Debate me

Ask a libertarian anything

I don't fucking know... What is your position on Citizen's United?

How many cocks have you sucked?

Why is it cheaper to get healthcare in Europe than in America? How would you fix this? How are you going to keep foreign governments from buying individual properties thus slowly losing territory in ancapistan permanently to other governments?

2) a person who believes in free will.

Haaaaaaa you're in for a rough puberty

What if the child consents?

How do you plan to limit the taking over by multinationals once the government is virtually nonexistent?

>libertarian

You are confused. Why are you flying the anarchist flag?

How do you deal with the "automation will replace every job in the future" type of communist?

why do you use the term ancap when anarchy, meaning 'without hierarchy', is antithetical to the hierarchical nature of property?

By killing the communist of course.

Should Chucky cheeses be able to run the police?

*tips virginity*

but then what do you do when automation replaces every job.

also polite sage

>robots take our jerbs
>cost of production goes down
>cost of product goes down
>it is now actually easier to be poor

Why did you become a librarian??

Why do you think genuine liberty (the right of people to go wherever they please) is less important than the right of property owners to exclude other people from their property?

>Why is it cheaper to get healthcare in Europe than in America?
fewer people, healthier population, more tax money to spend on healthcare, and in the US hospitals can charge literally anything they want for dumb shit. if you go to the emergency room for a possibly broken ankle and its just a sprain, they will take x-rays, give you a cold pack, and wrap your shit up with a compression bandage.

and that will cost you probably like 4 grand

if her father isnt willing to step in, then fine

What if the cost of the product doesn't go down? Because if you didn't have to decrease products, would you? I thought ancapism was about everyone maximizing profits.

And where do you find a job? Robots are probably cheaper and more consistent.

Because property is a negative right.

What it is her father? It usually is in most cases.

How do expect to ever see your ideology gain traction when our country is filling up with nonwhites?

That's a meme. As technology replaces current human jobs it also allows us to become more useful through transhumanism, thus leading to new jobs.

Name at least one successful libertarian society

What is the foundation of liberty?

Roads?

Not true, the "jobs created by machines" is greatly outnumbers by those taken away.

Trans-Humanism would not be accomplished in an anarcho-capitalistic society, although an anarcho-capitalistic society will never be accomplished either way.

>automation replacing every job
we probably wouldnt even allow this to happen

Why do you hate roads so much?

Why is taxation theft?

>free will

i agree with the nazi, oddly

>Plug yourself into the matrix goy! Don't you wanna live forever doing repetitive calculations for my spaceship?!

Transhumanism is pure fucking evil.

Why not? Of course we were talking about in an anarcho-capitalistic society but what about in any given society. Why not let automation take over every job.

Anarcho-capitalism really can't be accomplished in any way other than through seasteading and spacesteading, but libertarianism is certainly possible on a wide scale. Communism and socialism still continue to remain failures to this day, though.

>Ask a libertarian anything

Why do you guys keep claiming that Texas is legal theft?

>says the Nazi
I thought you people were supposed to believe in eugenics.

>transhumanism
>us

and what will you be useful for?
only people with scientific capital or economic capital will be needed in a transhumanist-anarchocapitalist society.

I feel like that's incorrect though, society has been and still is pushing away from the ideals drawn out by "right wing libertarianism" you can point out a few places or times where this isn't the case but on the larger scale it's not where society is headed. Of course on the larger scale we're all dead, so whatever.

why do you believe you will be anything more than a wage worker in 20+ years?

Define what you believe makes you a libertarian, and are liberals today a bad representation of what they used to be?

Why do you think that everyone will just drop thier natural tribalist instincts because money? Why do you think market competition from shipping cheap 3rd world workers? Most importantly, why are libertarians like the political party of Judas Iscariot?

It's not whether societies are pushing for or against libertarianism, it's what the results are from their politics. South America is mostly against free market capitalism, with Venezuela as the worst case and Chile as the best case. Now Venezuelans still don't want a free market economy, so Venezuela will continue to be a 3rd world shithole for a long time, but if Chile keeps on this path, it will continue to prosper and dominate globally over nations like Venezuela.

We see this in other places as well, Asia, Africa, Europe, whoever embraces free market policies prospers, and so the world becomes a sort of "survival of the fittest" competition where those who embrace heavy government control and regulation decay into irrelevance.

Not Spartan 113 eugenics. Even then so, eugenics is still a controversial topic for EN's. Usually people who support are Nordicist.

>libertarianism is certainly possible on a wide scale
>liberty as a core principle

what is freedom? what is liberty?

>political freedom

is it more important than economical freedom?

>autonomy

what if people disagree with libertarianism? will you let them be autonomous?

