909
A mile rule (slrpnk.net)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 2 hours ago

I remember those innocent days when I considered myself a libertarian. If you aren't part of a marginalized group, and you consider yourself smart and responsible, AND most importantly assume that other libertarians are arguing in good faith with good priorities, some of what they say can seem to make a lot of sense.

But then when you look at the real-world motivations and results, they start to look like people who are down to to smoke weed while licking the same boot as a brown person.

[-] AtariDump@lemmy.world 18 points 9 hours ago

I was shooting heroin and reading “The Fountainhead” in the front seat of my privately owned police cruiser when a call came in. I put a quarter in the radio to activate it. It was the chief.

“Bad news, detective. We got a situation.”

“What? Is the mayor trying to ban trans fats again?”

“Worse. Somebody just stole four hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of bitcoins.”

The heroin needle practically fell out of my arm. “What kind of monster would do something like that? Bitcoins are the ultimate currency: virtual, anonymous, stateless. They represent true economic freedom, not subject to arbitrary manipulation by any government. Do we have any leads?”

“Not yet. But mark my words: we’re going to figure out who did this and we’re going to take them down … provided someone pays us a fair market rate to do so.”

“Easy, chief,” I said. “Any rate the market offers is, by definition, fair.”

He laughed. “That’s why you’re the best I got, Lisowski. Now you get out there and find those bitcoins.”

“Don’t worry,” I said. “I’m on it.”

I put a quarter in the siren. Ten minutes later, I was on the scene. It was a normal office building, strangled on all sides by public sidewalks. I hopped over them and went inside.

“Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge and my gun and a small picture of Ron Paul. “Nobody move unless you want to!” They didn’t.

“Now, which one of you punks is going to pay me to investigate this crime?” No one spoke up.

“Come on,” I said. “Don’t you all understand that the protection of private property is the foundation of all personal liberty?”

It didn’t seem like they did.

“Seriously, guys. Without a strong economic motivator, I’m just going to stand here and not solve this case. Cash is fine, but I prefer being paid in gold bullion or autographed Penn Jillette posters.”

Nothing. These people were stonewalling me. It almost seemed like they didn’t care that a fortune in computer money invented to buy drugs was missing.

I figured I could wait them out. I lit several cigarettes indoors. A pregnant lady coughed, and I told her that secondhand smoke is a myth. Just then, a man in glasses made a break for it.

“Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled.

Too late. He was already out the front door. I went after him.

“Stop right there!” I yelled as I ran. He was faster than me because I always try to avoid stepping on public sidewalks. Our country needs a private-sidewalk voucher system, but, thanks to the incestuous interplay between our corrupt federal government and the public-sidewalk lobby, it will never happen.

I was losing him. “Listen, I’ll pay you to stop!” I yelled. “What would you consider an appropriate price point for stopping? I’ll offer you a thirteenth of an ounce of gold and a gently worn ‘Bob Barr ‘08’ extra-large long-sleeved men’s T-shirt!”

He turned. In his hand was a revolver that the Constitution said he had every right to own. He fired at me and missed. I pulled my own gun, put a quarter in it, and fired back. The bullet lodged in a U.S.P.S. mailbox less than a foot from his head. I shot the mailbox again, on purpose.

“All right, all right!” the man yelled, throwing down his weapon. “I give up, cop! I confess: I took the bitcoins.”

“Why’d you do it?” I asked, as I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy.

“Because I was afraid.”

“Afraid?”

“Afraid of an economic future free from the pernicious meddling of central bankers,” he said. “I’m a central banker.”

I wanted to coldcock the guy. Years ago, a central banker killed my partner. Instead, I shook my head.

“Let this be a message to all your central-banker friends out on the street,” I said. “No matter how many bitcoins you steal, you’ll never take away the dream of an open society based on the principles of personal and economic freedom.”

He nodded, because he knew I was right. Then he swiped his credit card to pay me for arresting him.

[-] don@lemm.ee 2 points 3 hours ago
[-] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 3 points 7 hours ago

Libertarians are just republicans who are too afraid of being lumped in with their own so they came up with a different name. Sure you may think it isn’t, but every libertarian politician and leader votes among republican lines. Actions speak louder.

[-] rational_lib@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago

Actual argument I had recently with a "libertarian" family member:
Libertarian: "Rent control shouldn't exist! It's wrong for big government to tell property owners and renters what kind of agreements they can enter!"
Me: "What are your thoughts on single family zoning that bans missing-middle housing throughout most of the US?"
Libertarian: "Well that's different! People choosing what kind of rules should apply to where they live is the epitome of freedom!"
Me: "Couldn't that same argument apply to rent control?"
Libertarian: "Wha...you have clearly been brainwashed by the woke mind virus! So sad!"

