I sure hope Tarkan has donated

[Tarkan]

The main thing that terrifies me about the Libertarians is their economics.

What's so scary about libertarian economics?

What should really terrify you is Keynesian economics. It's all bullshit built on an inflated money supply. Ever since Breton Woods the US has been exporting it's domestic inflation to the rest of the world because our industrial base (things of real value) has been eroding, but our ability to print dollars keeps on chugging along, and...given that until very recently you could only buy oil on the global market using dollars and the US was a de facto reserve currency, that created a demand for dollars even amongst the countries that didn't engage in any trade with the US. That's a house of cards that is going to collapse (hard) sooner or later. Chinese currency is no better and the Euro is a mess as well. Fiat currencies will always lead to seigniorage and financial collapse because it's easier to print money to temporarily solve problems than it is to actually fix problems or raise taxes.

The problem with libertarianism is, sort of like communism, it only works with a moral and conscientious people. And people, on the whole, are not moral and conscientious. Communism fails to minimize-maximize optimizers (which is genetically, in historical terms, the optimal strategy for Homo sapiens - why expend energy if we don't have to?), and libertarianism fails to economic populism ("it's not fair that Bob has twice as much as stuff as you, let's tax Bob / rob Bob and redistribute his stuff to us!"). Libertarianism does NOT mean if you don't work, you don't eat (that's more what you get from bureaucratic socialism like in Canada, where they strongly suggest euthanasia if you are no longer an economically productive member of society) - it just means that libertarians don't support using the government and government violence to take money from one group of people to give it to another group of people for whatever cause (one, it's immoral, two, government is really inefficient at re-distributing money). Charities fill the voluntary void that government does today with a nanny state.

In any event, libertarianism fails to automation. The basic economic function of y = f(k, l) or output equals a function of capital and labor is on the cusp of being replaced with y = f(k), rendering people progressively more economically useless. And we're going to hit that point in our lifetime (maybe in the next 10 years), and so the people that control all the capital, and it will only be a relative handful, will either have to use that capital output to take care of 99.9999% of the rest of the population, or they will decide to kill us off like some of the WEF presenters are more or less suggesting.

[ROB]

The main thing that terrifies me about the Libertarians is their economics.

What's so scary about libertarian economics?

What should really terrify you is Keynesian economics. It's all bullshit built on an inflated money supply. Ever since Breton Woods the US has been exporting it's domestic inflation to the rest of the world because our industrial base (things of real value) has been eroding, but our ability to print dollars keeps on chugging along, and...given that until very recently you could only buy oil on the global market using dollars and the US was a de facto reserve currency, that created a demand for dollars even amongst the countries that didn't engage in any trade with the US. That's a house of cards that is going to collapse (hard) sooner or later. Chinese currency is no better and the Euro is a mess as well. Fiat currencies will always lead to seigniorage and financial collapse because it's easier to print money to temporarily solve problems than it is to actually fix problems or raise taxes.

Thank you for perfectly illustrating the absolute retarded understanding of economics that terrifies me about Libertarians. Saved me some time.

[Alphabet]

I'll go full retard here and focus all the hate, disdain and rock throwing towards me.

I am no master of Economics, duh. But, if it isn't broken, why fix it? In my silly mind, anything other than a straight up barter system is putting a flux capacitor on a lawn mower. What's the fucking point?

I am flipping Legos or ammo, and I'm looking for quality Euro BDSM porn. el3so has the porn, a nice FN I want, and he needs Legos or ammo. We make a deal between ourselves at a price point we both think is fair.

Ok...Now we have to engage Rob Shipping Co. Ltd. Rob has his price for shipping. Now, el3so and I already have a shipping cost built into our price points, because we know what Rob Shipping Co. Ltd, and Tarkan and Brothers Dockside Mercantile services will cost us.

What's the big fucking deal? Other than government setting up a system of "taxation" (which is really extortion.) that we're supposed to follow, when we've already figured our shit out?

Liberty be scary yo.

[ROB]

Because your 20 tons of wheat for my 3 diamonds is inconvenient.

And taxes (or something similar) have been a reality of human existence since well before even the invention of money.

[gnaruki]

I like libertarian concepts in theory - they seem fair. But in practice they don't work well in anything greater than a simple, low-tech economy.

