Libertarian Discussion Thread

[Taihei Tengoku]

"booj money," otherwise known as "money"

I mean money coming from the bourgeois.

Literally an undifferentiable product

[Great Minarchistan]

1. So somehow the bottom 99% have <50% of the vote while the top 1% have >50% of the vote (or if you take the worst case scenario, 26/74). I wonder where did you get this brilliant math from.
2. So you just ignore simple statistics that point out of a HUGE cost of college solely by adding up the average college professor salary. On regards to your first link all I could see is a story filled with individual anecdotes (that surely don't add up to the situation of 1.5 million professors) and that doesn't disprove the insanely high average wage. I'll also ignore your funny remark on how highly paid are professors under socialism since you apparently believe it won't aggravate the cost of tuitions. The pixie dust fairy will pay for it after all!
3. Because it's true.
4. >I don't understand the mechanisms of Medicare and Medicaid and how do they work to subsidize insurance companies and hospitals at the cost of two trillion a year
>I also don't understand the mechanisms of Social Security and how its insanely low real rate of return took away the participation of most people from capital gains
5. Thank god that small businesses exist on our current economic system!

1. This is not about votes. It is about power. Both parties take booj money, both are influenced by lobbying from business. Both parties also work in the interests of the bourgeois. This is not democracy.
2. I linked a story about a college professor living in a car, and I can find more too. And yes, while college does cost a lot of money, this money isn't going to professors. Colleges keep a lot of their teachers on part time jobs, meaning they can pay them less. Once the parisites are eliminated, tuition prices can be cut.

4. >what the fuck is market share

I understand how Medicare and Medicaid work. What I'm saying is that even if these programs cause demand pull inflation, they still aren't the primary reasons for huge bills.

5. Small business is driven by the same motives as large business - even more so due to intense competition.

I have to hand it to Rand Paul. Libertarian or not, he is really reigning in the GOP when it comes to authentic fiscal conservatism, and this rubs well on libertarians.

>fiscal conservatism
>USA
pick one

Their interests are whatever they perceive them to be. If Joe says it's in his interest to cut Medicare, despite the fact he is a Medicare recipient, then Medicare cuts are his interest.

It's against Joe's interest. He's just been fooled.

1. Ah, so apparently the bottom 99% that have 99% of the votes are secretly manipulated by the top 1%. You are either saying the bottom 99% are dumb enough to be lured and manipulated to vote on a candidate they don't want to (which would be reasonable enough to say that's why they aren't getting wealthier) or you are once again invoking the joke of the invisible illuminati plot magically intervening on the beliefs of citizens.
2. Few anecdotes that don't represent the living of 1500000 college professors. And once again you seem to ignore that each professor costs in average 80-90k yearly in wages. Knowing college courses aren't directed by a single professor you can account some five into it and you reach to the skyhigh sum of four hundred thousand dollars a year. Let's suppose that's literally the only spending burden, so you get 400k divided by a class of 40 students (which is already at an aggravating level for grade development) and ta da, 10k a student, accounting only the salary of professors. With your plan of 70-75bn. a year you'll get $3600 which covers basically a third of the extremely optimistic figures exposed above.
4. It's not even demand pull inflation since demand for medical care is typically static and inelastic, the reason for why prices have been rising so fast over the last decades is because the government wants to keep the same prices by dumping money on those companies. Knowing of the genius-tier plan, such businesses can simply increase the prices that the government will dump more money to apply downwards pressure. And that's why spending increase on medicare+medicaid was above inflation on all years since 1968.
5. Even better! Both seek for profit and the one that's the best takes the market share from the less apt to stay in the market.

[Orostan]

1. This is not about votes. It is about power. Both parties take booj money, both are influenced by lobbying from business. Both parties also work in the interests of the bourgeois. This is not democracy.
2. I linked a story about a college professor living in a car, and I can find more too. And yes, while college does cost a lot of money, this money isn't going to professors. Colleges keep a lot of their teachers on part time jobs, meaning they can pay them less. Once the parisites are eliminated, tuition prices can be cut.

4. >what the fuck is market share

I understand how Medicare and Medicaid work. What I'm saying is that even if these programs cause demand pull inflation, they still aren't the primary reasons for huge bills.

