Why I Could Never Be GOP or Libertarian

[kaz]

You and yourself need to get a room

You need to get a new shtick.

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

 

[JoeNormal]

You need to get a new shtick.

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

 

[Contumacious]

You and yourself need to get a room

You need to get a new shtick.

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

 

[kaz]

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

Swish, another miss by the moron. My point on Marxism is directly to your point that to oppose any restriction on government makes us anarchists. Try to follow the conversation, OK, Dopey?

And here you go. Note most of the libertarians generally agreed. As for your claiming to know what we think, obviously your post here that we're anarchists belies that ridiculous claim.

What is a small government libertarian?

 

[JoeNormal]

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

Swish, another miss by the moron. My point on Marxism is directly to your point that to oppose any restriction on government makes us anarchists. Try to follow the conversation, OK, Dopey?

And here you go. Note most of the libertarians generally agreed. As for your claiming to know what we think, obviously your post here that we're anarchists belies that ridiculous claim.

What is a small government libertarian?

Most of that doesn't sound too bad. There are some glaring omissions like education, R&D, corporatization, Wall Street gambling and what to do with the disenfranchised (basically anything that would require a concerted effort from a large group of people) but laid out as you have it, it doesn't sound like all libertarians are nut jobs. I wonder why in practice, talking to libertarians essentially goes no further than bitching about the taxes they have to pay.

 

[JoeNormal]

You need to get a new shtick.

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

 

[Contumacious]

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

Listen dingle berry

you can not force me to accept your crap then require me to pay for it.


Fuck you.

.

 

[JoeNormal]

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

Listen dingle berry

you can not force me to accept your crap then require me to pay for it.


Fuck you.

.

Are you paying for it? If so, then I guess I can.

 

[kaz]

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

Swish, another miss by the moron. My point on Marxism is directly to your point that to oppose any restriction on government makes us anarchists. Try to follow the conversation, OK, Dopey?

And here you go. Note most of the libertarians generally agreed. As for your claiming to know what we think, obviously your post here that we're anarchists belies that ridiculous claim.

What is a small government libertarian?

Most of that doesn't sound too bad. There are some glaring omissions like education, R&D, corporatization, Wall Street gambling and what to do with the disenfranchised (basically anything that would require a concerted effort from a large group of people) but laid out as you have it, it doesn't sound like all libertarians are nut jobs. I wonder why in practice, talking to libertarians essentially goes no further than bitching about the taxes they have to pay.

As to your last question, because you're a stupid bigot who believes what you want to believe. As to the earlier points:

education: Should go bottom up, not top to bottom. Meaning family, then local government, then State as last resort and the Feds have zero to do with it as the 10th amendment states

R&D: Business is so much better at it than government

corporatization: Clearly addressed. You believe in government picking market winners, not me/us. It's on you to address that. Why should government pick market winners? As for me, a company sucks? Walk across the street to their competitor. Only government can force you to do business with a company, free markets give you the power to fire anyone you want fired

Wall Street gambling: No one is forcing you to invest. So don't

and what to do with the disenfranchised: Fuck them, they "disenfrancised" themselves. No one has had their vote removed but that they are too lazy to exercise it

 

[kaz]

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

How has invading Iraq, nation building in Afghanistan or toppling the Libyan government helped me again?

 

[sealybobo]

You need to get a new shtick.

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Imagine all the pain and suffering we'd have to witness before the market decides. It's be anarchy

 

[kaz]

You don't think libertarians have kids and " I need a new schtick?



What a dumb ass. Take your hand out of your pants, lefty, or get a room with yourself

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Imagine all the pain and suffering we'd have to witness before the market decides. It's be anarchy

Why? You hate the market, now you care what they do?

 

[sealybobo]

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Imagine all the pain and suffering we'd have to witness before the market decides. It's be anarchy

Why? You hate the market, now you care what they do?

It's my market. I vote for politicians who properly regulateit.

Why don't you first convince Republicans? Seems you'd have better luck with them.

I agree with Republicans you're cra cra

 

[JoeNormal]

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

Swish, another miss by the moron. My point on Marxism is directly to your point that to oppose any restriction on government makes us anarchists. Try to follow the conversation, OK, Dopey?

And here you go. Note most of the libertarians generally agreed. As for your claiming to know what we think, obviously your post here that we're anarchists belies that ridiculous claim.

What is a small government libertarian?

Most of that doesn't sound too bad. There are some glaring omissions like education, R&D, corporatization, Wall Street gambling and what to do with the disenfranchised (basically anything that would require a concerted effort from a large group of people) but laid out as you have it, it doesn't sound like all libertarians are nut jobs. I wonder why in practice, talking to libertarians essentially goes no further than bitching about the taxes they have to pay.

