Why is manlet Republican Party so bad with budgets?!

trash

The left is obsessed with spending stolen money to solve problems instead of actually solving problems and the right is obsessed with pandering to the left.

They get more money for wars that they can profit personally off of and give less to the needy - what’s not to like?

the only time "fiscal responsibility" is invoked is when republicans are publicly campaigning against a democrat. congressional republicans do not tell a president to cut spending. they have increased trump's proposed budgets every single time because they know pitchforks would be coming out if they actually followed through on spending cuts, and they also know that if they increase spending, they won't be as politically vulnerable.
that dynamic changes when a democrat holds the WH, as at that point they can blame all "unnecessary" spending on the democrat.
never mind the fact that social spending is an investment that saves/produces more money generally than is spent by taxpayers in the long run. there are exceptions to this but the principle of deficit spending is that it will pay for itself down the road in increased tax revenue, since poor people will be upwardly mobile once they dont have to steal for food, etc

gay no one cares

youtube.com/watch?v=X_8E3ENrKrQ

>Nuh uh

>manlet
What does this have to do with anything here?
Are you some kind of sexist bigot?

u triggered Manlet?

Do you not have a legitimate answer?

ur opinions are trash

Of course not. He’s a liberal - all emotions, no facts.

>Not a legitimate answer
Figures

I just answered you.

What opinions you retard?

The left is obsessed with spending money in lieu of actually solving problems and the right is obsessed with pandering to people on the left.

You didn't answer anyone
No facts

Only one fact has been spoken in this thread and it was this

Clinton had a republican congress
Obama had a republican congress
Bush, Reagan, Trump had democrat congresses
If there's one trend it's that dem congress means big budget spending.

This.

Seems to me that the actual trend is that spending and taxation always increase overall.

ie. Trump with tariffs, raising spending despite running on -purportedly- econ conserv platform.

Clinton was the last time we will ever have a balanced budget, accept that our currency will crash now and that it's hopeless to think either side will ever return to a pre regan and pre bernie world

trump increased the deficit with a red congress tho

I don't know what that retard was saying
They sure did not answer anything

Uh, I gotta correct you there. Trump had a Republican congress for the first 2 years of his term.

You also conveniently left out the role of tax cuts in decreasing revenue relative to spending.

>balanced

Unlike your education on economics clearly.

As far as I can tell they didn't really make any assertions either.

Or tariffs in increasing it. Let's not forget taxation rose overall under Trump, as did spending.

The GOP has abandoned what pretense it had for combating deficits. It now supports tariffs (taxes), cutting other taxes, and spending like mad. It supports these positions because Trump supports them, and the GOP is a personality cult.

The deficit from Trump's first year is Obama's final budget year. Trump didn't pass a budget before he took office.

i don't know shit about economics tbh
doesn't change the fact that were fucked nigger

But not anywhere near enough to balance the budget. The tax cuts did not pay for themselves.

The revised estimates showed growth didn't even hit the target of 3 percent (most likely due to the effects of the tariffs being a drag on growth).

>As far as I can tell they didn't really make any assertions either.
As far as I can tell they had nothing to say, just retard bullshit

2017: 666B
2018: 779B

Ah, the irony of hypocrisy

AND the GOP is a protectionist corporatist racket much like the rest of government on the whole.

Clearly so.

You misunderstand.

Tariffs are taxes. The overall level of taxation levied (stolen) from the people is higher under Trump than it was previously.

The growth can not happen in earnest or sustainably because it is an economy built on revoking private property rights and upending the free market for favours. It will be bad until market regulation and all taxation is either drastically curtailed or abolished outright.

Found the low t soy boy

Sage

Attached: get_a_loada_this_guy_huh.jpg (348x333, 39K)

>doesn't care about money

You must be one of those commie fags

That’s because Trump is a lifelong NY Democrat, so it’s business as normal for him.

what gives you the moral right to use a road?

Attached: 8c6.gif (480x238, 443K)

If you own it, that fact.

All infrastructure should be funded via voluntary donation or crowdfunding.

Your immediate knee-jerk to roads makes it obvious you are still suffering from the cognitive dissonance known as theft justification or taxation advocation.

What gives you the moral right to steal? What gives the government that right?

Neither has it. Explain how mandatory taxation is ethical, go ahead I'll wait while you basically recite Mein Kampf.

law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-14/section-1/the-right-to-travel

found the russian troll

thyme

I"m asking you, personally
what gives you the right to use a road owned by the Federal government
if you do not personally agree to adhere to/agree with being taxed, you have no stake in it

You can go anywhere that isn't private property, unimpeded. It's a basic human right, much like property - which taxation directly violates.

Violating human rights is wrong btw

I do not agree to being taxed, but I am forced to pay at gunpoint.

Your "argument" is nonsense.

Yup.

You also have the right to leave an area unimpeded even if you are surrounded by privately owned land - some smaller towns are like that - privately owned land completely surrounds the towns.

