[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
in addition to having bad ideas, [/quote]
If you have the time could you go into detail about why you feel this way.
I will admit I’m ignorant to what the bulk of his ideas were, beyond baby baby bare bone basics.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I could not find any sales figures for Rothbard, so I am pretty sure you could not either.[/quote]
Well, if his books could provide him a living in the marketplace, why didn’t he live off their publication?
And, since his books didn’t supply him a living via the market, didn’t he have an obligation to cease that unproductive endeavor and go find productive work instead of producing something that required a government subsidy and welfare?
I mean, that’s Rothbard’ theory, right? How come it is good for everyone else, except him?[/quote]
I think that you think that Rothbard was some sort of Ayn Rand with testicles.
Though she might have had those too.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
If you have the time could you go into detail about why you feel this way. [/quote]
He espoused “anarcho-capitalism,” a belief that at base advocates the elimination of the state - complete elimination, including even no courts or public law enforcement.
It is goofball theory in innumerable ways - and theory it is and will ever be, it being so incompatible with basic human nature.
[quote]orion wrote:
I think that you think that Rothbard was some sort of Ayn Rand with testicles.
Though she might have had those too. [/quote]
Do you have an explanation for inconsistency and hypocrisy on the part of Rothbard, or no?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
He espoused “anarcho-capitalism,” a belief that at base advocates the elimination of the state - complete elimination, including even no courts or public law enforcement.
[/quote]
And I assume if the market demands a need for those things, the market will produce them anyway without the state?
Seems like in that case we would just end up right back to where we started, having them and tearing them back down.
interesting. Crazy talk, but interesting.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I think that you think that Rothbard was some sort of Ayn Rand with testicles.
Though she might have had those too. [/quote]
Do you have an explanation for inconsistency and hypocrisy on the part of Rothbard, or no?[/quote]
There is neither inconsistency nor hypocrisy.
I believe him to be the one who authored the RP newsletters.
This guy was utterly pragmatic and willing to do whatever it takes.
You can make of that what you will, but its not hypocrisy, it is living off the enemy.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
If you have the time could you go into detail about why you feel this way. [/quote]
He espoused “anarcho-capitalism,” a belief that at base advocates the elimination of the state - complete elimination, including even no courts or public law enforcement.
It is goofball theory in innumerable ways - and theory it is and will ever be, it being so incompatible with basic human nature.[/quote]
That is his ideal, yes, and most of his books do not even mention it.
[quote]orion wrote:
There is neither inconsistency nor hypocrisy.
I believe him to be the one who authored the RP newsletters.
This guy was utterly pragmatic and willing to do whatever it takes.
You can make of that what you will, but its not hypocrisy, it is living off the enemy. [/quote]
Equal parts hilarious and preposterous. I should have expected you’d come up with nothing.
In any event, Rothbard is the Great Enabler - if he gets to “live off the state”, everyone deserves that same right - as we all deserve to be as “utterly pragmatic” as Rothbard, right? - and so I don’t want to hear any libertarian complaints to the contrary.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
There is neither inconsistency nor hypocrisy.
I believe him to be the one who authored the RP newsletters.
This guy was utterly pragmatic and willing to do whatever it takes.
You can make of that what you will, but its not hypocrisy, it is living off the enemy. [/quote]
Equal parts hilarious and preposterous. I should have expected you’d come up with nothing.
In any event, Rothbard is the Great Enabler - if he gets to “live off the state”, everyone deserves that same right - as we all deserve to be as “utterly pragmatic” as Rothbard, right? - and so I don’t want to hear any libertarian complaints to the contrary.[/quote]
As I said, make off that what you will.
It seems to be very clear to me however that you have never read any of his books and will bitch and moan about trivialities to avoid ever doing so.
Perfectly fine, there is enough competition for me without people actually trying to stretch their minds.
Tom Woods no longer works for the state, he lives of off his books and speaking engagements and I am sure you will dismiss him too, because you do not care about any of this stuff and you would rather have that nobody else cared either.
There, find some mud to sling on him, I am sure that he is not the perfect human being, by your standards, the only valid one of course, and thereby, by not living up to those impeccable and unimpeachable standards conservative or liberal writers have set, can be dismissed without ever opening a page of his writings.
