Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Libertarianism is Infeasible

Erik_Erikson
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2012 8:54:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At least when it comes to market policy. It doesn't work in policy theory. It doesn't work in policy practice. And worst of all: it decreases market efficiency

Look at the fundamental questions in your economic policy that you have yet to solve. Furthermore, a shift to your market paradigm would involve a resurgent of problems we had solved in the Victorian era.

There's no excuse to follow this ideology. Your underlying assumptions, your material possessions and your fundamental ways of life would not be possible in a Libertarian marketplace.

It might have worked at the start of the colonial era. But we live in bigger, more complicated and interconnected society in which human interaction needs to be observed and carefully maintained.

There is nothing sadder in this world then a philosopher who does not follow his philosophy.

Yes, I'm looking to debate a Libertarian who can make a clear, concise argument in favor of Libertarian economic policy.
I know nothing. That is, probably, the first step to true knowledge (I'm not too sure).
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2012 10:08:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
LordKnuckle, Ragnar_Rahl, Cody_Franklin, socialpinko, or LaissezFaire would be able to win that debate if you start it.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Erik_Erikson
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2012 10:17:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/2/2012 10:08:43 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
LordKnuckle, Ragnar_Rahl, Cody_Franklin, socialpinko, or LaissezFaire would be able to win that debate if you start it.

LaissezFaire is a child. He cannot even conquer himself, let alone the market!

Original Content is on my side! I can never be defeated.
I know nothing. That is, probably, the first step to true knowledge (I'm not too sure).
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 12:44:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You haven't really established a substantial position. You're just saying it's wrong, which isn't an argument for people over the age of 4.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 12:49:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
inb4 this is a multi-account.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 4:54:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/2/2012 8:54:55 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
At least when it comes to market policy. It doesn't work in policy theory.

Yes it does.

It doesn't work in policy practice.

Yes it does.

And worst of all: it decreases market efficiency

No it doesn't.

Wait... Are we just lobbing bare assertions at each other and hoping that one or two will stick? DAMN. Maybe we should start making substantive arguments, man...



Look at the fundamental questions in your economic policy that you have yet to solve.

I don't have an economic policy.

Furthermore, a shift to your market paradigm would involve a resurgent of problems we had solved in the Victorian era.

That's not an argument. That's vague gesturing again.

There's no excuse to follow this ideology.

Which ideology?

Your underlying assumptions, your material possessions and your fundamental ways of life would not be possible in a Libertarian marketplace.

Which assumptions? Which possessions? What "ways of life" (since I didn't think that was a unitary entity)?

It might have worked at the start of the colonial era. But we live in bigger, more complicated and interconnected society in which human interaction needs to be observed and carefully maintained.

orly? http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Also, that's just you being incredulous/uncreative, i.e., not advancing a substantive argument.

There is nothing sadder in this world then a philosopher who does not follow his philosophy.

Good thing I follow mine.

Yes, I'm looking to debate a Libertarian who can make a clear, concise argument in favor of Libertarian economic policy.

Objection--you can't debate without arguments. I'd lend you some of mine, but I don't think you'd want them... :(
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 4:56:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/2/2012 10:17:34 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
At 8/2/2012 10:08:43 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
LordKnuckle, Ragnar_Rahl, Cody_Franklin, socialpinko, or LaissezFaire would be able to win that debate if you start it.

LaissezFaire is a child. He cannot even conquer himself, let alone the market!

Bashing his age isn't an argument.

Original Content is on my side! I can never be defeated.

See: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^
Erik_Erikson
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2012 11:02:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The challenge has been issued. Since nobody has challenged me; I assume Libertarians are scared of my girth.

8/3/2012 12:44:37 AM
You haven't really established a substantial position. You're just saying it's wrong, which isn't an argument for people over the age of 4.

Even if I don't have a position, which I am not admitting, I don't need one. I can know that certain positions are BS without having one. (Example: Der Nazis.) Let me flip your statement on it's face: Insulting me is not a position, but it's still a statement. :D

8/3/2012 4:54:38 PM
At 8/2/2012 8:54:55 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
At least when it comes to market policy. It doesn't work in policy theory.


Yes it does.

It doesn't work in policy practice.


Yes it does.

[...]

I don't have an economic policy.

Do you think, when watching Nick Jr., Dora the Explorer is talking directly to your age group? You can reasonably infer that my comments are directed towards Libertarian ideology rather then you, the-guy-who-doesn't-make-his-mind-up-until-he's-at-the-front-of-the-line.