[-] lemmyseikai@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago

Clearly they are not a libertarian.

The correct reaponse is "The government would need to demonstrate a beyond reasonable need for that ban. Preventing industrial chemical plants from being built near housing, sure, types of housing, get out."

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago

Libertarian ideology is logically solid, but it has two minor problems:

  1. It heavily depends on assumptions that never hold in real life.
  2. Any other ideology, when confronted with bad outcome predictions of their models, will try to explain why their way actually prevents these bad outcomes. Libertarianism... prefers to explain why these outcomes are actually a good thing.
[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 13 points 1 day ago

Except it isn't logically solid, because the premise is that Governing bodies cannot be expected to provide for the general welfare because humans are naturally greedy and selfish, and the solution is that we abolish all social safety nets and instead rely on voluntary charity to solve the problem of poverty...

But what voluntary charity exists if by Libertarian's own logic: Humans are too greedy and selfish to give to the poor even when they're literally mandated to do so?

[-] jessca@lemmy.ca 4 points 18 hours ago

It also seems to assume perfect knowledge and that all harms can be compensated for.

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

Hence my first "minor problem". There are more such assumptions though - e.g. the assumption that you can star/stop/switch t a business/career with zero cost.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 18 hours ago

The lives Brian Thompson measured in dollars were priceless to the families they said goodbye to.

Luigi, number one!

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

Milton Friedman, my favourite libertarian, advocated for a negative income tax as the best form of social safety net. It means that the minimum amount of money any person gets is not zero!

He also liked to point out that a lot of other government programs were in fact regressive: paid for in taxes by working class people and providing the benefit to middle class and up. A classic example of that is funding for higher education. It’s pretty darn regressive to pay for higher education with taxes collected from working class people whose children don’t even attend higher education!

He has a lot of other arguments that make a ton of sense. He is against any and all forms of subsidies for large businesses and he is against laws which create and protect monopolies and oligopolies.

The one thing I’m not clear on is how to organize society to protect against future government interference and especially corruption by special interests.

[-] Narauko@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

You need solid anticorruption laws the same way you need solid antitrust laws and they need to be liberally enforced. The problem is that neither have been since the 70's. Regulatory capture by big business is a massive problem, and I am not sure if it is possible to 100% defend against.

I self identify libertarian but lean left. I'd argue that while things like funding higher education may currently be regressive, if free education extended from the current cap of 12th grade to encompass at least an associates level degree you would have a lot more lower and working class taking advantage of it and making it less regressive. With the country having jettisoned it's manufacturing and blue collar industry, I would further argue this is necessary for the country to compete on the international stage.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Germany has government funded education throughout. It’s still regressive! They stream people into either working class tracks (hauptschule and realschule) or academic (gymnasium). In effect, this means working class students have far less opportunity to go to university in Germany than they do in the US, despite the latter’s problems with affordability.

Friedman would go 100% the other way and abolish public schools entirely, along with abolishing the minimum wage, subsidies for universities, subsidies for business, and tariffs. His argument is that the minimum wage puts a floor on the productivity of a worker which means many people who could be hired at a lower wage and be trained on the job instead do not get hired at all and have to pay for their own training through school (either directly with tuition or indirectly through taxes).

The current system ends up creating large classes of people who get an education in subject matter that’s totally irrelevant to their career (like someone studying sociology in order to work in HR). Why should we, as taxpayers, be paying for this? Employers should be paying to train their own workers on the job!

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 18 hours ago

That name sounds familiar.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

He’s one of the most famous economists of the 20th century. There’s a ton of YouTube videos of him debating all kinds of people and giving lectures on many different topics from his perspective.

[-] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

You have to pay toll for the road first

[-] frostysauce@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

The shoes require a subscription.

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 13 hours ago

You can have a free trial of 20 whole steps!

[-] bbpolterGAYst@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 1 day ago

i met plenty of people who'd like to fuck clowns and a total of zero who want to fuck libertarians. Clowns 1, Libertarians 0

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

So many of my friends grew up in libertarian families. I wish their parents had been professional clowns instead of perennially divorced wealth obsessed crypto-nazis.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Reminder: Ayn Rand died on public assistance.

They're only for freedom to gouge for water at the only source for a hundred miles when they believe they'll be the ones holding the ladle.

[-] ProtonEvoker@lemmy.world 117 points 1 day ago

A libertarian is just a conservative that likes weed. You can ask their girlfriends after they pick them up from middle school.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2025
909 points (97.5% liked)

196

16848 readers
1659 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS