The three main goals of libertarianism

[Contumacious]

[For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern. This means minimizing labor costs and externalizing as many costs as possible.

Pure bullshit.

Government agencies (non-profits) exist to acquire and preserve power at the taxpayers expense

The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act caps the liability for claims arising from nuclear incidents. It reduces the insurance nuclear power plants need to buy and requires taxpayers to cover all claims in excess of the cap. The benefit of this indirect subsidy has been estimated at between $237 million and $3.5 billion a year, which suggests that it has been worth many billions of dollars to the industry. It could be argued that the value is considerably larger than that, since the industry might not have existed at all without it: “At the time of the Act’s passing, it was considered necessary as an incentive for the private production of nuclear power … because investors were unwilling to accept the then-unquantified risks of nuclear energy without some limitation on their liability."

.

 

[JoeNormal]

are you a total moron? all corporations exist to rape the environment and screw the workers ?

Damn man, grow the fuck up.

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern. This means minimizing labor costs and externalizing as many costs as possible.

Just to give an example. Suppose there is a toxic chemical that a company must dispose of. To do it legally cost them $C. However, they could just dump it in the lake behind the plant essentially for zero dollars. That would be illegal, however, so there is a cost associated with that action. If the chances of being caught are Y and the amount of the fine is $F, then the expected amount they will have to pay for the infraction is $(Y*F). if Y*F < C, a company that is risk neutral will choose to dump the chemical in the lake behind the plant because on average it is the least costly to them.

There is an additional cost - the externalized cost $E - that society bears for now having toxic chemicals in a public resource. This cost may be hard to compute but it is there. The company doesn't pay this cost - we do - which is fine by the company because that means it gets to pocket $E more in profit than if it were to actually have paid the true cost of dumping toxic chemicals.

This is how corporations operate and it is a natural consequence of them being motivated soley by profit. That is OK - except that We the People - as issuers of their Charter - bear a responsibility to keep them in check. For instance, we need to ensure that $(Y*F) > $C in the case above, so that companies will always choose to properly dispose of said chemical because it will cost them less on average. We also need to ensure that $(Y*F)$ >= $E, so that the total amount of fines we collect for infractions will at least be the cost We the People incur for it. The government can change Y*F. Profit motive itself can change C by developing technology that makes it cheaper to dispose of toxic waste. The libertarian idiots would prefer Y*F = 0, however, which means C doesn't matter anymore because the corporations will only choose Y*F.


The above is just one example of how profit motive can continue to be profit motive while not harming the environment.

Corporations are not living things. Corporations are groups of humans. Some humans would do the dumping you describe others would not. Just as some humans would demand redistribution checks funded through theft of their neighbors income. Some people are just plain scum of the earth, some a little better, some better than most.

"Corporations are people my friend." - Mitt Romney

 

[RKMBrown]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern. This means minimizing labor costs and externalizing as many costs as possible.

Just to give an example. Suppose there is a toxic chemical that a company must dispose of. To do it legally cost them $C. However, they could just dump it in the lake behind the plant essentially for zero dollars. That would be illegal, however, so there is a cost associated with that action. If the chances of being caught are Y and the amount of the fine is $F, then the expected amount they will have to pay for the infraction is $(Y*F). if Y*F < C, a company that is risk neutral will choose to dump the chemical in the lake behind the plant because on average it is the least costly to them.

There is an additional cost - the externalized cost $E - that society bears for now having toxic chemicals in a public resource. This cost may be hard to compute but it is there. The company doesn't pay this cost - we do - which is fine by the company because that means it gets to pocket $E more in profit than if it were to actually have paid the true cost of dumping toxic chemicals.

This is how corporations operate and it is a natural consequence of them being motivated soley by profit. That is OK - except that We the People - as issuers of their Charter - bear a responsibility to keep them in check. For instance, we need to ensure that $(Y*F) > $C in the case above, so that companies will always choose to properly dispose of said chemical because it will cost them less on average. We also need to ensure that $(Y*F)$ >= $E, so that the total amount of fines we collect for infractions will at least be the cost We the People incur for it. The government can change Y*F. Profit motive itself can change C by developing technology that makes it cheaper to dispose of toxic waste. The libertarian idiots would prefer Y*F = 0, however, which means C doesn't matter anymore because the corporations will only choose Y*F.


The above is just one example of how profit motive can continue to be profit motive while not harming the environment.

Corporations are not living things. Corporations are groups of humans. Some humans would do the dumping you describe others would not. Just as some humans would demand redistribution checks funded through theft of their neighbors income. Some people are just plain scum of the earth, some a little better, some better than most.

"Corporations are people my friend." - Mitt Romney

Yeah, well he meant corporations are the name of a group, for which a number of people are members. Mitt can't be that dumb, or can he?

 

[kaz]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

 

[RKMBrown]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

Oh yeah, that's gonna hurt!

 

[Oddball]

The three main goals of libertarianism


1) Decrease wages salaries and benefits for the poor and middle class as much as possible. Lower wages salaries and benefits for those who labor means those who own can profit more.

2) Decrease taxes on the wealthy as much as possible. No explanation needed.

3) Remove all regulations that make it harder for the wealthy to herd the poor like cattle - and remove all regulations that make it possible for a healthy middle class to exist. Regulation is the enemy of profit and profit is the only thing that matters.


That about sums it up!