Barter is difficult, sometimes fun but inefficient. In all the swaps I've ever done they've never been completely fair. Every time I've either managed to trade up (sweet) or down (whatever, I'll take a small hit). On a small scale it can often end up a win-win. One man's trash is another's treasure as the cliche goes.

This thread reminds me of a book on my to read list: A libertarian walks into a bear : the utopian plot to liberate an American town (and some bears) ISBN: 9781541788510

[Alphabet]

I like libertarian concepts in theory - they seem fair. But in practice they don't work well in anything greater than a simple, low-tech economy.

Barter is difficult, sometimes fun but inefficient. In all the swaps I've ever done they've never been completely fair. Every time I've either managed to trade up (sweet) or down (whatever, I'll take a small hit). On a small scale it can often end up a win-win. One man's trash is another's treasure as the cliche goes.

This thread reminds me of a book on my to read list: A libertarian walks into a bear : the utopian plot to liberate an American town (and some bears) ISBN: 9781541788510

The Free Town Project was active in Grafton from 2004 to sometime in 2016...In 2012, a bear attacked a woman in her yard in Grafton. In 2018, a bear attacked a woman in her wheelchair, in Groton in Grafton County. Then in 2020, a bear attacked a man from behind, in Canaan, also in Grafton County. Before this, it had been more than a hundred years since the last black bear attack in all of New Hampshire.

In each case the victim survived the attack, and in the most serious case where injuries were really bad Fish and Game Maj. Jim Juneau said: "The homeowner unknowingly walked in on the animal, and that bear did what any animal is going to do when it feels cornered. It is going to act defensively. It's going to panic in an effort to get out, And I suspect in this case, the woman was in the wrong place at the wrong time.


The title, and the subject of the book was over dramatic, and biased.

In the case of the bear "problem", the city was still forced to follow state and federal wildlife laws. In a true Libertarian society, and assuming the bear threat was real, and not hyped to make a point, then citizens would have been free of govt regulations in dealing with the bear problem.

[gnaruki]

I'll need to read it. It does seem to be written by a smug liberal.

Back on your example of shipping metric tons of porn across the Atlantic. International maritime trade has a lot of moving parts. Could it be done without government regulation and subsidies? What do you think it'd look like? Would it result in some type of syndicalism? Would say the shippers team up to pay for channel dredging to access ports? Are all the various operators throughout the chain going to pitch in to make the system work?

Can Adam Smith's invisible hand work to keep the nuts and bolts of modern society humming along? It works on the consumer level. People vote with their dollars and entrepreneurs that figure out what people want are rewarded handsomely. But no one seems to want to pay for the boring shit.

[el3so]

Though no records were kept of the number of Free Town Project participants who moved to Grafton, the town's population grew from 1,138 in 2000 to 1,340 in 2010.[25] Project participants fashioned homes out of yurts, recreational vehicles, trailers, tents, and shipping containers. The changes they voted in included a 30% reduction in the town's budget, denying funding to the county's senior-citizens council.[26]

Sounds like a homeless encampment. In bear country?

No big predators around here except for wolves getting reintroduced, paid for by taxes.
That's the parts that are even easier to forget about than the logistics, the intangible stuff. From nature preservation to volatility. Almost makes me glad I pay taxes. And insurances. And bank fees.

[Alphabet]

I'll need to read it. It does seem to be written by a smug liberal.

Back on your example of shipping metric tons of porn across the Atlantic. International maritime trade has a lot of moving parts. Could it be done without government regulation and subsidies? What do you think it'd look like? Would it result in some type of syndicalism? Would say the shippers team up to pay for channel dredging to access ports? Are all the various operators throughout the chain going to pitch in to make the system work?

Can Adam Smith's invisible hand work to keep the nuts and bolts of modern society humming along? It works on the consumer level. People vote with their dollars and entrepreneurs that figure out what people want are rewarded handsomely. But no one seems to want to pay for the boring shit.

For me, it boils down to voluntary vs non voluntary participation.

If I want high quality Euro porn, and the shipper decides they need to expand their dock, dredge, or hire a security team to protect their ships from pirates, then that cost I expect to be built into the delivery of the product. It's my choice.