5. Small business is driven by the same motives as large business - even more so due to intense competition.



>fiscal conservatism
>USA
pick one


It's against Joe's interest. He's just been fooled.

1. Ah, so apparently the bottom 99% that have 99% of the votes are secretly manipulated by the top 1%. You are either saying the bottom 99% are dumb enough to be lured and manipulated to vote on a candidate they don't want to (which would be reasonable enough to say that's why they aren't getting wealthier) or you are once again invoking the joke of the invisible illuminati plot magically intervening on the beliefs of citizens.
2. Few anecdotes that don't represent the living of 1500000 college professors. And once again you seem to ignore that each professor costs in average 80-90k yearly in wages. Knowing college courses aren't directed by a single professor you can account some five into it and you reach to the skyhigh sum of four hundred thousand dollars a year. Let's suppose that's literally the only spending burden, so you get 400k divided by a class of 40 students (which is already at an aggravating level for grade development) and ta da, 10k a student, accounting only the salary of professors. With your plan of 70-75bn. a year you'll get $3600 which covers basically a third of the extremely optimistic figures exposed above.
4. It's not even demand pull inflation since demand for medical care is typically static and inelastic, the reason for why prices have been rising so fast over the last decades is because the government wants to keep the same prices by dumping money on those companies. Knowing of the genius-tier plan, such businesses can simply increase the prices that the government will dump more money to apply downwards pressure. And that's why spending increase on medicare+medicaid was above inflation on all years since 1968.
5. Even better! Both seek for profit and the one that's the best takes the market share from the less apt to stay in the market.

1) Are you reading what I am writing? I specifically said it wasn't about votes. American parties depend on corporate money. Both sides work for different factions of the bourgeois. I never said anybody was planning that, or people were being convinced to vote for these people. There is no choice but the booj in the American system. This isn't planned, it's just a byproduct of capitalism.

2) You have not been reading anything. What a suprise that libertarians cannot read!

Most college professors now are on part time pay. And I am not disputing with you that college is expensive. I am only saying that current tuitions are paying for the living of parasites. I'm not citing anecdotal evidence, if you read that Atlantic article you'd see that anecdotes are only being used as examples. My point is that the rising cost of college tuition is because of a for profit system where a parasitic class sucks up as much money as possible.

After reading some stuff from the Bernie campaign, they say completly free college may Costner 600 billion dollars. We can take 400 billion right off the military budget, and still have 197 billion left over. China, the next spender on war, is at 151 billion. The EPI estimates that at minimum 110 billion dollars could be collected from a financial transactions tax. Now we have 90 billion dollars we need. Raising the total tax revenue on the wealthiest 1% would generate 157 billion dollars a year. That more than covers everything.

4) That's not right. Insurance companies demand massive discounts from hospitals, forcing them to hike prices to still make ends meet. Medicare and Medicaid don't cause all of this.

5) You mean the one that can extract the most surplus value the fastest and undercut its competitor.

[Orostan]

I mean money coming from the bourgeois.

Literally an undifferentiable product

Notice how I said "coming from".

[Darussalam]

Literally an undifferentiable product

Notice how I said "coming from".

Which is probably not very important

[Taihei Tengoku]

Literally an undifferentiable product

Notice how I said "coming from".

the same money changes hands multiple times as they are exchanged for goods and services :oooooooooo

[Orostan]

Notice how I said "coming from".

Which is probably not very important

I doubt that

Notice how I said "coming from".

the same money changes hands multiple times as they are exchanged for goods and services ooooooooo

>I will now proceed to purposefully misinterpret what this person is saying

[Great Minarchistan]

1. Ah, so apparently the bottom 99% that have 99% of the votes are secretly manipulated by the top 1%. You are either saying the bottom 99% are dumb enough to be lured and manipulated to vote on a candidate they don't want to (which would be reasonable enough to say that's why they aren't getting wealthier) or you are once again invoking the joke of the invisible illuminati plot magically intervening on the beliefs of citizens.
2. Few anecdotes that don't represent the living of 1500000 college professors. And once again you seem to ignore that each professor costs in average 80-90k yearly in wages. Knowing college courses aren't directed by a single professor you can account some five into it and you reach to the skyhigh sum of four hundred thousand dollars a year. Let's suppose that's literally the only spending burden, so you get 400k divided by a class of 40 students (which is already at an aggravating level for grade development) and ta da, 10k a student, accounting only the salary of professors. With your plan of 70-75bn. a year you'll get $3600 which covers basically a third of the extremely optimistic figures exposed above.
4. It's not even demand pull inflation since demand for medical care is typically static and inelastic, the reason for why prices have been rising so fast over the last decades is because the government wants to keep the same prices by dumping money on those companies. Knowing of the genius-tier plan, such businesses can simply increase the prices that the government will dump more money to apply downwards pressure. And that's why spending increase on medicare+medicaid was above inflation on all years since 1968.
5. Even better! Both seek for profit and the one that's the best takes the market share from the less apt to stay in the market.

1) Are you reading what I am writing? I specifically said it wasn't about votes. American parties depend on corporate money. Both sides work for different factions of the bourgeois. I never said anybody was planning that, or people were being convinced to vote for these people. There is no choice but the booj in the American system. This isn't planned, it's just a byproduct of capitalism.

2) You have not been reading anything. What a suprise that libertarians cannot read!

Most college professors now are on part time pay. And I am not disputing with you that college is expensive. I am only saying that current tuitions are paying for the living of parasites. I'm not citing anecdotal evidence, if you read that Atlantic article you'd see that anecdotes are only being used as examples. My point is that the rising cost of college tuition is because of a for profit system where a parasitic class sucks up as much money as possible.

After reading some stuff from the Bernie campaign, they say completly free college may Costner 600 billion dollars. We can take 400 billion right off the military budget, and still have 197 billion left over. China, the next spender on war, is at 151 billion. The EPI estimates that at minimum 110 billion dollars could be collected from a financial transactions tax. Now we have 90 billion dollars we need. Raising the total tax revenue on the wealthiest 1% would generate 157 billion dollars a year. That more than covers everything.

4) That's not right. Insurance companies demand massive discounts from hospitals, forcing them to hike prices to still make ends meet. Medicare and Medicaid don't cause all of this.

5) You mean the one that can extract the most surplus value the fastest and undercut its competitor.

1. Above corporate money, parties need votes. And last time I checked the bottom 99% has a share of 99% of the votes.
2. Sorry, I didn't have access to McLiteracy Youth Assistance^TM back when I was a child. And now you brought up a more sane figure of 600 billion. That'd be probably the cost of free college.
4. It's interesting how all of a sudden the implementation of medicare and medicaid increased the medical care inflation substantially. Maybe it's just a coincidence after all!
5. Right on the point even though long term also plays a role.

[Orostan]

1) Are you reading what I am writing? I specifically said it wasn't about votes. American parties depend on corporate money. Both sides work for different factions of the bourgeois. I never said anybody was planning that, or people were being convinced to vote for these people. There is no choice but the booj in the American system. This isn't planned, it's just a byproduct of capitalism.

2) You have not been reading anything. What a suprise that libertarians cannot read!

Most college professors now are on part time pay. And I am not disputing with you that college is expensive. I am only saying that current tuitions are paying for the living of parasites. I'm not citing anecdotal evidence, if you read that Atlantic article you'd see that anecdotes are only being used as examples. My point is that the rising cost of college tuition is because of a for profit system where a parasitic class sucks up as much money as possible.

After reading some stuff from the Bernie campaign, they say completly free college may Costner 600 billion dollars. We can take 400 billion right off the military budget, and still have 197 billion left over. China, the next spender on war, is at 151 billion. The EPI estimates that at minimum 110 billion dollars could be collected from a financial transactions tax. Now we have 90 billion dollars we need. Raising the total tax revenue on the wealthiest 1% would generate 157 billion dollars a year. That more than covers everything.

4) That's not right. Insurance companies demand massive discounts from hospitals, forcing them to hike prices to still make ends meet. Medicare and Medicaid don't cause all of this.

5) You mean the one that can extract the most surplus value the fastest and undercut its competitor.

1. Above corporate money, parties need votes. And last time I checked the bottom 99% has a share of 99% of the votes.
2. Sorry, I didn't have access to McLiteracy Youth Assistance^TM back when I was a child. And now you brought up a more sane figure of 600 billion. That'd be probably the cost of free college.
4. It's interesting how all of a sudden the implementation of medicare and medicaid increased the medical care inflation substantially. Maybe it's just a coincidence after all!
5. Right on the point even though long term also plays a role.