Yes, this is the case. To imprison someone unjustifiably is an NAP violation and therefore a violation of basic human rights (namely liberty and life in this case).

>muh roads
what is this your first day out of high school lmfao

quads of truth

32

You're 32 days out of high school?

No wonder you don't understand the most basic principles of economics.

it isn't but neither is using a road

Why are libtards so bad with arguments?

damn you got me

Ah I see you come from the "just ignore the answer" school of leftist arguing.

Read Rothbard, Hoppe, Mises & Friedman for starters and you'll become acquainted with the basics.

Probably because they usually do manage to cut some taxes as promised but never really cut any of the spending they promise to cut. In fact they now tend to like war and so dump untold fortunes on military

Tariffs are taxes.

Not an argument.

>implying you have

reaganomics is good

Triggered

Sure kid.

>implying you would know who has or hasn't or even who they are

Yes I am triggered by people who try to talk politics or economics but are armed only with the extremely limited and mostly incorrect assumptions they develop during middle school.

tell him bud

>>huuuuur duuuuuuur muh fucking jew economists

Ouch. My....feeling I guess?

I made a single vague explanation of what the fuck and you get triggered because? Because I didn't write a block of text including more details?
lulz. Stay triggered.

Attached: 1469127023546.jpg (850x297, 34K)

So weak.

>the jews are trying to get our money
>by saying we should keep it
idiot lmao

>when you believe you're more annoying than you are pathetic

when you become a meme

Attached: Unknown.png (233x216, 4K)

Muh feelings.....again.

>when your brain is washed clean with orange glo

Attached: 29088192-f238-435a-b81e-a34943564aeb_1.38cc2238a409a014a4334e78d7cd90b7.jpg (450x450, 24K)

I always love the argument that, left to their own devices, businesses and corporations would act fairly and equitably without some sort of overarching rules or laws to keep them ethical.

Because obviously, businesses are based entirely on purity and goodness, in the libertarian ideal, and not at all just on human greed.

>not one argument yet

The more you double down on deliberately humiliating yourself the more obvious it is that it was accidental.

Not arguments.

forgot one

So you avoid answering since you don't have an answer! Classic libertarian.

Stay mad.

I mean, I'm still not seeing any sort of response as to why the removal of government will suddenly make businesses moral and honest in their dealings with citizens? Any answer to that one? Any sort of response?

Every time they bitch about budget is a bold face lie, along with anything they say about tax policy.
Republicans exist soley to loot the system and set up some hick ass casino with a church attached to it.

Correct, my argument is meticulously and deliberately laid out in the thread above. You should read it.

Protip: you have to post an argument in order for someone to argue against it. All you've done is disagree, with no position, facts or even logic.

Libertarians answer questions even if it's ur mom gay. This one's just a faggot and an ethnonationalist one at that - the most insecure of faggots.

better then the alternative

>not seeing how obvious thw shitposting is.

Argue what? Hard to argue with snowflakes who get triggered at the drop of a politically correct pronoun.

"Not arguments" isn't an argument

Afraid not. Economic deficits don't manifest until late-term or post-presidency. Literally take every name on that list and slide it down one slot, then you'll be halfway to accurate. We won't see Trump's definitively for another year or two. This is part of why we need to stop relying on a liquid global economy.

Attached: 1516826476730.jpg (500x364, 45K)

So weak.

Since you've posted like 4 times now without one shred of an argument imma assume you don't have one lmao

Clinton was a great president, but claiming he made the economy great is ridiculous. At that time computers were taking off, and all computers were made in the US. Jobs skyrocketed as did the economy. He was in the right place at the right time. Clinton is often credited for making the economy great, when really it was Microsoft and Apple selling billions of dollars worth of computers made and taxed in the US.

>p-p-please pay attention to me
>im a good troll i swear

Not really, no. It'd be the exact same thing as the alternative, actually.

I mean, I'm still waiting for any sort of explanation as to why the libertarian ideal is actually feasible. In reality, it's as silly a pipe dream as communism. They're just different sides of the 'impossible ideal' of society that are completely unrealistic.

>Clinton was a great president

ha ha

no

>so weak

Nope.

Attached: 267808.png (1000x743, 58K)

Can you name one way in which it's unfeasible?

Of course, the economic side is totally bulletproof. Free markets invariably raise quality of life and productivity, lowering scarcity and therefore eventual human work.

So what do you not understand? The concept of not forcing people to pay for shit you want under threat of violence?

No sir, I think you'll find with just a little bit of effort that it is, in fact, you who does not have the argument.
Not arguments.

>no argument
>you need an argument
>no I dont

That's the spirit, now just do that for your position instead of your sense of self.

>Not an argument

Once again: what exactly is keeping businesses ethical when there is no overarching rules or laws governing them? Without any sort of oversight, what is going to keep businesses from doing as they wish and screwing over the customer? Why do you think businesses will magically become completely ethical if there was no government nor law keeping them in check?