I am challenging Libertarians. This post is directly pointed at their ideology based on market application. If you don't have a stance on it, responding only makes you look ill-prepared.

8/3/2012 4:56:53 PM
Bashing his age isn't an argument.

Original Content is on my side! I can never be defeated.


See: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^

I see Harry Potter being frozen alive. What was I supposed to interpret from that? But yeah, the kid rages hard. Rages. Hard. Wasn't really attacking him on his age rather his anger problem and his verbose style.

I'd like to debate him, but he's yet to challenge me. So, yeah.

Until somebody challenges me to a debate on market policy, I can only assume that Libertarians cannot properly explain their market principles.

I will offer up no specific arguments until I'm in a debate. I do this, because I advocate for the free market and I want to get paid for my effort. I'm no SCAB. Pay me in sweet, sweet libertarian tears and debate credit.

To quote Pal Waaktaar and Magne Furuholmen:
*turn on video
I know nothing. That is, probably, the first step to true knowledge (I'm not too sure).
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2012 2:04:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/4/2012 11:02:33 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
The challenge has been issued. Since nobody has challenged me; I assume Libertarians are scared of my girth.

Well, your profile picture is Gingrich, so I feel I should point out there's a difference between girth and being a fatass.

8/3/2012 12:44:37 AM
You haven't really established a substantial position. You're just saying it's wrong, which isn't an argument for people over the age of 4.

Even if I don't have a position, which I am not admitting, I don't need one. I can know that certain positions are BS without having one. (Example: Der Nazis.)

Too bad libertarianism isn't analogous to being a Nazi (the plural of which, in German, uses the pronoun die, not der, by the way). It's a bad analogy that almost lets you get away with hand-waving... :(

Let me flip your statement on it's face: Insulting me is not a position, but it's still a statement. :D

That isn't really a "flip".

8/3/2012 4:54:38 PM
At 8/2/2012 8:54:55 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
At least when it comes to market policy. It doesn't work in policy theory.


Yes it does.

It doesn't work in policy practice.


Yes it does.

[...]

I don't have an economic policy.

Do you think, when watching Nick Jr., Dora the Explorer is talking directly to your age group? You can reasonably infer that my comments are directed towards Libertarian ideology rather then you, the-guy-who-doesn't-make-his-mind-up-until-he's-at-the-front-of-the-line.

I am challenging Libertarians. This post is directly pointed at their ideology based on market application. If you don't have a stance on it, responding only makes you look ill-prepared.

I'm an anarchist, which is what libertarians are when they grow out of Ron Paul. And I mean, even reading people like Hayek, he points out that markets aren't about "policy"--markets are just what happen when you acknowledge the epistemic limits of trying to be a central planner. So, the reason I don't have a policy is because I don't pretend that centralization is viable. Like, if you're admitting ignorance and saying "not my job to plan", then you don't really have a policy in the meaningful sense.

8/3/2012 4:56:53 PM
Bashing his age isn't an argument.

Original Content is on my side! I can never be defeated.


See: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^

I see Harry Potter being frozen alive. What was I supposed to interpret from that?

"I am invincible" --> Dies horribly.

"I can never be defeated" --> You guess.

But yeah, the kid rages hard. Rages. Hard. Wasn't really attacking him on his age rather his anger problem and his verbose style.

LaissezFaire is one of the most laid-back people I've ever met. And I've known him for a while now.

I'd like to debate him, but he's yet to challenge me. So, yeah.

Until somebody challenges me to a debate on market policy, I can only assume that Libertarians cannot properly explain their market principles.

Violent monopolies suck, people can't plan economies for sh*t, and division of labor precludes having to sit around be arbitrary about what gets done and why. A priori, you default you leaving people to their own devices. The end.

I will offer up no specific arguments until I'm in a debate. I do this, because I advocate for the free market and I want to get paid for my effort. I'm no SCAB. Pay me in sweet, sweet libertarian tears and debate credit.

Freeing people to do their own thing doesn't entail any specific mode of organization, which includes a society in which everything is commoditized and reduced to exchange-value. So, the whole "markets are just profit" parody thing you're doing isn't working for me.

To quote Pal Waaktaar and Magne Furuholmen:
*turn on video


Okay.
Erik_Erikson
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2012 3:45:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Blah Blah Blah, still no challenges.