>freedom of choice

no laws then?

>voluntary association

what if there is no consesus?

>individual judgement

doesn't that destroy the cohession of your ideology/movement? or is it that you have the absolute truth so everyone will come to realize this?

>self ownership

doesn't this beat the actual work of a factory? how can the illiterate own themselves? or are you aying that only people from the 1st world will make it to your "New world"?

It's been like that for basically ever. That's not a new thing, just in recent times that is actaully declining and people are generally moving away from it, of course it still exists as a function in society

Economically that's looking to have some merit. Socially speaking, libertarians are 80% nihilistic, which is why you get trounced on that front, and all the half smart libertarians have already taken up our Nationalist positions.

As unlikely/impossible as fully automated work force is we will say it is possible for the argument.

Now if most jobs are replaced then there will be only be a small group of people who actually own the robots or do misc task related to the robots that may not be possible for the robots to do. In this magic robot wonder land labor pretty much is near free according to the retarded theory, so the owners can produce pretty much anything for just the cost of non labor resources. Hell they can even send robots to space to mine automatically and just mine the fucking solar system for free. But as for the non working humans they will pretty much just live off the mercy of the owners, people would form communities whether family, local, or religious to care for the people that they wish to protect.
Also if labor was free, food would be nearly free. They could give away food and slap ads on it or just feed them just because they feel like it.

Pretty much there will be less but more powerful bread winners and families/communities they take care of can just be NEETS.

I do believe in Eugenics. I also have absolute confidence that the kikes who run the (((tech industry))) would NEVER willingly uplift the goyim.
You are cattle, and you will always be cattle.

>GoodGoy Interface Pod™ pic related

I will agree that we don't do a good job on the social and cultural front as we do on the economics side. "Let the drug users fall to the bottom of societal hierarchy" doesn't have the same ring to it as "lock 'em up!", and everyone claims to be on the side of liberty so espousing that doesn't really work anymore either.

Are you anarcho-capitalist or libertarian?

How do you prevent a corporation from becoming too large?

How do you take care of the environment?

Transhumanism doesn't have to be turning yourself into a robot, it can be CRISPR genome editing, myostatin reduction, brain enhancing drugs, etc.

I do believe that we should remain human at a fundamental level, I wouldn't even want to take immortality if it was offered, but I see no reason not to operate at peak human efficiency.

>tfw you can't help automated machines
>tfw you don't have the knowledge to help the engineers

>is it more important than economical freedom?
Yes

Also, libertarianism is different from anarcho-capitalism. Libertarianism believes in making the government's role as small as feasible, anarcho-capitalism believes in getting rid of it entirely.

Point out that they're mentally deficient. I don't think you're gonna have robit judges and lawyers or robit psychiatrists or social workers or any number of non fast food jobs

But the whole idea of robots taking over all the human work positions is just dumb. People overestimate the potential of technology and think it is limitless because they watched too much Star Trek. The amount of money and effort that goes into making machines that can inmate what a human can do will always cost more than just sexually reproducing and raising a human, something that humans are already inclined to want to do.

How the hell would it be more efficient to design and construct a robot that lifts up cardboard boxes and move them around in a warehouse when you can just hire some dude for like $8 an hour, who maintenance himself and is easily told what to do?

Even if robotics advances to the point where it can seriously compete against human labor it would just drive the price of labor down which would make all production cheaper, which would make products cheaper.

Robot Trump 2050 has my vote

Even then you need people to run maintenance on those machines lifting the cardboard boxes. And sure, you could theoretically build a robot to do that too, but the sheer complexity of building a robot that can perform maintenance while also performing self maintenance or building a 2nd robot to perform maintenance on that robot (thus leading to more and more maintenance robots) means that it is far cheaper to just use a human.

I mean, hell, the fact that many factories and fast food restaurant has to wait until minimum wage rises to finally make the switch to automation proves that it's certainly not the doomsday prediction people make it out to be.

Corporations are not really a smart idea without a government, The only reason we see corporations so large as they are today is because of the nifty laws that consider the corporation as its own entity rather than a large group of people who own small portions of it. The modern corporation is set up so that the people buying portions of it are not liable for the corporation since it is its own entity. Without these laws to protect the corporation the business scheme would be too risky for people to want to invest in.

As for pollution the government is what protect manufacturers from being liable for vandalizing other peoples property. People would sew manufacturers for poising their air and/or water supply and would have to stop or pay people to accept the pollution that they produce. Our current system sets the "acceptable" amount of pollution that they can produce and taxes them for it, none of this actually helping the people who is having the property vandalized.