Ahh, you're a terrible troll, friendo, and I'm here for serious discussion.

Bored? why not check this cool server, full of hot lewds of females and trapss!

discord gg/7e5ce36

Stay mad.

You have not conversed with me before, do not "once again" me.

Your question is based on an inherent misunderstanding of what constitutes a free market, and the purpose of one. Look up free vs controlled market and educate yourself.

>get in this van user, we have rock CDs and beer and everything

Attached: 1518288065446.png (654x702, 415K)

>no argument still
>still far more effort into arguing about the argument

NO U

I'm NOT arguing about the argument because you've presented NO argument for me to argue against.
Not an argument.

not an argument

NOT an argument.

Allow me to impress upon you the severe mistake you have made. For years my conduct has been largely benign. And yet, without provocation, you have severed our détente and forced me to unleash upon you the vengeful flames of a thousand suns. You shall curse your mothers for the day of your birth. So, go now, go, and begin your life of fear, knowing that when you least expect it, the looming sword of Damocles will crash down upon you, cleaving you in twain and as you gaze upon the smoking wreckage that was once your life, you will regret the day you crossed the WRONG user!!!

Not an argument.

tl;dr consumers will not deal with or associate with any business behaving unethically.

Businesses are also subject to the same human rights as humans are, in that defrauding or harming people via a product even if indirectly would be grounds to be legally dissolved or even prosecuted.

Prosecution in a totally private system is performed by the local councils or governments which are funded entirely by local citizenry, ensuring the outcome is beneficial to the community.

Really, the only thing that actually needs to change is the mandatory taxation.

The mot basic principles of economics, and this includes government, dictate that any market in which pay is guaranteed or compulsory will perform worse and cost more over time. Government is a monopoly on social help & organization and controls the market for it.

You should be asking why the people in govt, ie. also flawed humans, are somehow able to make selfless decisions but people in business are not.

In reality, this position is deeply flawed, as are human beings - absolute power corrupts absolutely, and statistically this is absolutely irrefutable, as is the economic evidence.

The solution therefore is to devolve power to localities roughly one-quarter the size of the average state in the USA and abolish the federal reserve, IRS and military-industrial complex.

I said 'once again' because I have been asking this question all thread, and thus far no one has given any answer. Neither have you, for that matter.

And please, if it's so simple, answer the question. What keeps businesses ethical if there is no law nor oversight for them? If it's so simple, it should be easy for you to give me an explanation, right?

You haven't presented a position to argue against in the first place. Your first post here was "Not an argument".

I love American Dad.

Ah yes, I see you come from the leftist "ignore the facts" school of argumentation.

What you really need to be asking is why do you keep posting nonarguments?
Take notes, kid.
Stay mad.

Anyone actually swayed by this nonsense question would do well do see
Read some Rothbard and stop justifying theft because it's easy.

Have to run government like a business hurr durr. Look at Trump’s businesses.

tagged you by mistake

Government IS a business you imbecile, that's why it should be abolished - it's business that can LEGALLY FORCE YOU TO DO BUSINESS WITH IT.

Not arguments.

not an argument

not arguments

It's always so funny how no libertarian can ever answer this question. They always insist it's a non-issue and not an argument, and they spam the same copy/paste answers ignoring it, but NONE of them can possibly answer it.

It's a pretty simple question, and if the libertarian ideal is actually attainable, it should have a solution. Yet none of them can ever respond with an actual answer. Sad.

It is a legitimate criticism. I have to vote R to keep my gun rights, but I am seriously worried about the debt load we're leaving for the kids.

not an argument

NOT an argument

not arguments

Attached: 1548150336646.gif (350x350, 522K)

>why will businesses that rip off or hurt people do badly in this system
>because people won't go to them
>ha ha you never answer this question give in to glorious marx comrade

Fucking useless human lmao the only reason you don't know better is because you're actively trying not to learn.

NOT AN ARGUMENT

>tl;dr consumers will not deal with or associate with any business behaving unethically.
Unless it's apple Inc (among many others)

not an argument

They're whitephobic

>Because they forgot that all taxation is theft.
So you can run a country on voluntary donations? Drinking that utopian koolaid I see.

And as you can see here in 2009, with the stock market crash and the giant bailout wallstreet received for their idiotic moves increased the deficit immensely and was then lowered by obama, again

And even now, the Rs are supporting someone who is setting dangerous precedent, restricting your gun rights via executive order. Other Rs are supporting new laws which bypass the Bill of Rights because feels, neglecting due process of law to remove firearms from people.

Basically, your political options just decreased as far as gun rights are concerned.

Feel free to educate me then! I'm all ears. Waiting and willing to learn, so that I too can suckle on the glorious teat of libertarianism.

NOT AN ARGUMENT

Apple actually pays lots of lobbyists to change FCC and other related laws and systems/regulatory bodies to keep competition out. It's the main economic purpose of all government.