[quote]orion wrote:
As I said, make off that what you will. [/quote]
His actions define him, and his actions undermine the very theory he insists is “right”, and you can’t defend his hypocrisy.
No, I’ve read much of “Enemy of the State” (it’s free on the web…of course it is, no one would actually buy it) and it is, bulntly, atrocious.
Set that aside though - as much as you might like for it to be, my criticism is not “trivial”. Why should anyone else have to live by the tenets Rothbard preaches if he doesn’t?
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
do you care to provide a condensed version ?[/quote]
No.
You, you specifically, need to watch all of it, because you are the one insisting that “big business” would catapult us into a Blade Runner scenario if they were allowed to.
To level up is work, pretend to be Asian for a few hours. [/quote]
I disagree that I said big business will catapult us ant where and if I understand Rothbard I agree with him and do not see anything he says revolutionary .
The only area I would say free market is best would be the labor market. I would also like to comment IMO the Insurance companies have changed the Medical market into the Isurance market and in doing so they have high jacked both profits and control
You may have considered my stance on Mitt Romney as being anti free market. IMO my stance was exactly free market. If Corporations are people then people are corporations especially us that own them . My point was and is that Mitt’s corporations dollar is worth $.86 or more and Mine is worth $.70 or less . There is an inherent disparity that is stacked against me in what you want to refer to as the free market
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
do you care to provide a condensed version ?[/quote]
No.
You, you specifically, need to watch all of it, because you are the one insisting that “big business” would catapult us into a Blade Runner scenario if they were allowed to.
To level up is work, pretend to be Asian for a few hours. [/quote]
I disagree that I said big business will catapult us any where and if I understand Rothbard I agree with him and do not see anything he says revolutionary .
The only area I would say free market is best would be the labor market. I would also like to comment IMO the Insurance companies have changed the Medical market into the Isurance market and in doing so they have high jacked both profits and control
You may have considered my stance on Mitt Romney as being anti free market. IMO my stance was exactly free market. If Corporations are people then people are corporations especially us that own them . My point was and is that Mitt’s corporations dollar is worth $.86 or more and Mine is worth $.70 or less . There is an inherent disparity that is stacked against me in what you want to refer to as the free market
[/quote]
I do not refer to that as a free market.
I refer to that as crony capitalism, corporatism, neo mercantilism or by its traditional name, fascism.
Its you that wants government that already has granted territorial oligopolies to health insurers to move the US to a non profit system.
Meaning from seriously damaged competition to no competition at all.
Rothbards lecture is relevant insofar as he gives one example after another how big business turned to governments to make cartels and monopolies work, they themselves could never do it for long.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
do you care to provide a condensed version ?[/quote]
No.
You, you specifically, need to watch all of it, because you are the one insisting that “big business” would catapult us into a Blade Runner scenario if they were allowed to.
To level up is work, pretend to be Asian for a few hours. [/quote]
I disagree that I said big business will catapult us any where and if I understand Rothbard I agree with him and do not see anything he says revolutionary .
The only area I would say free market is best would be the labor market. I would also like to comment IMO the Insurance companies have changed the Medical market into the Isurance market and in doing so they have high jacked both profits and control
You may have considered my stance on Mitt Romney as being anti free market. IMO my stance was exactly free market. If Corporations are people then people are corporations especially us that own them . My point was and is that Mitt’s corporations dollar is worth $.86 or more and Mine is worth $.70 or less . There is an inherent disparity that is stacked against me in what you want to refer to as the free market
[/quote]
I do not refer to that as a free market.
I refer to that as crony capitalism, corporatism, neo mercantilism or by its traditional name, fascism.
Its you that wants government that already has granted territorial oligopolies to health insurers to move the US to a non profit system.
Meaning from seriously damaged competition to no competition at all.
Rothbards lecture is relevant insofar as he gives one example after another how big business turned to governments to make cartels and monopolies work, they themselves could never do it for long.
[/quote]
I do not think Insurance companies should be allowed to function as for profit in the Health care industry I think if Insurance is going to be allowed in health care than it should be non profit because as it is presently they (MONOPOLIZE) the health care industry. One Reason I could go a step farther and think health care would be best socialized a
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
As I said, make off that what you will. [/quote]
His actions define him, and his actions undermine the very theory he insists is “right”, and you can’t defend his hypocrisy.