1. A campaign that takes corporate money has an advantage. Campaigns that can outspend their opponents often win. Voting isn't everything.
2. Ok, so you agree we can afford free college?
5. The long term is only the difference between competition today and competition tommorow.

[West Leas Oros]

You, sir, are a curmudgeon. Who doesn't like a good party (Especially one with plenty of Laphroaig).

No, he's Max Stirner.

No, he hates constitutions because he's a dirty criminal and hates justice.

[Northern Davincia]

No, he's Max Stirner.

No, he hates constitutions because he's a dirty criminal and hates justice.

Same thing.

[Orostan]

No, he hates constitutions because he's a dirty criminal and hates justice.

Same thing.

t. spooked

[Mattopilos II]

Codified systems of government, such is constitutions, are fundamental to social order....so is the state.

Hobbes, is that you? Seriously, the idea people defend you are a left-winger is the funniest thing. You are nothing more than a paternal conservative.

Though I agree, reform through parliamentarism is insufficient and revolution is necessary. You can become socialist using a fundamentally capitalist legislature.

Not any socialism I want. Fuck that.

[Mattopilos II]

No, he's Max Stirner.

No, he hates constitutions because he's a dirty criminal and hates justice.

Where is the negative part here

[Nulla Bellum]

2. Sorry, I didn't have access to McLiteracy Youth Assistance^TM back when I was a child.

He just lacks the entrepreneurial spirit to sell crazy. It's a commie thing.

[Orostan]

2. Sorry, I didn't have access to McLiteracy Youth Assistance^TM back when I was a child.

He just lacks the entrepreneurial spirit to sell crazy. It's a commie thing.

>entrepreneurial spirit
SPOOKS BEGONE

[Nulla Bellum]

He just lacks the entrepreneurial spirit to sell crazy. It's a commie thing.

>entrepreneurial spirit
SPOOKS BEGONE

Show us on the doll where capitalism exploited you.

[Great Minarchistan]

1. Above corporate money, parties need votes. And last time I checked the bottom 99% has a share of 99% of the votes.
2. Sorry, I didn't have access to McLiteracy Youth Assistance^TM back when I was a child. And now you brought up a more sane figure of 600 billion. That'd be probably the cost of free college.
4. It's interesting how all of a sudden the implementation of medicare and medicaid increased the medical care inflation substantially. Maybe it's just a coincidence after all!
5. Right on the point even though long term also plays a role.

1. A campaign that takes corporate money has an advantage. Campaigns that can outspend their opponents often win. Voting isn't everything.
2. Ok, so you agree we can afford free college?
5. The long term is only the difference between competition today and competition tommorow.

1. Money doesn't vote, it only convinces voters to vote.
2. Bloody hell no. 600 billion a year is too big of a hole, plus there's always the reminder that this would probably force an inflow of people that wouldn't otherwise be studying on college. Knowing the 600bn. is based on the current amount of students you'd likely add up some 200-300bn. into it (800-900bn. total). Secondly, I suppose many people would be going to shitty degrees like liberal arts, hence not adding up much to the national income which means you ain't really repaying it to be fair. Thirdly, student debt is really not that hard to pay off for most students. Those who cannot pay for it could benefit from scholarships based on how smart or on how much you deserve it.

[Great Minarchistan]

>entrepreneurial spirit
SPOOKS BEGONE

Show us on the doll where capitalism exploited you.

oof my bonemarrow was extracted for profit purposes

[Orostan]

>entrepreneurial spirit
SPOOKS BEGONE

Show us on the doll where capitalism exploited you.

>I do not understand Marxism or surplus value

1. A campaign that takes corporate money has an advantage. Campaigns that can outspend their opponents often win. Voting isn't everything.
2. Ok, so you agree we can afford free college?
5. The long term is only the difference between competition today and competition tommorow.

1. Money doesn't vote, it only convinces voters to vote.
2. Bloody hell no. 600 billion a year is too big of a hole, plus there's always the reminder that this would probably force an inflow of people that wouldn't otherwise be studying on college. Knowing the 600bn. is based on the current amount of students you'd likely add up some 200-300bn. into it (800-900bn. total). Secondly, I suppose many people would be going to shitty degrees like liberal arts, hence not adding up much to the national income which means you ain't really repaying it to be fair. Thirdly, student debt is really not that hard to pay off for most students. Those who cannot pay for it could benefit from scholarships based on how smart or on how much you deserve it.