Thanks for proving my point. We need more economic competition, this protectionist shit needs to stop.

Literally whitephobic racists

Explain to me why you can't without saying the ends justify the means, Adolf.

not an argument

You are neither waiting nor willing, don't lie to me.

Then stop outsourcing to China

not an argument

Because theres only ever been 1 nonwhite president so its kinda hard to not mention the white ones in a party that exclusively has elected whites?

So instead of trying to educate us you'd rather insult. This is why Trump will win in 2020

Racist

I'm here waiting still, and I'm asking, so I'm clearly willing. I desperately seek an answer to my question! Why won't you share it? I mean, you must know it, right? There must BE an answer, right?

Something called human nature my dude. Utopian pipedreams like pure libertarianism or ancap only work on paper. They don't take reality into account.

Honestly I don't think they know. They're brain washed but refuse to admit it because they're cucks or racist against white people.

Apply this to democracy

Democracy is fucked for the same reasons that capitalism is fucked

Why do people assume if people are talking bad about republicans they're liberals?

Nah
Its more than just that bullshit apple does.
Apple consumers will quite literally bend over backwards to make excuses and forgive bwing screwed by Apple post-purchase.
>bro, it's not the phone. You're just holding it wrong, bro.

No, that's how we get costs down to produce things more cheaply.

Stop overestimating the value of your work or products.

Good, I hope he does. We're fucked economically either way now thanks to his tariff BS, may as well lol on the way down

your concern has been addressed, you chose to ignore it.

human nature is exactly why they work, using the free market to harness human desire into productivity is a lot more realistic than stealing your way into economic prosperity you useless imbecile

go read some more marx

CUZZZ MUH TEAM

Divided and conquered conditioning

>implying corporatist culture could exist with abundance of competition

nice try commie

Not arguments.

It's cute you think this is a democracy.

>Basically, your political options just decreased as far as gun rights are concerned.

I am painfully aware. :(

>doesn't understand economics enough to knwo the difference between the deficit and the national debt
>criticizes the Republicans
Checks out.

Attached: cage laugh.gif (177x150, 1.74M)

>come to America to make your products!
>we don't support the basic human right of property when user gets the gibmedats

that's why the US economy is having a lot of trouble retaining manufacturing.

>human nature is exactly why they work, using the free market to harness human desire into productivity is a lot more realistic than stealing your way into economic prosperity you useless imbecile
>go read some more marx
Then why don't billionaires voluntarily contribute to public infrastructure now? Why are we forced to tax them? Sounds like you're living in a fabricated reality bro. This one too scary for you?

Also love the ad hominims, really make your point look even more retarded than it already is.

Do you not have reading comprehension?

Taxation is theft.

Funny how this random post answers my questions better than any of the libertarians here did.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but no libertarian has been able to answer my question, so maybe you have a point?

The thing is, libertarians all swear that their silly idealistic libertarian society would work without issue, and yet they can't answer even the simplest of questions about it with any surety.

My concern has not been addressed, literally everyone who responded gave a copy/paste troll response, or kept saying 'the answer is easy, how could you not know?' without actually answering it.

>Not arguments.

What argument would you like me to make? You're right, Republicans bitch about deficits from the sidelines and then spend like drunken sailors. I'm agreeing with you.

Not arguments.

They do, unironically, a lot. We arent forced, you just can't be bothered to come up with an ethical solution. Others did it while you jerked off and ate cheeseburgers.

You're the one afraid of reality. the idea of not stealing to pay for your existence terrifies you, and it makes you unable to consider things objectively.

Not arguments.
I'll take literally anything at this point. I'm starving for arguments, dude.

>The thing is, libertarians all swear that their silly idealistic libertarian society would work without issue, and yet they can't answer even the simplest of questions about it with any surety.
And I'm insisting this can also be equally applied to those who extol the virtues of democracy

>still not one single argument, even a common sense one, as to why this isn't 100% correct

doing a great service for commies like you I see lmao

Pretty sure it's because it's cheaper to outsource.. we don't tax big corporations.

Then whats you're alternative to taxing? Please don't use a utopian voluntary bullshit scapegoat.

>Funny how this random post answers my questions better than any of the libertarians here did.

That's because libertarianism is a pipedream bullshit utopia that has never worked.

What country currently uses a libertarian based government?

+100 democracy is also inherently immoral, mob rule

No, it's a statement. Sad you're not aware of the difference.

>No you
What are some good ol alternative ethical solutions then mr expert?

We do tax them actually, but we tax them less because they pay people in govt to give them favours to root out competition. Thanks for backing me up AGAIN.

Voluntary donation has been proven to work and the free market has INVARIABLY produced better quality of like 100% of the time throughout human history. Learn to argue.

The United States is not a democracy you fucking moron. It's a federation republic. Basically it's a corporation. Learn the rules before trying to play will ya?

Taxation is theft. That's not a statement of policy, it's a moral principle. Learn the difference.

Not arguments.
>it's a statement
That's what I said, it's not an argument. What's the issue?

I'm not arguing I'm informing. The United States is a federation republic. If you believe otherwise you're brain washed.

Not arguments.

>abundance of competition
You're funny, user.

I wonder why the 80s were known for corporate consolidation.....Hnnm

> It's a federation republic. Basically it's a corporation.
Arm the photon torpedoes, Worf, we have an idiot who thinks the Federation is pro-business

>We do tax them actually, but we tax them less because they pay people in govt to give them favours to root out competition. Thanks for backing me up AGAIN.

So you're saying we're a corporatocracy?

>Voluntary donation has been proven to work and the free market has INVARIABLY produced better quality of like 100% of the time throughout human history. Learn to argue.

Learn to source. I'd love to see evidence of this.

I've presented over 5 so far and you ignore them all, deciding instead to call anything you didn't advocate previously a "utopian dream" with no facts, data or any relevant info whatsoever, even reason, to back up what you say.

ALL economic data backs up free markets, though. ALL of it.

Who said I was arguing. I'm stating facts.

>I'm not arguing
That's exactly what I'm telling you, bro, and that's a serious problem in my opinion. Arguments are the foundation of truth.

And that's why y'all are going to lose in 2020

>Taxation is theft
Do you don't have a solution? Doesn't surprise me lol. Muh pipedream libertarianism that exists nowhere in the world.

Who's extolling the virtues of democracy here? What on earth are you even talking about? I just want an answer to my question from one of the libertarians here that insist it's not an issue for their idealised society.

Government regulation cutting competition.

Yes, we are. This isn't up for debate, it's a well known fact worldwide for over a decade.

Literally open ANY economics book with a positive reputation and it backs it up, I don't even need to pick one specifically.

Not an argument.
>Who said I was arguing
I've been trying to tell you the opposite. Your "facts" aren't arguments by any stretch of the imagination.

They still think it's a democracy. It hasn't been a democratic nation since 1967.

Not arguments.

not an argument

Once again, retard

Do
you
Not
Have
Basic
Reading
Comprehension?
Nevermind, I think that's already answered.

That's the beauty of a federal republic I don't have to listen to dumbasses like you.

A truly free market would be corrupted by resource grabbing monopolies. How do you balance out monopolistic takeover? Or put restraints on environmental and health damage?

Please enlighten me on how corporations have more than 1 agenda, the agenda to make profit?

It wasn't then either you moron.

Not arguments.

>Yes, we are. This isn't up for debate, it's a well known fact worldwide for over a decade.
>Literally open ANY economics book with a positive reputation and it backs it up, I don't even need to pick one specifically.

No I get that, I'm still wondering where you get your evidence of voluntary contributiones being better or more abundant than taxation. That sounds like fabricated bullshit.

>Government regulation cutting competition.
The 1980s user
The Reagan era
A time of corporate tax cuts and deregulation.

Not an argument.

But definitely autism.

In talking technically. The Democratic republic died with the 13 colonies.

No, that's exactly what we have. The free market is the best tool yet devised to ensure both parties in a transaction are happy.

Why?

Because it's not compulsory. That's the whole point.

The fact I have to explain this to you shows how warped your worldview really is. You can't fathom mutually beneficial exchange.

Once again, open ANY econ textbook.

ANY ONE that's not outright communist (ie. Communist Manifesto, if you can consider that an econ book). Pick ANY.

A solution to what? You're making up all kinds of conditions, you should spell them out. I made a statement of moral principle, I didn't not claim to magically provide a solution so some problem you imagined.

>The fact I have to explain this to you shows how warped your worldview really is. You can't fathom mutually beneficial exchange.

Oh I can fathom it, I can even comprehend it, but just because I can doesn't mean it fits with human nature and reality. Can you please provide evidence of a truly freemarket economy actually working?

>corporate
So not for small or independent business
ie. anti competition

exactly what I said

dumbass

So, there is no evidence of this actually happening, it's all on paper and subjective.

It's not clear what side you're on, and therefore what side you imagine I'm on. Which I'm sure you know, because making a joke based on a mispelling is a great way to predict someone's politics, isn't it?

And I respect your right to do so. Nevertheless, I must continue to try to persuade the universe to make more arguments. It is my calling in this life to drag the nonarguers from the dark and make them face the glorious blinding light of truth. I will not abandon this quest now nor ever.
Not arguments.

A solution to tax being theft of course, how do we pay for public infrastructure or social programs? Government workers, regulators, etc?

>not arguments
>Hurr Durr muh democracy
We live in a federal republic. These are facts. If you want it to be different explain why instead of arguing. Enlighten me as to why you believe in a democracy and why I have to care about you? Please. What makes you so special? Why should I care about illegal immigrants? I don't want an argument I want a civil discussion. If you can't provide that, you'll lose the 2020 election to Trump.

Don't lie to me.

Ive already listed the ENTIRE FIELD OF ECONOMICS. If you want a specific book, go to your local library and take THE FIRST ONE off the shelf.