Feasible Topics:
"Libertarian Market Structure Accurately Represents The Free Market"
"Libertarian Market Structure Allocates Resources Effectively"
I know nothing. That is, probably, the first step to true knowledge (I'm not too sure).
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2012 6:05:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
What are these so-called problems?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2012 6:13:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/5/2012 3:45:01 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
"Libertarian Market Structure Allocates Resources Effectively"

"Effectively" is hugely relative.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2012 1:53:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/5/2012 3:45:01 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
Blah Blah Blah, still no challenges.

Feasible Topics:
"Libertarian Market Structure Accurately Represents The Free Market"
"Libertarian Market Structure Allocates Resources Effectively"

We told you to debate LaissezFaire, because he's the economics guy. You were just a pretentious dick about it, and were like "That child is no match for my intellectual badassery". So, I mean...
ClintonH
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2012 5:59:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/2/2012 8:54:55 PM, Erik_Erikson wrote:
At least when it comes to market policy. It doesn't work in policy theory. It doesn't work in policy practice. And worst of all: it decreases market efficiency



Look at the fundamental questions in your economic policy that you have yet to solve. Furthermore, a shift to your market paradigm would involve a resurgent of problems we had solved in the Victorian era.

There's no excuse to follow this ideology. Your underlying assumptions, your material possessions and your fundamental ways of life would not be possible in a Libertarian marketplace.

It might have worked at the start of the colonial era. But we live in bigger, more complicated and interconnected society in which human interaction needs to be observed and carefully maintained.

There is nothing sadder in this world then a philosopher who does not follow his philosophy.

Yes, I'm looking to debate a Libertarian who can make a clear, concise argument in favor of Libertarian economic policy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First of all the use of the term "libertarian economic policy" is too unspecific. Libertarians come in many forms, right wing, left wing, anarchist ect...
I will assume for the purpose of educating you that you are refering to the Classical Liberal "Laissez faire" economic principles.


"At least when it comes to market policy. It doesn't work in policy theory. It doesn't work in policy practice. And worst of all: it decreases market efficiency"

Right off the bat... it is difficult to ascertain the nature of your objections with regards to "market policy"..... The means by which you judge a given systems "market efficiency" are also suspect. One would have a difficult time debating against your....sentences here....due to the apparent lack of definition in these terms you have used.

There's no excuse to follow this ideology. Your underlying assumptions, your material possessions and your fundamental ways of life would not be possible in a Libertarian marketplace.

I dont see how one can lump terms like "underlying assumptions", "material possessions", and "fundamental ways of life" into an "argument" against the laissez faire economic principles... while simultaneously combining the two into the same entity agaisnt which you argue. Your argument is then that Libertarian economics prevents Libertarian economics....and economics someho...... you know what I think I made my point.
ClintonH
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2012 6:01:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Debate has really become...less rewarding... with the ever growing infantile phillistine influx into the "spread my ignorant opinions on debate forum" clique.
ClintonH
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2012 6:12:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
It might have worked at the start of the colonial era. But we live in bigger, more complicated and interconnected society in which human interaction needs to be observed and carefully maintained.

Whoops I almost neglected to destroy this little nugget of profound ignorance..

By what logic did you conclude that "human interaction needs to be observed and carefully maintained"...? Furthermore I would ask how libertarian free market economics would impede the observation and maintainance of human interaction, assuming there were a need for government to "maintain human interaction"... I would love to follow that thought train.


Your post just goes to show what cartoons and crappy public schools will do to the minds of men. Maybe consider a vasectomy for the sake of our progeny.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2012 5:09:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It might have worked at the start of the colonial era. But we live in bigger, more complicated and interconnected society in which human interaction needs to be observed and carefully maintained.

You realize that complexity is an argument AGAINST central planning right? What government can possibly be careful about so much work?

Division of labor. It's like. THE THING. In economics. As important as scarcity.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
RyuuKyuzo
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/13/2012 7:58:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/8/2012 12:58:31 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Here's his debate with LaissezFaire: http://www.debate.org...

Hmm. And here I was getting excited to take this debate. Oh well. I'll have to stay on top of forum action more diligently it seems.
If you're reading this, you're awesome and you should feel awesome.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2012 12:25:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/8/2012 12:58:31 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Here's his debate with LaissezFaire: http://www.debate.org...

looks like he FF
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/14/2012 6:38:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/14/2012 12:25:28 AM, DanT wrote:
At 8/8/2012 12:58:31 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Here's his debate with LaissezFaire: http://www.debate.org...

looks like he FF

Yep, he might do it again. He's been offline for 5 days now.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.