As to your last question, because you're a stupid bigot who believes what you want to believe. As to the earlier points:

education: Should go bottom up, not top to bottom. Meaning family, then local government, then State as last resort and the Feds have zero to do with it as the 10th amendment states

R&D: Business is so much better at it than government

corporatization: Clearly addressed. You believe in government picking market winners, not me/us. It's on you to address that. Why should government pick market winners? As for me, a company sucks? Walk across the street to their competitor. Only government can force you to do business with a company, free markets give you the power to fire anyone you want fired

Wall Street gambling: No one is forcing you to invest. So don't

and what to do with the disenfranchised: Fuck them, they "disenfrancised" themselves. No one has had their vote removed but that they are too lazy to exercise it

So this is the kind of penetrating insight the companies who hire you can expect? JFC, no wonder you can afford to spend 8 hours a day here. If you want to know why more people don't take libertarians seriously, look no further than this page.

 

[JoeNormal]

I know a bunch of libertarians (and fortunately, not all are pompous asses like you). None of them have kids. I did a survey on this site and the only one who claimed to have kids misread the question and it turned out he was a liberal.

Having kids requires a serious commitment that flies in the face of the naive conception of personal freedom that libertarians love so much. Probably a good thing because in most cases, they'd make shitty parents anyway.

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

How has invading Iraq, nation building in Afghanistan or toppling the Libyan government helped me again?

Most of the economies that the US has 'assisted' with their military might are now vital sources of the slave labor and raw materials that you appear to think are perfectly fine in laissez faire economics.

 

[kaz]

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Imagine all the pain and suffering we'd have to witness before the market decides. It's be anarchy

Why? You hate the market, now you care what they do?

It's my market. I vote for politicians who properly regulateit.

Why don't you first convince Republicans? Seems you'd have better luck with them.

I agree with Republicans you're cra cra

It's your market? You did dick for the market. You don't know what you're talking about, it's just your greed talking. you're the willie sutton party. Why do you loot markets? That's where the money is ...

 

[kaz]

Another stupid leftist douche bag who thinks libertarians are anarchists. The choices are not just Marxism and anarchy. What is wrong with you?

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

Swish, another miss by the moron. My point on Marxism is directly to your point that to oppose any restriction on government makes us anarchists. Try to follow the conversation, OK, Dopey?

And here you go. Note most of the libertarians generally agreed. As for your claiming to know what we think, obviously your post here that we're anarchists belies that ridiculous claim.

What is a small government libertarian?

Most of that doesn't sound too bad. There are some glaring omissions like education, R&D, corporatization, Wall Street gambling and what to do with the disenfranchised (basically anything that would require a concerted effort from a large group of people) but laid out as you have it, it doesn't sound like all libertarians are nut jobs. I wonder why in practice, talking to libertarians essentially goes no further than bitching about the taxes they have to pay.

As to your last question, because you're a stupid bigot who believes what you want to believe. As to the earlier points:

education: Should go bottom up, not top to bottom. Meaning family, then local government, then State as last resort and the Feds have zero to do with it as the 10th amendment states

R&D: Business is so much better at it than government

corporatization: Clearly addressed. You believe in government picking market winners, not me/us. It's on you to address that. Why should government pick market winners? As for me, a company sucks? Walk across the street to their competitor. Only government can force you to do business with a company, free markets give you the power to fire anyone you want fired

Wall Street gambling: No one is forcing you to invest. So don't

and what to do with the disenfranchised: Fuck them, they "disenfrancised" themselves. No one has had their vote removed but that they are too lazy to exercise it

So this is the kind of penetrating insight the companies who hire you can expect? JFC, no wonder you can afford to spend 8 hours a day here. If you want to know why more people don't take libertarians seriously, look no further than this page.

LOL, I always like idiots who insult people with, you're on a message board! What a loser! Dude, you're posting on what as you wrote that and read this? Gawd you are stupid.

Note you lacked the insight to actuallly respond to my answers to your points. Appraently you realized you needed some quick deflection there ...

 

[kaz]

That's all you got?

You forgot that "libertarians have zits and live in their mom's basement".

"They make me look like an idiot in logical debate and it hurts my feelings" might be more to the point.

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

How has invading Iraq, nation building in Afghanistan or toppling the Libyan government helped me again?

Most of the economies that the US has 'assisted' with their military might are now vital sources of the slave labor and raw materials that you appear to think are perfectly fine in laissez faire economics.

You're just an idiot. Oh yeah, you're a libertarian kaz? That means you're a totalitarian who wants to enslave people! Bam! Now that's an argument! Oh, and the wars you oppose, you want those! Ouch, you feel the zing on that, don't you?

Um ... no ...

I don't know if you're more stupid or arrogant. Oh yeah, kaz, well you're a libertarian. Well, I know three libertarians. Well, one's a liberal. I know more about it than you do. They're anarchists. Oh yeah, and they support slavery because they are totalitarian anarchist libertarians.



Keep talking, you're an intellectual two year old, it's hilarious

 

[JoeNormal]

Ok, tell me your conception of Libertarianism. My conception comes from the posts I've read from other real-life libertarians on this site as well as my libertarian friends. Yes, I did say friends.

As for the Marxism reference, that seems to be about as deep as your understanding of Liberalism goes.