All it sums up is what an ill-informed bigot that you are.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The three main goals of libertarianism


1) Decrease wages salaries and benefits for the poor and middle class as much as possible. Lower wages salaries and benefits for those who labor means those who own can profit more.

2) Decrease taxes on the wealthy as much as possible. No explanation needed.

3) Remove all regulations that make it harder for the wealthy to herd the poor like cattle - and remove all regulations that make it possible for a healthy middle class to exist. Regulation is the enemy of profit and profit is the only thing that matters.


That about sums it up!

All it sums up is what an ill-informed bigot that you are.

Well after 19 other pages of explanations by real libertarians on what libertarianism is, you don't see OohPoodMahPahnts chiming up anymore.

 

[RKMBrown]

oohpoodmahpahnts

rofl...

 

[JoeNormal]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

 

[Redfish]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

But you support the system of screwing the taxpayers when its done by liberals and democrats--------Huh?

 

[kaz]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

Politicians are screwing you right in front of your face. You're just clenching your eyes closed.

 

[JoeNormal]

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

But you support the system of screwing the taxpayers when its done by liberals and democrats--------Huh?

I'm pragmatic enough to recognize that people will get screwed by someone - either corporations or the government. Of the two, I'd say the government screws more gently. And why do you think that liberals and democrats are more heinous in that regard than conservatives and republicans. Look at what happened during GWB's era. Yeah, I know, GWB wasn't a conservative. Yada yada.

 

[JoeNormal]

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

Politicians are screwing you right in front of your face. You're just clenching your eyes closed.

You apparently do the same thing for corporations.

 

[kaz]

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

But you support the system of screwing the taxpayers when its done by liberals and democrats--------Huh?

I'm pragmatic enough to recognize that people will get screwed by someone - either corporations or the government. Of the two, I'd say the government screws more gently. And why do you think that liberals and democrats are more heinous in that regard than conservatives and republicans. Look at what happened during GWB's era. Yeah, I know, GWB wasn't a conservative. Yada yada.

1) You're obviously not a business owner

2) The government screws with guns and force. You can screw a company by not dealing with them. Government removes their competition.

That's gentle? If you're not doing anything with your life to know how ridiculous what you are saying is, you're not doing much with your life.

 

[RKMBrown]

For-profit corporations exist to reap profit and are not motivated by any other concern

So are politicians. Explain why you're against one and fine with the other.

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

Corporate execs are also in the public eye. They are no more or less benign than similar politicians. That democrats believe democrat politicians are above the law does not make it true.

 

[Redfish]

I'll toss in my two cents worth.

Politicians are in the public eye and can't get away with as much bald faced greed as private corporate execs. They're a more benign form of the same shitty kind of person. Of course, the ambitions of many of them compel them to take the lobbyist or 'consultant' role where they can screw the system without as much scrutiny but by that time, they're not politicians any longer.

But you support the system of screwing the taxpayers when its done by liberals and democrats--------Huh?

I'm pragmatic enough to recognize that people will get screwed by someone - either corporations or the government. Of the two, I'd say the government screws more gently. And why do you think that liberals and democrats are more heinous in that regard than conservatives and republicans. Look at what happened during GWB's era. Yeah, I know, GWB wasn't a conservative. Yada yada.

when a corporation screws people, it goes out of business. when the government screws people it just gets bigger so it can screw more people.

your premise that all corporations are inherently evil is just idiotic and ignorant.

 

[JoeNormal]

But you support the system of screwing the taxpayers when its done by liberals and democrats--------Huh?

I'm pragmatic enough to recognize that people will get screwed by someone - either corporations or the government. Of the two, I'd say the government screws more gently. And why do you think that liberals and democrats are more heinous in that regard than conservatives and republicans. Look at what happened during GWB's era. Yeah, I know, GWB wasn't a conservative. Yada yada.

1) You're obviously not a business owner

2) The government screws with guns and force. You can screw a company by not dealing with them. Government removes their competition.

That's gentle? If you're not doing anything with your life to know how ridiculous what you are saying is, you're not doing much with your life.

Ok, let's take the oil companies for example. They produce a commodity that's sold on the global market. Who do I boycott to affect BP?

I've had my own business and the government was the least of my worries.

 

[JoeNormal]

your premise that all corporations are inherently evil is just idiotic and ignorant.

For about the fifth time in this thread, I didn't say that all corporations are inherently evil. Granted I might have painted with a bit of a broad brush for simplicity's sake but please tell me you aren't really that much of a black-and-white thinker.

 

[RKMBrown]

your premise that all corporations are inherently evil is just idiotic and ignorant.

For about the fifth time in this thread, I didn't say that all corporations are inherently evil. Granted I might have painted with a bit of a broad brush for simplicity's sake but please tell me you aren't really that much of a black-and-white thinker.

Yet you insist that government screws more gently than corporations. I take that to mean that you screwed people over when you ran your company and now you can't screw people over as much and are merely taking advantage of others through soft tyranny of the majority?

 

[Oddball]

your premise that all corporations are inherently evil is just idiotic and ignorant.

For about the fifth time in this thread, I didn't say that all corporations are inherently evil. Granted I might have painted with a bit of a broad brush for simplicity's sake but please tell me you aren't really that much of a black-and-white thinker.

Yet you insist that government screws more gently than corporations. I take that to mean that you screwed people over when you ran your company and now you can't screw people over as much and are merely taking advantage of others through soft tyranny of the majority?

At least a corporation sells things I might want to buy.