.

The general trend is more government spending does not reduce poverty, only sustained economic growth does:
Cato.org

welfare:
Usgovernmentspending.com

Compare the data of Public Spending & Wealth Growth according to OECD data
(1960-1996) pretty shows you that govt's don't bring people out of poverty & prevent its reduction.

Check out OECD.stat & Danieljmitchell.files.wordpress.com

"All I see is big banks dinner with politicians."

They wouldn't have nearly as much power without legislation protecting them.

Case in point, govt jobs does not improve the economy, the state isn't ruled by freemarket principles so removing the market does not solve the problem of economic growth. You have deluded yourself into thinking central planners can maximise the allocation of resources efficiently.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

"Sure. same thing with Socialism friend. With no private property, only the state can tell where these things are meant to be (far away from any village I tell you, there is not even a reason to protest)."

Socialism runs into the calculation problem, ie there is a massive misallocation of resources. That is likely another reason for the rising aggregate govt spending and debt.. not just due to incentives to votebuying ie the temporary governance that incentivises a moves towards that parasatism/freeriding (socialist countries have massive debt, and the US democrat states that take on socialist policies)
Moddb.com

Its not just the problem that I outlined of people staying in perpetual joblessness & that inter-generational poverty due to welfare depedency and 80% wasted public funds. Being swept up into cheap public service jobs that do not cater to the skill set of those who where out of work like in Sweden isn't an answer. Case in point, this does not improve the economy, the state isn't ruled by freemarket principles so removing the market does not solve the problem. You get the same problems that led to the collapse of soviet Russia, of Venezuela, and now soon to be collapsed China. I don't see how you've made a case against private property.

"I'm sorry to tell you, but we have no illusions about Capitalism. In the books everything should work."

It does work, all of the horseshit that you outlined IS CORPORATISM, its a fascist collusion between big govt and big business which is seen in your bank bailout & financial crisis and economic depression/recession problems and of course the inherent problems of statism like Socialist calculation problem & parasitism. You want to see how great govt spending is when you compare developed OECD countries together by their economic trends?

The Socialist state of Sweden has apparently not as high living standards as people say it does. After taxes (Sweden's 55% income tax) and welfare benefits Sweden's median income is $27'167 which if it was to become a state in the US it would be one of the poorest states.

"These national-level comparisons take into account taxes, and include social benefits (e.g., "welfare" and state-subsidized health care) as income".

"Once purchasing power among the US states is taken into account, we find that Sweden's median income ($27,167) is higher than only six states: Arkansas ($26,804), Louisiana ($25,643), Mississippi ($26,517), New Mexico ($26,762), New York ($26,152) and North Carolina ($26,819)."

"calculate real incomes based on the cost of living in each state... find real purchasing power"

Mises.org
Bullshitexposed.com

Next time people who say that Sweden is so great, the only part of Sweden that is great is what wealth they managed to hang on to before it become a big socialist country after 1950. The golden years of Sweden's growth was when it was relatively free market between 1890-1950, that also is the only time that the poverty rate was dropping.

The general trend is more government spending does not reduce poverty, only sustained economic growth does:
Cato.org

welfare:
Usgovernmentspending.com

Compare the data of Public Spending & Wealth Growth according to OECD data
(1960-1996) pretty shows you that govt's don't bring people out of poverty & prevent its reduction.

Check out OECD.stat & Danieljmitchell.files.wordpress.com

"All I see is big banks dinner with politicians."

They wouldn't have nearly as much power without legislation protecting them.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

(I'm sorry, trying to reply you but it constantly goes to the top of the page).
«Socialism runs into the calculation problem, ie there is a massive misallocation of resources.»

You're talking about Social democracy (and its vile ally Keynesianism). Socialism is distribution of wealth and equalization of rent. It's just intellectually illusory to compare the two. On the other hand, Capitalism is all about disparity of rents and wealth. The misallocation happens in Capitalist countries - even historically when protestantism created free market (so to speak) areas beyond Christian Economics and Morality (go side by side). It would be the very same type of argument if I would say «wait a minute, ther was never socialism in the world, the close we got was Post-Modern revolutions in Bologna.» It does happen and it has a history. The more global it gets, the more division you will get (we are currently in the 3rd wave of globalization btw).

