The Official Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalist Thread

#1

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
84,550
Likes
50,066
#1
Figured it was about time we did this. The Ron Paul thread kind of served that purpose, but it's about time to retire that one and go with a broader theme.

Anyways, thought I'd start this off with this cool bit of history I learned today. Cold-hearted economists like David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill staunchly argued against slavery. Their side of the debate was countered by bleeding hearts like Charles Dickens and Thomas Carlyle who argued for it. Kinda interesting. Freedom rules.

David M. Levy, Sandra J. Peart, The Secret History of the Dismal Science. Part II. Brotherhood, Trade, and the Negro Question | Library of Economics and Liberty
 
#8
#8
19063573.jpg
 
#9
#9
I don't believe there is anything the state can do better than private enterprise.

The state's monopoly on violence is illegitimate.

Has anyone read the ongoing series on political obligation being run by libertarian.org?
 
#13
#13
are libertarians against monopolies per se or monopolies that create barriers to entry? I'm not sure they're the same thing.

Monopolies can only exist with government collusion. Absent government interference, there can be no monopoly. True libertarians are against government interference in the economy.
 
#15
#15
Interesting that you brought up John Stuart Mill's position on slavery. Most find his utilitarianism to be morally corrupt because it advocates the ends instead the means. Most arguements for slavery were telos in nature.

Speaking of slavery, I am always struck by Aristotle's argument for slavery. He basically said that they didn't deserve to be free because the were of intellectually inferior to their master. (To me) It was a fallacious argument for physical slavery. However if applied to modern political slavery, the argument becomes rather intriguing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
are libertarians against monopolies per se or monopolies that create barriers to entry? I'm not sure they're the same thing.

If a firm establishes monopoly power through natural market operations, libertarians are fine with it. Monopolies like that are extremely rare, and short-lived.

The monopolies that create barriers to entry use government as a tool to secure their monopolies. Those are the type of monopolies that are commonplace, and long-lasting.
 
#17
#17
Interesting that you brought up John Stuart Mill's position on slavery. Most find his utilitarianism to be morally corrupt because it advocates the ends instead the means. Most arguements for slavery were telos in nature.

Speaking of slavery, I am always struck by Aristotle's argument for slavery. He basically said that they didn't deserve to be free because the were of intellectually inferior to their master. (To me) It was a fallacious argument for physical slavery. However if applied to modern political slavery, the argument becomes rather intriguing.

Are you asserting that there are no 'natural slaves'? Or, are you simply asserting that Aristotle's criteria for deciding the question of who are these slaves are faulty?

I think there are probably individuals who are born as natural slaves; I just think we do not have the resources to know, without a doubt, who they are. There are certainly individuals who would much rather be told exactly what to do throughout their entire lives than have to deal with making any critical decisions. I would say that these individuals are natural slaves.
 
#19
#19
I've been thinking about how the government's hand in college education has been messing everything up. If it was purely free market forces, we wouldn't be struggling with college debt or filling the needs of the job market (i.e. competing with Asia). I think 30 years of misallocation of human resources at the onset of people's professional development has really slowed us down. And we don't have to do anything to fix it but remove government.
 
#20
#20
Monopolies can only exist with government collusion. Absent government interference, there can be no monopoly. True libertarians are against government interference in the economy.

You sure about that? Let's say I own the only navigable shoreline on an island. If I build a port and any one that wants to use the port must go through mine given the geographic constraints don't I have a monopoly on this particular trade?
 
#21
#21
I've been thinking about how the government's hand in college education has been messing everything up. If it was purely free market forces, we wouldn't be struggling with college debt or filling the needs of the job market (i.e. competing with Asia). I think 30 years of misallocation of human resources at the onset of people's professional development has really slowed us down. And we don't have to do anything to fix it but remove government.

Totally agree. We would've already made a huge switch to e-learning/web certifications if there weren't for so much government subsidization of traditional university education.
 
#22
#22
You sure about that? Let's say I own the only navigable shoreline on an island. If I build a port and any one that wants to use the port must go through mine given the geographic constraints don't I have a monopoly on this particular trade?

I have a monopoly on the specific property I own, too. The point is you don't have a monopoly on ports.
 
#23
#23
I have a monopoly on the specific property I own, too. The point is you don't have a monopoly on ports.

I could certainly have a de facto monopoly if no other land was suitable to a port on this hypothetical island.

I'm simply suggesting that having a monopoly isn't entirely dependent on the government as was suggested earlier.

It has more to do with having exclusive supply.
 

VN Store



Back
Top