Vs.

I don't want high quality Euro porn, and decide to buy from Jimmy across the street. Under non voluntary participation, I still have to pay, through taxes, for a navy to keep those shipping lanes pirate free, for subsides to private business, for the dredging of that channel through a govt approved private company who uses their lobby powers to get that contract, and on and on and on. All for a product I either don't want, or can buy locally with none of the above involved. It isn't my choice. I pay or go to prison.

As for boring stuff...Same applies. Social Security. Medicare. Law enforcement.

I don't need cops. I have my own retirement planned. I take care of my own healthcare. My community has a private road we all paid for. We have a direct contract with Fire and EMS. Yet, I am still on top of that forced to pay for those services so others can have them.

It's bullshit.

I had a similar discussion in my tiny circle of degens that I call my friends, about supporting local mom and pop's just because. No. Fuck that. It is not my business to keep you in business just because. You sink or your product/service makes you money and keeps your head above water. If you need outside assistance, you're a failure and you need to drown.

[Alphabet]

Though no records were kept of the number of Free Town Project participants who moved to Grafton, the town's population grew from 1,138 in 2000 to 1,340 in 2010.[25] Project participants fashioned homes out of yurts, recreational vehicles, trailers, tents, and shipping containers. The changes they voted in included a 30% reduction in the town's budget, denying funding to the county's senior-citizens council.[26]

Sounds like a homeless encampment. In bear country?

No big predators around here except for wolves getting reintroduced, paid for by taxes.
That's the parts that are even easier to forget about than the logistics, the intangible stuff. From nature preservation to volatility. Almost makes me glad I pay taxes. And insurances. And bank fees.

I guarantee you the only reason it blew up into what it did, was the defunding of the old farts fund. There is no bigger group of American grifters in the entire nation than Boomers and older. You want to see a hardcore, far right of Reagan, kill a commie for mommy boomer go full on Stalinist? Talk about getting rid of SS.

Well, maybe veterans...but it would be a photo finish.

[Alphabet]

Because your 20 tons of wheat for my 3 diamonds is inconvenient.

And taxes (or something similar) have been a reality of human existence since well before even the invention of money.

I never figured you to fall into the precious metals/mineral BS. Because that's what it is.

If we're in a barter situation, my 20 tons of wheat would make Musk, Bezos and Zuck look like poors. You can't eat, fuck, drink, smoke or shoot a bar of gold or diamonds.

I'm trading that wheat to have a local doc and dentist on call, feeding my security team, and a few cows for slaughter now and then.

You can keep the shiny anal beads. That's what they'd be worth.

[Tarkan]

People fall for precious metals bullshit because it's easier than hauling around 20 tons of wheat. Barter is inherently inefficient of a trading mechanism, and you can't really develop a complex economy based on barter. Sooner or later, something that looks, smells, and feels a whole lot like "money" will arise.

[Alphabet]

People fall for precious metals bullshit because it's easier than hauling around 20 tons of wheat. Barter is inherently inefficient of a trading mechanism, and you can't really develop a complex economy based on barter. Sooner or later, something that looks, smells, and feels a whole lot like "money" will arise.

Ok, but why does it have to be complex? I'm not trolling, or trying to be edgy. I've admitted the worst marks I got at university were in Econ.

If I've somehow accumulated 20 tons of wheat, I'm not traveling around with that in the back of a Ford Raptor, hoping to bank at the Dallas swap meet. I've clearly got the infrastructure to grow, harvest, and store it. Or I stole it, and have to move it fast, because shelf life. Who says I have to sell anything above 5,10,15,20lb bags at a time?

I'm not even talking end of civilization, Mad Max economy where I keep the local warlord in chow type of barter. We'll just do another Great Depression. Your fiat paper, or your .05 oz of whatever means nothing if anyone is looking for tangible goods.

My brick of .22LR or .308 and a need for a sow or a couple of hens, or help fixing a transfer case VS your tangible goods and your needs. We make a face to face deal on what we both think is fair, without 14 middlemen getting their cut, or a Fed or politician hundreds of miles away determing what our goods are worth, and taxing our transaction because they can.

I'm sorry/not sorry, but I fail to see how that is "wrong", or needs to be more complex.