«[...]the horseshit that you outlined IS CORPORATISM, its a fascist collusion between big govt and big business.[...]They wouldn't have nearly as much power without legislation protecting them.»

indeed, it's not hard at all to notice. The only thing i'm saying is that Corporations and big govt together are the conditions for the "real existing" Capitalism! It's Economic History... See Lee Kuan Yew measures and the so called history of the Asian Tigers, for instance, see the English Opium War way before (and all Economics of the Colonial Empires in this regard), see 1930's Germany (debatable?), see the history of Factories from the Loom machine to the railway, Aristocracy/Absolutism before 1789 in France, etc. Big Banks, Big Money and Big govts. That is Capitalist history.

All i'm pointing out is the very fault of the theory: Rational Choice based on one man on an Island (Adam Smith), Lobby at Imperial scale (David Ricardo), mislead big economic problems as fundamentally equal to small ones (Say), the intrinsic aspect of private property (possibly intellectual) with life itself but (off the record) an agrestic/violent oposition between Men and Nature (Locke), The Gossen Laws!, The Creative Destruction Theory!
It's all there... how could I pact with it?
Show me this empirical or even historical Pure Capitalism. It is a dystopia named corporatism and yes, trots into fascism.

«[...]there are countries that are both capitalist and economic nationalist.»
I'm telling you: Capitalism is an international phenomenon! it is intrinsic to its movement, look up the History and the Philosophy itself. if you argue that national economics are trully capitalistic, why did Israel need the expansion it did (the was of 6 days), why doe the USA need to invade and sack, why was colonialist mercantilism replaced by global trade?
I admit I may be no expert, but these things are part of the issue, we cannot really separate the theory from its practice, otherwise we cannot deny purity in the world (read for instance how Aristotle himself arrived to the conclusion there are, in fact no pure theories but constant deviations from the book - "T. of politics").

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

«I find it hard to believe that even the most hardened libertarian would want to sacrifice social trust, their low-skilled workers and cultural/racial/religious unity at the altar of economics.»
That's the reason i am still adressing you despite our massive opposite views on how the world should be. I know you care. i'm warning you that Liberal economics are dirty and tend to de-humanization. Libertarians call themselves true liberals (not everyone but I tend to agree with that) so you maybe should watch out and prospect the end of the road.

«[...]people staying in perpetual joblessness & that inter-generational poverty due to welfare depedency and 80% wasted public funds.»
Again, Keynesianism, not Socialism. not one inch.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

«Case in point, govt jobs does not improve the economy, the state isn't ruled by freemarket principles so removing the market does not solve the problem of economic growth.»
That is cyclic reasoning.
However, you do have valid points to throw away the State under Capitalism (and that system alone), if we are to beleive in perpetual growth, no doubt (not saying you are implying it, but Liberals do all the time, and they beleive in it!). But again, if we compare the alternative (that implies the idea of zero growth) you have sustainability. That is only possible in non-Capitalistic models (at least, in theory). So you should perfect your criticism beyond Thatcherism: the Devil is not cultural Marxism, "it's cultural Keynesianism". It's not the Jew or the black or the low IQ, it's the Liberal and his economic plans. do this and even the left will vote for you.

«compare developed OECD countries together by their economic trends»
Well, I don't beleive we should simply compare developed countries by that. What about Human development indexes (HDI)? The cultural aspects, the access to medical care and the free time off of work and so on? Aren't they also economic factors? We go in circles (Why is England so good in that list of E. trends but has so much drug use after the 80's conservative politics? Why in reverse are people in Iceland so creative? Why are people in the USA having 3 jobs, no way to pay college and still broken?). After that logic, what about GDP then? How is a nation so rich (I mean with such a high level of internal productivity), that cannot have medical care for free like the USA?

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator
TheUnbeholden

"Again, Keynesianism, not Socialism. not one inch."