Free markets producing more with less is the most core fact of the field of economics as a whole. This is as basic as the difference between matter and energy, I don't know how you can be so fucking dense.

Oh so anything you learn at university is false now if you disagree?

How fucking delusional can you be?

He means it doesn't matter who's pres, we all lose

Not an argument.

Slavery.

Voluntary contribution, stop asking.

People in the USA
They used it to justify invading Iraq "We're bringing Iraq democracy"

And in blind support of Israel "It's the only "real" democracy in the Middle East" (even though it isn't)

Waste of time

Not arguments.

I would support enslaving anyone who calls for social programs.

The irony would be marvellous.

We lose every time a politician is elected, it's the only truth after death and taxes.

Not arguments.

Congress writes the budget. President signs it . Somehow, president gets the credit and or blame. The real answer is they are all crooks .

LOL first off nice trips, second, I'm still waiting on you to simply provide evidence of a purely freemarket economy working.

You can keep ranting and crying over muh text books, but I want some real world conditions. Is it really that hard to come up with one simple example?

Jesus you're a real answer dodger aren't you lol.

Since it's your problem in want of a solution, how about you answer first. How would you pay for them?

not arguments

not an argument

Not an argument

LOL ok

You haven't provided any evidence of this working. Just because you say it, doesn't mean it's real. Even if you want reality to be like that.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing. I'll be working towards a solution.

I already did, you refuse to read it.

If you won't read the text that contains the information that proves it, that's called wilful ignorance.

You're a good little commie I see.

Kill yourself.

Clinton had .com boom to thank for the surplus. Tell me what exactly he himself did.

You refuse to read the evidence.

I'd tax the populous but use a blockchain ledger to bring complete transparency to how taxes are allocated.

not an argument

That's how libs think though. Their way is the only way. Meanwhile codification of law has been the only sustainable solution.

>That's how libs think though. Their way is the only way

Alright, guys, I really should finish jacking off, build my new Mega Construx Warthog and get to bed. It's past my bedtime. Can't fight nonarguments if I can't lift my eyelids, can I? Haha. But seriously, quit posting those nonarguments, yeah? Pic related, it's the Warthog Run set.

Attached: 71pw2Egn4aL._SX425_.jpg (425x236, 21K)

irony

not an argument

I've read it, bullshit and lies. Show some actual verifiable facts or you're done.

>I already did, you refuse to read it.
I have yet to see 1 example of a nation who has implemented a free-market and is currently using it. Maybe you posted one earlier to someone else?

>If you won't read the text that contains the information that proves it, that's called wilful ignorance.
I read the messages you replied to me with, none of which contain real-world examples.

>You're a good little commie I see.

>Kill yourself.

Wait are you triggered because I'm "not reading" or because you don't have an actual example of a freemarket working?

This faggot arguing to argue.

You refuse to provide any

Lego is better lol

You didn't read an econ textbook you moron you've never read a book in your life. you said yourself you don't consider books to be information lmao

go back to plebbit

not an argument

Bu.. but on paper it works so well!!

Not an argument. Worst I've ever seen even.

Yeah he doesn't understand society is done with the left. They're fighting to stay alive barely circling the drain refusing to bail out.

>irony

Because I'm not arguing.

That's what I'm telling you, champ.

Bro he's not going to provide and example because there literally are none. Maybe the wild west came close?

You can lie all you want, the thread is here for everyone to see. Unless you have literally anything to assert with facts we're done here.

All of economics backs up everything I've said, and the only people whose opinions are relevant are already clued in. You're a leftist, you'll never have more than just below average wage anyway

Okay, little bitch. Listen up. I'm about to tell you how the social contract works, and why you don't have to consent to it.
Your right to not be protected from non-consensual contracts is in fact one of the rights granted by the social contract. This means that when you are born, you are not protected. Anyone could kill you. Anyone could enslave you. Without a contract in place to protect you, surprise, you have no protections.
So in its magnanimous grace, instead of shooting you on the spot, our government signs your name for you on your birth certificate and makes you a protected citizen, and extends to you for free the benefits of the social contract, and for eighteen whole years they ask not one shit from you be given in return.
Let's assume you could reject the social contract. What would that even mean? Well for one, it means that you are no longer protected from those people you claim are thieves holding you up at gunpoint. Because it's not theft anymore if there's no social contract. They made no promise not to take your shit and have no burden to listen to you, you opted out of the service that protected you. What most countries will do is pretend you never left and just place you back on the social contract for you. But if you can get another nation to extend the kindness of citizenship, you can use theirs instead. Or if you just want to fuck off into the ocean, you can go your own way, make your own living, dependent on nobody, answerable to nobody, paying taxes to nobody... until the first time some Somali pirates find you. Then you get to sign their social contract. Which mostly consists of them taking all your shit and enslaving or killing you.
This is what you shits don't get. Without the social contract, you have no right to opt out of it. Whoever has the might makes right, and that ain't fucking you.

