Liberaltarianism

[Thurnez Isa]

I wasn't aware this thread was now about dogfucking.

I would have saved that last response for a more appropriate thread.   

Every conversation should eventually evolve into a convo about dogfucking.
I know mine always do.

[Doktor Howl]

Sorry.

No sweat.  My fault for not reading before posting.

[Disco Pickle]

I wasn't aware this thread was now about dogfucking.

I would have saved that last response for a more appropriate thread.   

Every conversation should eventually evolve into a convo about dogfucking.
I know mine always do.

true story: I almost posted something very nearly exactly like this but it didn't sound funny when I reread it so I deleted it, which may be more revealing than I'm immediately thinking it is but I truly don't care.. 

seeing someone else write it makes me realize that yes, in fact it is funny. 

thank you for this. 

I'm chuckling even as I press post.

[Disco Pickle]

Moving away from the dogfucking,


Pickle, study a bit of history. Start with the various ups and downs in the American economy going back as far as the record reach, look up the Gilded Age to observe how even in a time of "Laissez-faire" it doesn't exist (look at railroads to start), move on to the causes Great Depression and who it was that got fucked (the Grapes of Wrath is a fascinating read and pretty accurate), then look up labor history and the Great Society program set up by LBJ and its effects. In all time periods, look at the middle and lower classes. You've got all the economic theory; now you have to match it up against history.
If you're feeling brave, match our history/economic system against others, like Europe.

Economic theory relies on some axioms that simply don't hold true IRL (like us being, you know, rational. If we were, the blue collar folks would be stomping on the anti-union Republicans like there's no tomorrow). Also, von Mises economics isn't even a theory - it's just a philosophy because it isn't scientific and doesn't, as I understand it, rely much on numbers much. 

I've read The Grapes of Wrath..  many years ago.  I'm well versed on the history of economics in this and a few other countries (Weimar was one I read about in detail) and the origins of Central Banking.   

You wont hear me arguing against he EVILS OF UNIONS in history.  They did and continue to do a lot of good for workers with no voice in the matter.  If asked (and I never am) about the problem with modern unions and exploitative practices, I'd probably just end up giving you the same old tired talking points you hear about unions on any libertarian site (at least I'm honest, amirite?)

but a lot of those talking points are true.  Especially when you factor in government worker unions.   

I'm not a robot spouting what I've read and believe to be true no matter what you or anyone else might think.  I've given a lot of thought to where I stand on fiscal issues and, even holding the ones I currently hold, am completely open to new perspectives.

The Ludwig von Mises think tank advocates for Austrian Economics, as opposed to the Keynesian Economics we've been using (rather disastrously I might add, so as Dok Howl says, I really should be FOR it, simply for the chaos it creates in the banking system.. an idea I'm not entirely opposed to accepting)

I consider myself a fortunate individual in that I am not now, even at 31 years of age, set in my beliefs.

I registered on this board because I figured I could learn a thing or two from you subversive fucks that I might have missed while organizing a semi coherent life of my own that allows me to spend time reading BBS's.

I've noted your initial suggestions, continue to recommend away.

[Kai]

Three reasons that Economics is bullshit:

1. It assumes rational actors. Humans are anything if not rational, especially about money. Otherwise there wouldn't be such things as million to one lotteries.

2. It assumes infinite resources. Resources are not infinite.

3. It assumes growth can continue forever. Growth is not infinite.


Thus, a continual cycle of boom and bust, progression and recession, is how these things actually work.

If economics was a science, it would consist of descriptions of how the world actually works, rather than farce and bullshit.

[Kai]

In fact, if economics was a science, it would consist mostly of the study of human irrationality.

[Telarus]

In fact, if economics was a science, it would consist mostly of the study of human irrationality.

Oh, you mean 'marketing'?

[Doktor Howl]

Three reasons that Economics is bullshit:

1. It assumes rational actors. Humans are anything if not rational, especially about money. Otherwise there wouldn't be such things as million to one lotteries.

2. It assumes infinite resources. Resources are not infinite.

3. It assumes growth can continue forever. Growth is not infinite.


Thus, a continual cycle of boom and bust, progression and recession, is how these things actually work.

If economics was a science, it would consist of descriptions of how the world actually works, rather than farce and bullshit.

Well said.  Insisting that the world works a certain way because that's what you want, or that's what seems to make sense, isn't science if the data doesn't actually support it.

Libertarianism, for example, insists that logic rules the marketplace, when it's actually run by insane hairless monkeys who can't see past the closing bell.

[Disco Pickle]

Three reasons that Economics is bullshit:

1. It assumes rational actors. Humans are anything if not rational, especially about money. Otherwise there wouldn't be such things as million to one lotteries.

2. It assumes infinite resources. Resources are not infinite.

3. It assumes growth can continue forever. Growth is not infinite.




Thus, a continual cycle of boom and bust, progression and recession, is how these things actually work.

If economics was a science, it would consist of descriptions of how the world actually works, rather than farce and bullshit.

Well said.  Insisting that the world works a certain way because that's what you want, or that's what seems to make sense, isn't science if the data doesn't actually support it.

Libertarianism, for example, insists that logic rules the marketplace, when it's actually run by insane hairless monkeys who can't see past the closing bell.

All this being said (and absorbed and understood) what then is the alternative?

the system in place has failed dramatically and it's nothing near what libertarians want.

what's a solution that everyone could live with, left leaning and right leaning, and provides for the needs of all of us without completely fucking anyone?



I just realized that the probable answer is that this does not exist.

but you fucks are the most likely I've encountered to at least have creative ideas about it so..

*post*

[Doktor Howl]

All this being said (and absorbed and understood) what then is the alternative?

the system in place has failed dramatically and it's nothing near what libertarians want.

The system in place has failed dramatically for 220 years and is somehow still functioning.  And nobody cares what Libertarians want.

what's a solution that everyone could live with, left leaning and right leaning, and provides for the needs of all of us without completely fucking anyone?

Why on Earth would I want that?

[Kai]

The alternative is making economics into a science of how people actually exchange goods, services, currency and other items of ownership, rather than how some humans THINK that should proceed. This would include studying human behavior, rather than proscribing human behavior.

[Adios]

Rule # 1. Real money doesn't exist.

[Requia ☣]

Rule #2, even if it did exist, people would keep using imaginary money, because walmart takes imaginary money.

[Doktor Howl]

Rule #3:  You can't eat gold.  It's no different than fiat currency.

[Don Coyote]

Does that mean everything should be valued in units of potatoes?