Yeah sure, no welfare under Socialism, no govt programs under Socialism, no misallocating of resources under socialist central planners. Because you say so. Every single one of those countries that tried it have stopped using such a system and can barely last 50 years, but they just haven't been doing it right, they haven't been using "real socialism"! This isn't honesty, this is wishful thinking. I don't pretend to know that lasseiz fare could work in a modern society with certainty, eventhough there have been freemarket anarchist societies in the past. I don't know how to win this fight of freedom vs globalist internationl jewry or freemarket vs statism. That which perpetually does not work well should not be repeated, you don't have to make consequentialist weighing up of harms and benefits, what govt programs worked out of millions that don't, pragmatism & convoluted social contract moral justifications for great oppression and genocide, victimless crimes (that make up 85% of all crimes) etc

I didn't really explain the issue of low interest rates during a recession, basically it reduces the amount of savings and therefore money available for investment. Without that there is little capital being bought for increasing productivity, new technologies, increasing skills of workers & more jobs for higher skilled workers, which is what produces real changes in wages & eventhough higher interest makes borrowing slightly more expensive its still massively good because businesses will do it when it provides a higher return on investment (eg can be 20-25% return for 10-15% interest). Taxes/regulations harms both savings and investment & thats one of the main issues especially minimum wages during that recession which is what I mentioned before. The first mistake is keeping interest rates low during a recession, you need high interest rates to get capital/investment going.

Inflation is the knee in the backs of people, in the US we basically just have to get more money from the federal reserve to keep on replenishing that money supply. Higher interest rates will basically prevent that cycle of inflation and reduce prices (in real terms) of goods produced by those more productive businesses. The low interest rates encourages more discretionary spending or consumption but theres going to be bugger all consumption being done during a recession anyway and we don't need so much money being borrowed for consumption when people are ******* UNEMPLOYED!!! Businesses have to be allowed to do what they do best! A RECESSION WHICH THE US IS STILL IN... we did not back at barely 1.1% GDP. You couldn't even SEE the rise in GDP because of huge spikes in rent and healthcare costs (ObamaCare partly to blame, a total scam by the way because its govt mandated & given to illegal immigrants). The govt in the US provides jobs in almost as ****** a way as Sweden, by producing lots of temporary part-time jobs waiting tables and thats "job creation" while we lose thousands of IT, food & manufacturing. We keep pumping more money for something that would have been solved ages ago on its own if the freemarket could just choose what interest rates are right for what customers. Its a mad house. We have inmates running the insane asylum. But thats big govt.

Immigration for making up for low native birth rates and having two parents working or working 3 jobs is all a scam. Its liberal agitprop to make up for a overwhelming govt that has no clue whatsover except about its votebuying (and a insidious banking cartel that know very well what its doing who lie to people regularly). As for college tuitions well thats easier, they are gauranteed to keep getting more and more subsidies as they ask and vote for more, thus they have little reason to increase their producivity and cut extreneous costs. If they are on a time limit for how long they can keep getting subsidies or if they are pressured to reduce costs for those subisidies it would be a different story. Its always like this in every interventionist state. If there isn't entrepreneurial activity, jobs with possibility of advancement based on merit, relatively accessible education for skills required by the freemarket, allocation of resources based on prices that are decided by supply and demand (ie maximising profit and minimizing costs). I have no idea why you keep clinging to 'alternate models' because by centralizing power you get technological stagnation and keep people in poverty, the expansion and maintaining of power necessarily diminishes freedom. The only societies that can provide sustainable model is one that balances TOWARDS freedom. That is the only truth that I can say with certainty after all the books on these subjects. You really think that this is "solving" the issue?

Reply Good karma+1 vote
ZeTo49
ZeTo49

Nonetheless, there should be an interesting debate around private property and intelectual property once again. I would like to know how libertarians reconcile these two.

Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
Post a comment
Sign in or join with:

Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.

Established
Privacy
Public
Subscription
Open to all members
Contact
Send Message
Membership
Join group
Group watch
Follow
Share
Embed Buttons
Link to Pro-Capitalism by selecting a button and using the embed code provided more...
Pro-Capitalism
Statistics
Members
27
Watchers
13 members
Articles
1