I am not a big Spew Carey fan.

orangeplus wrote:

Why do I have the feeling that the moral of every show will be, "Gummit bad, Free Enterprise good."?

That's my main problem with the Libertarians.  They start out with a flawed premise, much like objectivism, that the free market is a superior proposition. The free market, just like big government, breeds greed and corruption.

asshatery wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

That's my main problem with the Libertarians.  They start out with a flawed premise, much like objectivism, that the free market is a superior proposition. The free market, just like big government, breeds greed and corruption.

Were you born retarded or did the Henry the 4th get to your brain?  The free market does not breed corruption.  Even the Accusation of Corruption is a killer in the free market, that is if people give a damn about product or service, and people will stop using you.  Read your God Damn Adam Smith, hell read Thomas Friedman, or Sowell.  I have fucking want to be econocunts like you that think you know anything about the actual functioning of markets because you took Macro and Micro as an undergrad.  Learn how Economy affects society as a whole.

Any bets on which of these two took econ in college (or went to college)?

I have fucking want to be econocunts like you

Just follow this map.  Eat well.

http://www.crfc.org/hamb.html

Last edited by Fled (2007-10-16 16:12:11)

Fled wrote:

I have fucking want to be econocunts like you

Just follow this map.  Eat well.

http://www.crfc.org/hamb.html

The funny thing is that at 16 I did go to hamburger U.  Sadly it was only the local campus out in Reston, but McDonalds knows less about Economics than a High Schooler, but the Whip Cracking, and Wetback Explotation classes were top notch.

and just in case you all don't know what neologism is... (Btw, it's not hyphenated, you econocunt!)

ne·ol·o·gism (n-l-jzm)
n.
A meaningless word used by a psychotic.

asshatery wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

That's my main problem with the Libertarians.  They start out with a flawed premise, much like objectivism, that the free market is a superior proposition. The free market, just like big government, breeds greed and corruption.

Were you born retarded or did the Henry the 4th get to your brain?  The free market does not breed corruption.  Even the Accusation of Corruption is a killer in the free market, that is if people give a damn about product or service, and people will stop using you.  Read your God Damn Adam Smith, hell read Thomas Friedman, or Sowell.  I hate fucking want to be econocunts like you that think you know anything about the actual functioning of markets because you took Macro and Micro as an undergrad.  Learn how Economy affects society as a whole.

You are absolutely right.  There's no corruption in big business.  I stand corrected.

Since you're thick, that was sarcasm.

headkicker_girl wrote:

Yes, of course at 16, you knew more about economics than Ray Croc.  Why, his billions were a mere fluke.  Just think of the heights McDonalds could have reached if only they had been more mindful of the genius in their midst.

When did I say I knew more about economics than Ray Croc at age 16?  Could you point it out for me?  Ohhhhhhhhh yeah I didn't 

Suicide---Your Only Option.

Btw, our friend has a new tagline.

Yay admins!

headkicker_girl wrote:

You are absolutely right.  There's no corruption in big business.  I stand corrected.

There is corruption in big business. 
Big business exists where there is free enterprise. 
Therefore free enterprise breeds big business.

OK...

You are an attorney. 
You are here. 
Therefore this site is a breeding ground for attorneys.

FOR THE LOVE OF GAWD SHUT DOWN THIS SITE NOW!!!

Last edited by Zookeeper (2007-10-16 17:34:14)

asshatery wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

Yes, of course at 16, you knew more about economics than Ray Croc.  Why, his billions were a mere fluke.  Just think of the heights McDonalds could have reached if only they had been more mindful of the genius in their midst.

When did I say I knew more about economics than Ray Croc at age 16?  Could you point it out for me?  Ohhhhhhhhh yeah I didn't 

Suicide---Your Only Option.

Let me quote you, fucktard:

but McDonalds knows less about Economics than a High Schooler

Were you talking about some other high schooler other than yourself?

Dude, seriously, I've had hang nails smarter than you.

Zookeeper wrote:

There is corruption in big business. 
Big business exists where there is free enterprise. 
Therefore free enterprise breeds big business.

What is this, a macroeconomic smackdown or an exercise in strawman arguments?

PS: I just noticed someone's been busy with the user titles. I'm not that avid, really. Avuncular or jocose, perhaps. Possibly truculent.

Dirckman wrote:

I like turtles

Finally, someone with some sense.

headkicker_girl wrote:

I haven't heard one argument in favor of libertarianism.  If the free market is so great, make a well-rationed argument to persuade me.  In the past I've given you more credit that a douche like Asshatery, but you're falling short today.

You made a simplistic statement like "There's no corruption in big business" as if that somehow proved something or made some substative point.  Are we supposed to take that statement as such a brilliant and powerful condemnation of a free market (and apparently libertarianism) that it leaves us in a position of having to rush to defend them?

{Debates whether to throw him-self into the midst of this free-for-all by extolling the virtues of Marxism, or to roll a cigarette and dream of turtle soup - Mmm, soup . . .}

XregnaR wrote:

Libertarianism is not an economic theory, it is a political one, based on reduced government and more individual freedoms.  It also centers around the concept of personal responsibility, which sadly most people lack.

A truly free market economy would cause corrupt businesses to go all Darwinian and shit. 

In the current [sarcasm]free[/sarcasm] market, corrupt practices are protected by a combination of slick lobbyists, easily purchased politicians and a complete apathy towards the concept of personal responsibility by at least 98% of the population.

Eliminate these three things, and companies that try to pull some bullshit on their potential consumers would experience a sucking noise in their ledger books similar to a sonic boom.

Sadly, the possibility of even one of these aspects changing is pretty much nil, unless the remain 2% invest heavily in firearms and testicular fortitude.