Since you answered, the reason why taxation is important as a principle is because it's pushback against the idea that government is this nebulous public good and we can just solve any problem by throwing more public money at it. It's not, it's specific programs, many of which are pointless, wasteful, or just pork; and they're paid for by people who do not provide individual consent for their money being taken. We need to start with that principle, because we're doing real harm to people when we spend public funds, and therefore it must only be done when it's clearly necessarily, within tight limits, and with accountability and efficiency. We have to remember we're stealing it from people, and that moral wrong cannot be justified unless the good that's being done is clear.

>done with the left.
Piss off, orange glo

when your argument sucks so bad you have to argue for the other side to get ahead

100% of this comment made me lol thank you user

>they're paid for by people who do not provide individual consent for their money being taken.
But you 100% have consent, you could choose to leave and live in a different country. It's what the founding fathers did.

In other words, tyranny is good!

That's not how consent works.

Tell a girl she can just leave the scene of the rape you useless idiot

Forced consent isn't consent. You'd make a good rapist.

Allow me to explain. You're saying I need to argue? Why? I've already won. There's no need to argue to defend my position. The burdeon rests on you to try loosening my grip. I'm not going to argue as there's no need. Good luck, but I don't wish you God speed. It's the end of the world. You should be getting ready to survive the coming darkness...

Don't like it? Move to Canada.

Not an argument.

I haven't paid a single penny in federal taxes, ever.
There are way to opt out. Nice legal ways

How could you have won without an argument? Think about it for a sec.

Do you tell every girl you meet if they don't want to be raped by you, they just have to move to Canada?

>All of economics backs up everything I've said
Then you can provide a realworld example with out crying and reeeeing about it right?

> and the only people whose opinions are relevant are already clued in.
Oh, now you're special lol. Who are you trying to prove that to? Hey guys, this guy is special because he thinks utopian pipedreams are real with out any real world examples.

>You're a leftist
Oh I am? So does it make things easier for you if you group billions of people into a single ideology or political spectrum? Sorry you need to dumb shit down so far to comprehend political idoelogies. Absolutionism is a disease for the stupid.

>you'll never have more than just below average wage anyway
Wage? I'm all about equity, fuck a salary when I own %5 of a successful series C startup. Then again, my network is a lot like your ideoligies for the time being, great on paper.

Well you keep trying to argue with yourself. I'll be going to bed knowing I've already won based on basic facts. Good luck with your 87 genders and feefees.

This is actually a pretty good policy.

>all taxation is theft
So you just want to suck the gov't teat without paying for anything, running the deficit up to 2 trillion before mushroom dick leaves office. Sounds like a Republican plan.

Attached: Hitler in Paris.jpg (669x851, 97K)

America is a third world nation in many respects, prove to me that you beat any Nordic European country when it comes to any marker of the good life and/or well being.

Tip, you can't.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-28-22-51-47.png (854x480, 278K)

Literally not one single autistic libertarian in this entire thread has even attempted to answer my question. How is it that all of them claim that libertarianism is legitimate, but not a single one of them can explain what would keep businesses ethical and honest without some form of oversight or guiding law?

>no facts
>republutards only care about facts when they align with their narrative; otherwise
>MUH FAKE NEWS!

I can only hope this isn't an American, considering how bullshit this statement is

I don't rape. Bye dumbass

>First thing that comes to mind when discussing moving out of the country... rape
Sounds like you guys have some issues

There's no need

Bc they run shit obviously

No forced Muslims

Not an argument, and I identify as an attack helicopter

You need an argument to win, dude.

Oof

You are all about forced consent tho

No I just need to be right, and stronger

Not if you file properly learn the law

You're the one defending rape

How can you be right with no argument? How can you be stronger than a humble servant of the almighty Kek?

You can't file properly to avoid a rape charge

Nobody is defending rape. Rape is forced sex. Taxation has nothing to do with sex. You're disgusting.

Well you don't have the first of those two. And for the second to matter, you need a machine that lets you punch people through the internet, which you also don't have.

>honest without some form of oversight or guiding law
Their argument falls apart at this point. That is why you get silence.

I didn't say anything about rape, I said if you don't like the country, you have the ability to move. You're not forced to stay here. You're the one who immediately equated taxation to rape lol. I think you're fucked in the head.

By being a servant of Christ

By saying not an argument, boomer kid, do you even lift?

He dead.

So don't rape it's not a difficult concept

Are you one of the "republutards"?

Force is force. Consent is consent. It's nice that you've arbitrarily decided that forced sex without consent is not to your taste, even though your support it in theory.

No taxation without representation!
> Corollary: Representation is not required for non- net taxpayers.

If you don't want to rape, you can move. It's your fault for staying here.

That's not an argument.

You keep on believing that. I suppose that's why you're stuck on arguing.

Consent is something you don't seem to grasp.