No, I’ve read much of “Enemy of the State” (it’s free on the web…of course it is, no one would actually buy it) and it is, bulntly, atrocious.
Set that aside though - as much as you might like for it to be, my criticism is not “trivial”. Why should anyone else have to live by the tenets Rothbard preaches if he doesn’t?[/quote]
Well, people buy it, Amazon says so.
Also, BUT THEY SHOULD.
Get every dollar they throw at you, I beg of you.
Take more!
Grab whatever you can, two, three, four times your share.
They took it from you at gunpoint, re-appropriate it for the free market.
Fuck winning hearts and minds, lets bleed them to death, the system is dying anyway, you expect us libertarians to form principled little colonies underneath bridges?
Hell no.
You want us to be saints so that the conservatives can still use as as their tools and then shit on our shoulders.
Hell no x2.
We may not be a cohesive, but we are a subversive lot.
And we are the subversive lot desperately needed to win elections if you happen to be a Republican because old white men are dying out.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
do you care to provide a condensed version ?[/quote]
No.
You, you specifically, need to watch all of it, because you are the one insisting that “big business” would catapult us into a Blade Runner scenario if they were allowed to.
To level up is work, pretend to be Asian for a few hours. [/quote]
I disagree that I said big business will catapult us any where and if I understand Rothbard I agree with him and do not see anything he says revolutionary .
The only area I would say free market is best would be the labor market. I would also like to comment IMO the Insurance companies have changed the Medical market into the Isurance market and in doing so they have high jacked both profits and control
You may have considered my stance on Mitt Romney as being anti free market. IMO my stance was exactly free market. If Corporations are people then people are corporations especially us that own them . My point was and is that Mitt’s corporations dollar is worth $.86 or more and Mine is worth $.70 or less . There is an inherent disparity that is stacked against me in what you want to refer to as the free market
[/quote]
I do not refer to that as a free market.
I refer to that as crony capitalism, corporatism, neo mercantilism or by its traditional name, fascism.
Its you that wants government that already has granted territorial oligopolies to health insurers to move the US to a non profit system.
Meaning from seriously damaged competition to no competition at all.
Rothbards lecture is relevant insofar as he gives one example after another how big business turned to governments to make cartels and monopolies work, they themselves could never do it for long.
[/quote]
I do not think Insurance companies should be allowed to function as for profit in the Health care industry I think if Insurance is going to be allowed in health care than it should be non profit because as it is presently they (MONOPOLIZE) the health care industry. One Reason I could go a step farther and think health care would be best socialized a
[/quote]
As I said, you want the very organization that makes the status quo possible to fix it by taking it completely over.
I dont know what kind of logic that is, but it goes to show that even by your own logic there is one way, and one way alone (in practice that is) that such systems can be created… with the help of the state.
Armed men that kill you if you dont comply.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
As I said, make off that what you will. [/quote]
His actions define him, and his actions undermine the very theory he insists is “right”, and you can’t defend his hypocrisy.
No, I’ve read much of “Enemy of the State” (it’s free on the web…of course it is, no one would actually buy it) and it is, bulntly, atrocious.
Set that aside though - as much as you might like for it to be, my criticism is not “trivial”. Why should anyone else have to live by the tenets Rothbard preaches if he doesn’t?[/quote]
Well, people buy it, Amazon says so.
Also, BUT THEY SHOULD.
Get every dollar they throw at you, I beg of you.
Take more!
Grab whatever you can, two, three, four times your share.
They took it from you at gunpoint, re-appropriate it for the free market.
Fuck winning hearts and minds, lets bleed them to death, the system is dying anyway, you expect us libertarians to form principled little colonies underneath bridges?
Hell no.
You want us to be saints so that the conservatives can still use as as their tools and then shit on our shoulders.
Hell no x2.
We may not be a cohesive, but we are a subversive lot.
And we are the subversive lot desperately needed to win elections if you happen to be a Republican because old white men are dying out.