You hit it on the head.  It's all great in theory, but power corrupts, and aside from the lobbyists, etc., the rich like to remain in power and have no intention of allowing anything to interfere.  A TRUE free market system would prevent this from occurring, but this would also mean that people would have to have the intelligence to realize that they are being manipulated, and they don't. 

In addition, for the free market to work perfectly, too many assumptions must come to fruition.  For example, there must be perfect competition, no monopolies, no price fixing, etc.  Why is government intervention necessary?  To prevent one corporation from  owning everything, which is the necessary and final product of a truly "free market." 

In addition, the free market does not necessarily create innovation...it stifles it.  Microsoft is a good example.  It dominates the market, yet arguably makes a shitty, flawed product and puts a great deal of money into crushing the competition.

As far as I'm concerned, the free market is a myth.

headkicker_girl wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, the free market is a myth.

Why do you keep harping against an imaginary economic system?

All legitimate markets are highly regulated.  Are you railing against capitalism (an economic theory) or against Libertarianism (a political one)?

Defining that, exactly what economic or political system do you champion?  How is it less corrupt?

opsec wrote:

All legitimate markets are highly regulated.  Are you railing against capitalism (an economic theory) or against Libertarianism (a political one)?

Defining that, exactly what economic or political system do you champion?  How is it less corrupt?

That's a good question, and I'm glad you asked.  I am not a "champion" of any political or economic system because I can see the inherent pros and cons in all of them.   (Are there pros to a dictatorship?  I would say yes, in the case of Iraq, because Saddam made a country out of three factions that hate each other and couldn't wait to start slaughtering each other as soon as he was out of the way.  Same with Yugoslavia).  Would I prefer to live in a capitalist society over a communist society?  Of course, but there's no place where perfect communism has ever been practiced, so who can say that it wouldn't work out?  Cubans are more literate than Americans.  And as we've seen post 9/11, many Americans will gladly give away their freedoms if someone tells that it's being done in the name of protecting us from "the terrorists."

As for Libertarianism, I despise it as a political theory because it's proponents see a mythical free market as the answer to all of societal ills.  A perfect free market will NEVER exist, so it's just mental masturbation as far as I'm concerned.  You might as well sit in a pumpkin patch and pray to the easter bunny to make the world a better place.

headkicker_girl wrote:

[I am not a "champion" of any political or economic system

Ah, so you're an anarchist.

headkicker_girl wrote:

because I can see the inherent pros and cons in all of them.

And apparently omniscient, which I guess would make you a nihilist.

Roger_That wrote:

THIS IS NOT DRUDGE!  SHUT UP ALL OF YOU or I will lock this thread.

Back off, I'm lawyer-baitin'.

headkicker_girl wrote:

asshatery wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

Yes, of course at 16, you knew more about economics than Ray Croc.  Why, his billions were a mere fluke.  Just think of the heights McDonalds could have reached if only they had been more mindful of the genius in their midst.

When did I say I knew more about economics than Ray Croc at age 16?  Could you point it out for me?  Ohhhhhhhhh yeah I didn't 

Suicide---Your Only Option.

Let me quote you, fucktard:

but McDonalds knows less about Economics than a High Schooler

Were you talking about some other high schooler other than yourself?

Dude, seriously, I've had hang nails smarter than you.

Cum Dumpster,  I didn't say that I knew it in High School.  You would never ever ever make it in a contract negotiation.  Choke on a Cock and die.

Last edited by asshatery (2007-10-16 22:56:04)

headkicker_girl wrote:

asshatery wrote:

Chock on a Cock and die.

I see you're a master of spelling as well as economics...truly, a renaissance man.  Now excuse me, I must go chock on a cock!  Hizzah!

You're such a cock-chocker.

He can't even spell "hattery". Let's not bait the retarded.

headkicker_girl wrote:

You hit it on the head.  It's all great in theory, but power corrupts, and aside from the lobbyists, etc., the rich like to remain in power and have no intention of allowing anything to interfere.  A TRUE free market system would prevent this from occurring, but this would also mean that people would have to have the intelligence to realize that they are being manipulated, and they don't. 

In addition, for the free market to work perfectly, too many assumptions must come to fruition.  For example, there must be perfect competition, no monopolies, no price fixing, etc.  Why is government intervention necessary?  To prevent one corporation from  owning everything, which is the necessary and final product of a truly "free market." 

In addition, the free market does not necessarily create innovation...it stifles it.  Microsoft is a good example.  It dominates the market, yet arguably makes a shitty, flawed product and puts a great deal of money into crushing the competition.

As far as I'm concerned, the free market is a myth.

Actually you’r missing a simple trick here.  There is no such thing as a natural Monopoly.  There has to be government restriction on the market to create one.  In a free market no matter how big and powerful a company is anyone can start up a competition.  True it might not be much of one, but it still is not a Monopoly. If someone makes a better OS than Microsoft and they decide to sell it to Microsoft that is their own choice.

You may not like it but that doesn't make Microsoft a monopoly.  To understand why Microsoft does so well you only have to look at their early market saturation, and their bundling program (which by the by was not monopolistic, a company can doesn't have to provide you with shit, and they can make any agrement with the PC manufacturers they want.) which were innovative ways to flood the market with their product.  Also marketing to the lowest common denominator is a great idea.  You may want a lot of functions in your OS but a shitkicker like myself,, give me a pretty picture to click.

Back to the question of the free market, my question to you is , what do you mean by "work perfectly"?  To what end do you think the market should work?  An even distribution of goods?

Asshat -- do you really think that I want to have any sort of dialogue with you now?  I wish I could grow balls only so I could tell you to suck them.