Holy fuck this kid is cancer lol, you're a fucking idiot. You're still in school aren't you little faggot? You literally have 0 real-world experience and it shows dramatically.

That's not a marker that's actually followed by any major study or institution , when assessing quality of life.

However, you came out of that a little differently than the rest of us.

I'll give you that cause I'm not a pos, but that's a very sad place to be considering where America could be... In say, health, press freedom, infant mortality.

But a keky, and somewhat meaningful answer in your part. Still sad by comparison. But straws are all you have left as as a country.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-26-21-23-15.png (854x480, 402K)

Arguing with a girl to brow beat her into having sex is still rape

See that fact you'd even compare the two is just retarded. They're not even in the same ballpark, it's just an extremist incel type of thought process you have. I pity you user.

Jesus Christ, much like King Arthur, is neither dead nor alive. He is a fictional composite figure.
There were many Christs in the cult of Christus. It just means anointed one. They would pour oil on themselves and then riot in the street hoping to be crucified for the cause.

And yet you don't explain why. None of you do. Every libertarian immediately assumes that without something to keep them in check, all businesses will magically become purely ethical and honest, without ever screwing over customers in any way.

Funny how none of you can explain WHY that would magically occur in a libertarian society, though.

Telling her she can move if she doesn't want to be raped isn't consent, either. Glad you're finally coming around.

B.. but All of economics backs up everything I've said, and the only people whose opinions are relevant are already clued in. You're a leftist, you'll never have more than just below average wage anyway REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Taxation is theft, and rape is rape. You support some really bad things user.

To the fags arguing
Not all taxation is theft.
The income tax is most certainly theft as it assumes ownership of your resources and productivity.
Sales taxes are a different matter in most cases. (In my city groceries wave a llower sales tax than non-food. Used to be zero not long ago for food.

Because a 50 year old man that feels like a 4 year old girl has more rights than your actual 4 year old girl.

They're also completely different things. Again, the fact you'd even consider them in the same category is disgusting.

You can file to not pay income tax but it's more expensive to do so they win either way.

Freedom of expression/ speech/ thought

The one liberty the USA 100% beats European nations on all day long

Attached: emma_watson_tickle_fake_15_by_the70sguy_dax9ea5-fullview.jpg (1024x682, 94K)

No, they don't. Libertarians generally don't make any claims about the morality of businesses. Did you learn about libertarians from frothing progressives screaming about the evils of Ayn Rand?

That fact that you support them is far more disgusting, rapist.

See, these still aren't answers. No libertarian can ever answer this question, whenever I ask it. For some reason, they think adopting libertarianism just automatically means all businesses/business owners will become purely ethical beings, without anything keeping them in check.

So strange none of them have an answer to this problem with their idealised society.

I just want one real-world example of free-market libertarianism working. Why is it so hard for libertarians to provide evidence?

So how do you propose getting people to clear a sewer pipe? Fix the power grid?

That's just bullshit. From an abstract moral perspective, there's no difference between taxing income or consumption. You're still taking people's stuff, either way. The differences are more practical, like how income tax gives the government the right to put their nose in practically every fact of your personal finances, while sales tax does not.

They live in la la Land they can't provide any because every time they try it relies on them riding on our contributions to society. They're literally bottom feeders, parasites demanding respect.

True.
But it's a scale.
Surely you don't want the opposite...
Pure totalitarianism, right?
Why even talk in extremes.

I lean libertarian.
But I'm not for dissolving everything. Unless you're an idiot you probably lean libertarian on a lot of issues as well.

I'm not some other retard you were talking to BTW. Just added this.
Most actual humans aren't all left, right, lib or totalitarian.

Taken the political axis test?
All retards are at the top. Commies and Nazis.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-29-17-08-08.png (854x480, 239K)

LIbertarianism is a pipe dream utopia. It doesn't take into account any part of human nature. It's great on paper, but there is no real-world evidence for it actually working. It's nothing more than overly optimistic wishful thinking.

Please, someone, prove me wrong.

You never asked me.

The US is a fairly good example of a free market with minimal restrictions, especially prior to FDR. Now of course you're going to sperg and deny that it qualifies, because you're the idiot who claimed that somehow libertarians hold up businesses as this sacred, chaste, perfect ideal. But that's your problem.

And that's why I'm not arguing. There's no reason to. They want to argue? Fine provide a reasonable provable point or we will no longer take them seriously.

>especially prior to FDR.
Yes, remember leaded gasoline and asbestos?

>Every Leftist immediately assumes that without something to keep them in check, all governments and businesses will magically become purely ethical and honest, without ever screwing people over in any way.

What does that have to do with the morality of businesses, as perceived by libertarians? My personal views on a completely unrelated topic are irrelevant. Stay on topic user.

Yeah.
No.
Your press freedoms are in the gutter. The two are more than related, so try again.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-28-15-50-38.png (854x480, 359K)

What do they have to do with FDR?
Protip: Nothing, you're just an idiot.