Swish, another miss by the moron. My point on Marxism is directly to your point that to oppose any restriction on government makes us anarchists. Try to follow the conversation, OK, Dopey?

And here you go. Note most of the libertarians generally agreed. As for your claiming to know what we think, obviously your post here that we're anarchists belies that ridiculous claim.

What is a small government libertarian?

Most of that doesn't sound too bad. There are some glaring omissions like education, R&D, corporatization, Wall Street gambling and what to do with the disenfranchised (basically anything that would require a concerted effort from a large group of people) but laid out as you have it, it doesn't sound like all libertarians are nut jobs. I wonder why in practice, talking to libertarians essentially goes no further than bitching about the taxes they have to pay.

As to your last question, because you're a stupid bigot who believes what you want to believe. As to the earlier points:

education: Should go bottom up, not top to bottom. Meaning family, then local government, then State as last resort and the Feds have zero to do with it as the 10th amendment states

R&D: Business is so much better at it than government

corporatization: Clearly addressed. You believe in government picking market winners, not me/us. It's on you to address that. Why should government pick market winners? As for me, a company sucks? Walk across the street to their competitor. Only government can force you to do business with a company, free markets give you the power to fire anyone you want fired

Wall Street gambling: No one is forcing you to invest. So don't

and what to do with the disenfranchised: Fuck them, they "disenfrancised" themselves. No one has had their vote removed but that they are too lazy to exercise it

So this is the kind of penetrating insight the companies who hire you can expect? JFC, no wonder you can afford to spend 8 hours a day here. If you want to know why more people don't take libertarians seriously, look no further than this page.

LOL, I always like idiots who insult people with, you're on a message board! What a loser! Dude, you're posting on what as you wrote that and read this? Gawd you are stupid.

Note you lacked the insight to actuallly respond to my answers to your points. Appraently you realized you needed some quick deflection there ...

It's not that you're here, it's that you have 35,000 apparently vapid posts. People on this board are here for a variety of reasons. I come here when I'm tired of thinking about technical issues or when the testers are having a go at a product that I'm finishing. If I can rile a few right wingers, so much the better.

So... I've got a few minutes and not much better to do right now...

Education: If it were local, the kids in Texas would be learning that the Earth is 6000 years old and evolution is not as valid an explanation for life as creationism.

R&D: You obviously have no clue of the roles of government vs industry. Industry expects a payout in no more than 5 years. If they can't guarantee that, they don't bother to go down that road (I know because R&D is one of my job functions). Government doesn't have that restriction. They can tackle or fund the big, open-ended research areas and then when it's sufficiently developed, hand them off to private industry to be commercialized.

Corporatization: Admittedly a big tent but what I am most critical of is the attitudes of upper management with regard to the people who work for them. Disposable, easily replaced by slaves and since they control the cash flow, guess who they choose to reward most lavishly.

Wall Street gambling: Oh, I have a choice huh? And what, put my money in a savings account where inflation will eat it alive. These fuckers have caused more damage than WWII. There's a crash coming and after it happens, I'd pay $500 on ppv to see these guys dragged from their offices and bludgeoned.

The disenfranchized: Yup, there's that libertarian inclusiveness I've come to expect.

 

[JoeNormal]

I'm sorry if the truth offends but you've zoomed in on a tangent of our conversation. Here's a recap of what bothers me about libertarianism:

All of its proponents were brought up in a society where education, defense, infrastructure, R&D, etc were provided by that society. Now that they don't (at the moment) need it, they feel they shouldn't be burdened with having to pay some small fraction of the money they earn back to the society. Never mind that they wouldn't have earned that money at all outside of the construct of a society. It's an ideology of logical inconsistency and hypocracy.

That is the stupidest pretext to continue the status quo that I have heard thus far.

WHY should FREEMEN be required to pay for the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state?


.

Because they are recipients of whatever good has also come from it.

How has invading Iraq, nation building in Afghanistan or toppling the Libyan government helped me again?

Most of the economies that the US has 'assisted' with their military might are now vital sources of the slave labor and raw materials that you appear to think are perfectly fine in laissez faire economics.

You're just an idiot. Oh yeah, you're a libertarian kaz? That means you're a totalitarian who wants to enslave people! Bam! Now that's an argument! Oh, and the wars you oppose, you want those! Ouch, you feel the zing on that, don't you?

Um ... no ...

I don't know if you're more stupid or arrogant. Oh yeah, kaz, well you're a libertarian. Well, I know three libertarians. Well, one's a liberal. I know more about it than you do. They're anarchists. Oh yeah, and they support slavery because they are totalitarian anarchist libertarians.



Keep talking, you're an intellectual two year old, it's hilarious

The problem is that libertarians don't seem to know how the things they possess came to be. They generally don't look any further than their current situation and think it's because of their own self worth. I would guess that you don't care that much of what you own is the product of slave labor. Those people just shouldn't have been born slaves right?

Tell me how you can support laissez faire economics and not acknowledge the engine that drives it.

BTW, if you worked for Boeing, you're a huge beneficiary of our military industrial complex. You at least realize that don't you?