[/quote]
I don’t want to use libertarians. I don’t want their support at all. I’d rather lose, and try to build up conservatism for the future. Not that you’re American, but there’s a nice little Libertarian Party. Good luck.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
do you care to provide a condensed version ?[/quote]
No.
You, you specifically, need to watch all of it, because you are the one insisting that “big business” would catapult us into a Blade Runner scenario if they were allowed to.
To level up is work, pretend to be Asian for a few hours. [/quote]
I disagree that I said big business will catapult us any where and if I understand Rothbard I agree with him and do not see anything he says revolutionary .
The only area I would say free market is best would be the labor market. I would also like to comment IMO the Insurance companies have changed the Medical market into the Isurance market and in doing so they have high jacked both profits and control
You may have considered my stance on Mitt Romney as being anti free market. IMO my stance was exactly free market. If Corporations are people then people are corporations especially us that own them . My point was and is that Mitt’s corporations dollar is worth $.86 or more and Mine is worth $.70 or less . There is an inherent disparity that is stacked against me in what you want to refer to as the free market
[/quote]
I do not refer to that as a free market.
I refer to that as crony capitalism, corporatism, neo mercantilism or by its traditional name, fascism.
Its you that wants government that already has granted territorial oligopolies to health insurers to move the US to a non profit system.
Meaning from seriously damaged competition to no competition at all.
Rothbards lecture is relevant insofar as he gives one example after another how big business turned to governments to make cartels and monopolies work, they themselves could never do it for long.
[/quote]
I do not think Insurance companies should be allowed to function as for profit in the Health care industry I think if Insurance is going to be allowed in health care than it should be non profit because as it is presently they (MONOPOLIZE) the health care industry. One Reason I could go a step farther and think health care would be best socialized a
[/quote]
As I said, you want the very organization that makes the status quo possible to fix it by taking it completely over.
I dont know what kind of logic that is, but it goes to show that even by your own logic there is one way, and one way alone (in practice that is) that such systems can be created… with the help of the state.
Armed men that kill you if you dont comply.
[/quote]
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
do you care to provide a condensed version ?[/quote]
No.
You, you specifically, need to watch all of it, because you are the one insisting that “big business” would catapult us into a Blade Runner scenario if they were allowed to.
To level up is work, pretend to be Asian for a few hours. [/quote]
I disagree that I said big business will catapult us any where and if I understand Rothbard I agree with him and do not see anything he says revolutionary .
The only area I would say free market is best would be the labor market. I would also like to comment IMO the Insurance companies have changed the Medical market into the Isurance market and in doing so they have high jacked both profits and control
You may have considered my stance on Mitt Romney as being anti free market. IMO my stance was exactly free market. If Corporations are people then people are corporations especially us that own them . My point was and is that Mitt’s corporations dollar is worth $.86 or more and Mine is worth $.70 or less . There is an inherent disparity that is stacked against me in what you want to refer to as the free market
[/quote]
I do not refer to that as a free market.
I refer to that as crony capitalism, corporatism, neo mercantilism or by its traditional name, fascism.
Its you that wants government that already has granted territorial oligopolies to health insurers to move the US to a non profit system.
Meaning from seriously damaged competition to no competition at all.
Rothbards lecture is relevant insofar as he gives one example after another how big business turned to governments to make cartels and monopolies work, they themselves could never do it for long.
[/quote]
I do not think Insurance companies should be allowed to function as for profit in the Health care industry I think if Insurance is going to be allowed in health care than it should be non profit because as it is presently they (MONOPOLIZE) the health care industry. One Reason I could go a step farther and think health care would be best socialized a
[/quote]
As I said, you want the very organization that makes the status quo possible to fix it by taking it completely over.
I dont know what kind of logic that is, but it goes to show that even by your own logic there is one way, and one way alone (in practice that is) that such systems can be created… with the help of the state.
Armed men that kill you if you dont comply.
[/quote]
[/quote]
I do not understand what you are trying to say ?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
I don’t want to use libertarians. I don’t want their support at all. I’d rather lose, and try to build up conservatism for the future. Not that you’re American, but there’s a nice little Libertarian Party. Good luck.[/quote]
Yeah well, two party system.
Insofar as conservatism is supposed to accept reality as it is and go from there… I think you will have a lot of accepting ahead of you.