[Tarkan]

People fall for precious metals bullshit because it's easier than hauling around 20 tons of wheat. Barter is inherently inefficient of a trading mechanism, and you can't really develop a complex economy based on barter. Sooner or later, something that looks, smells, and feels a whole lot like "money" will arise.

Ok, but why does it have to be complex? I'm not trolling, or trying to be edgy. I've admitted the worst marks I got at university were in Econ.

If I've somehow accumulated 20 tons of wheat, I'm not traveling around with that in the back of a Ford Raptor, hoping to bank at the Dallas swap meet. I've clearly got the infrastructure to grow, harvest, and store it. Or I stole it, and have to move it fast, because shelf life. Who says I have to sell anything above 5,10,15,20lb bags at a time?

I'm not even talking end of civilization, Mad Max economy where I keep the local warlord in chow type of barter. We'll just do another Great Depression. Your fiat paper, or your .05 oz of whatever means nothing if anyone is looking for tangible goods.

My brick of .22LR or .308 and a need for a sow or a couple of hens, or help fixing a transfer case VS your tangible goods and your needs. We make a face to face deal on what we both think is fair, without 14 middlemen getting their cut, or a Fed or politician hundreds of miles away determing what our goods are worth, and taxing our transaction because they can.

I'm sorry/not sorry, but I fail to see how that is "wrong", or needs to be more complex.

I have nothing against barter. I think it's a perfectly reasonable mechanism of trade when you have two parties that have what each of the other wants.

But let's imagine a modern intact economy without money.

You are a farmer and you produce wheat. Wheat goes for around $6 a bushel or 60 lbs (sorry, we have to use some "unit" to measure "value". Your farm needs a new F250. An F250 costs about $80k these days, so if I'm doing my math right, that works out to 400 tons of wheat that you need to drop off when you buy your truck.

Your neighbor Bob, well, he's a sorghum farmer, and he has to drop off 500 tons of sorghum to buy the same truck.

Bob's neighbor Charlie, well, he's not a farmer, he's a plumber, and his average work bill is "worth" $2,000. So he does some plumbing work for everyone until he has $80k worth of chickens, hammers, saws, old tires, gasoline, hooch, yards of cloth, and then drops that off at the car dealership for his F250.

Your Ford dealership? They aren't just a dealership at this point, they are a warehouse and a grain elevator, blah blah blah.

Meanwhile, someone has to haul all this shit around to and fro between parties. We'll call this guy Dick. If Dick "specializes" in this job - pairing up buyers and sellers, he suddenly becomes a "middle man." He's not going to do this for free, he's going to take product off the top as an "in-kind" payment.

Now to make things easier, you might start writing things down on paper as IOUs. So, instead of dropping off a bunch of random goods, the plumber writes out 20 "plumbing job" IOUs to the dealership in exchange for his F250. Now the dealership doesn't have to store a bunch of random shit. They can store these little pieces of paper, and use them to pay employees (maybe) or buy other services without having to sell a car. Congrats, you just created a credit system, a futures system, and something suspiciously like money at the same time.

The reality is, you don't need an evil central bank for this stuff to happen. It will happen organically as economies become more complex. While it's more resilient for us to be jacks of all trades trading/producing in all goods, it ends up being more efficient for each of us to specialize in a single endeavor (or handful of them), and pay someone to do everything else, and use a commonly accepted medium of exchange for setting and transferring value. Money itself isn't really evil. Fractional reserve banking is another story.

For small goods and small services, barter can work well. It gets very cumbersome for large capital goods. Large capital goods, however, are a product of complex societies. Simple societies with low levels of trust, no money equivalents, and poor property rights usually do not produce large capital goods unless they use directed slave labor. Barter is also cumbersome for some services like medical care (which has what is called a vertical demand curve - what happens when you have a potentially fatal infection and the doctor wants your whole farm to cure you?)

[ROB]

Not "precious metals" guy at all. In fact, other than its practical utility, I don't see the argument that it's inherently valuable. I was simply using diamonds as a "small thing" of perceived value in exchange for a "large thing" of perceived value to demonstrate an example of inconvenience. I think Tarkan has illustrated the point of complexity better than I did anyway.