1) So then we agree?
2) "student debt is really not that hard to pay off"

The fuck is this shit? College students have negative net worth! It's impossible for them to pay off 100000 dollars of debt with interest. Even with scholarships, colleges just charge more for tuition to take from them as much as possible as well as cheat the government.

Even if we have a sudden influx of new people to college and couldn't afford i , we can just ask for a small tuition fee. It would still mean college is almost free. And also, I used the lowest estimate for the FTT. It can pull in at most 400 billion, and with the 157 billion tax for wealth and the 400 billion military cut we'd have more than enough money for even a 900 billion dollar plan. I have already proven that the USA can more than pay for a 600 billion dollar plan.

[Nulla Bellum]

Show us on the doll where capitalism exploited you.

>I do not understand Marxism or surplus value

Sure thing, sweetie. Try suing for damages with a "muh employer exploited muh 'surplus value'" argument in a court of law.

::pats head::

[Taihei Tengoku]

I don't think anyone who believes in "surplus value" has any right talking about spooks.

[Nulla Bellum]

I don't think anyone who believes in "surplus value" has any right talking about spooks.

https://youtu.be/vRvdSQHZJYU

[Great Minarchistan]

Show us on the doll where capitalism exploited you.

>I do not understand Marxism or surplus value

1. Money doesn't vote, it only convinces voters to vote.
2. Bloody hell no. 600 billion a year is too big of a hole, plus there's always the reminder that this would probably force an inflow of people that wouldn't otherwise be studying on college. Knowing the 600bn. is based on the current amount of students you'd likely add up some 200-300bn. into it (800-900bn. total). Secondly, I suppose many people would be going to shitty degrees like liberal arts, hence not adding up much to the national income which means you ain't really repaying it to be fair. Thirdly, student debt is really not that hard to pay off for most students. Those who cannot pay for it could benefit from scholarships based on how smart or on how much you deserve it.

1) So then we agree?
2) "student debt is really not that hard to pay off"

The fuck is this shit? College students have negative net worth! It's impossible for them to pay off 100000 dollars of debt with interest. Even with scholarships, colleges just charge more for tuition to take from them as much as possible as well as cheat the government.

Even if we have a sudden influx of new people to college and couldn't afford i , we can just ask for a small tuition fee. It would still mean college is almost free. And also, I used the lowest estimate for the FTT. It can pull in at most 400 billion, and with the 157 billion tax for wealth and the 400 billion military cut we'd have more than enough money for even a 900 billion dollar plan. I have already proven that the USA can more than pay for a 600 billion dollar plan.

1. Do you agree with me?
2. Firstly, average students graduate with ~40k on debt. The 100k+ memes are a really small minority that typically attend colleges in the Ivy League (and are therefore expected to have a better post-college income due to their certifications). Knowing you get 35% underemployment at worst-case studies and an average wage of 50k, we could expect something along the lines of 40k for the underemployed -- which is some thousands above median personal income in the US.

Now, knowing that a reasonable rent for a small house/apartment is $600/month (implying you are moving out already at 21 and unless if you are living on insane places like S.F. where I'd expect a far higher income anyways) and accounting stuff like transportation (~500), healthcare insurance (~200), entertainment (~200), social security taxes (~260) and minor expenses (~350) plus food on which you can confidently spend some $180 a month leaves you at a monthly spending of $2290, i.e. annual spending of $27500. Taking that salary of $40k it means you can save a surplus of $12.5k a year.

Now, to the repaying: 40k outstanding balance plus some 3% real interest p.a. (prime rate+2% minus 2% inflation target) means you can repay your student loan within four years. Since the common age for graduates to finish college and start working is 21-22, with this strategy you can be a debt-free person at your mid-20s already.
tl;dr: It's COMPLETELY possible for a college student to repay their debt even when underemployed. All you need is a tight budget for a few years, not having any children until your 30s and maybe (even though I don't think it's necessary at all considering the above) ask your family for financial help/not moving out for a while.

[Great Minarchistan]

Also fuggin join the ldt discord taihei