How far liberal are you?
Are you full on Anarchist, or are you more of a small government right leaning libertarian who still has hope in a efficient government?

kek, I actually made this shoop
>original was pic related
>some Anarcho-Commie retard posted it
I've found that the best way to fix the far-left scum is to get them to go lolbertarian first. It's a much easier transition to go from commie to lolberg and THEN to natsoc.

You aren't addressing the main issue. The people who own these industries / control legislation concerning these products don't WANT a population of genius goys. They might bring the retards up to the 100-110 IQ range, but they aren't going to let us make super-babies.

how's grade 9 going?

Humans are just too cheap to make. People even make them on accident all the time. And they are far more versatile than any machine that can be made.

Humans are indeed very versatile, and we live in a civilization made for humans, doors made for human hands, stairs made for human feet, etc.

Making a robot in a human shape continues to prove very difficult and even when it is achieved it is usually overly-complicated and specialized. That's not taking into account the limits to AI or manufacturing

travel is a negative right. unless you dont think forcibly keeping somebody from leaving voilates the NAP

Pretty good arguments.

What if they pollute public propriety like a large river or the ocean though? And how is anybody going to get paid to monitor these?

Also who is going to pay for large R&D projects like space exploration? I'm not an expert but even SpaceX is heavily subsidized by the american government, no?

"What if the cost doesn't go down?"
>Be a greedy corporate shithead
>Automate business
>Don't decrease the cost of product
>Briefly enjoy extra money
>Competitors automate their business
>Sell their product for slightly less
>Now I have to stop marking up my product in order to stay competitive.
>Back and forth for a bit until we hit reasonable cost margins
>Price is now cheaper
>If I want to get another lump of bullshit markup money I have to be the first to innovate again

"Where do you find a job?"
>Be average worker
>Job is replaced with robots
>Get new job designing, building, repairing, or programming robots.
>New business ventures become viable now that cost of labour isn't a barrier to startup & entire new job market are invented to varying degrees of success.
>Fast forward to post-singularity
>Robots become capable of managing all labour needs
>Can't find job because robots do everything
>No jobs exist for anyone, no one has income.
>Private charities feel bad about this problem and buy robots for the first people hit by unemployment (maybe out of empathy, maybe just as an investment in keeping crime rates down), corporations that follow suit see people choosing them over their competitors.
>Not even a big expense, they don't cost much to make at this point since other robots do everything every step of the way, and anyone trying to mark-up the price gets undercut by their competitors.
>These robots become self sustaining, everyone has robots, money becomes irrelevant.
>Don't need a job anymore because there is a literal slave caste of robots that serve all the needs of humanity now.
>We now live as the leisure class artists & philosophers of a post-scarcity society, capitalism may be obsolete at this point, or a new economy takes shape based on whatever is left to have relative value.

came here to post this

Because in popular culture anarchism is viewed as absence of state.

Public property is only a term used for state owned property. Without a government that land would be owned by someone and they would most likely want to take care of it. I am not sure about the ocean though. There might be large portions that companies or guilds that use the ocean and would like to protect it from harm. (probably fishers) Though I can never too sure how people will freely organize themselves in a free world I can only predict.

Correct that SpaceX is heavily involved with the state, but even without the state I think the push for space travel would probably keep that going. But if people are not interested or do not find enough value or profit in going to space they might not have to. Either you just accept that space isn't going to be explored or try to finance it yourself. You might think that space exploration is necessary for mankind to advance or survive, but you do not get to decide what is best for everyone, you can only choose for yourself.

But I predict that enough people like you are interested in space exploration and would willing to help pay for, even if like a small 5$/month amount like a Patroen kind of thing. Also businesses will probably find potential profits in bringing tourist to space. Also a super rich individual might just have a passion for space travel and finance it himself, again I can only try to predict.

nice reddit spacing

But muh roads

>1 post by this ID

>Without a government that land would be owned by someone and they would most likely want to take care of it

You can't apply that idea to everything. I have trouble seeing how someone would decide to take of the atmosphere for example. You need to employ scientists and launch satellites. It's very important but doesn't create revenue and simply ignoring it would create problems in the long term.

>I am not sure about the ocean though. There might be large portions that companies or guilds that use the ocean and would like to protect it from harm. (probably fishers)

Over-fishing is actually a big problem. I wouldn't trust fishers one bit.

Also what about species going extinct? There might be even more poachers trying to do a profit under anarchy. I don't think there would be enough patrons in the world to fund all these things.

>Also a super rich individual might just have a passion for space travel and finance it himself, again I can only try to predict.

What do you do if a super rich individual becomes so rich he drives out the competition? There aren't any anti-trust laws under anarchy.

What do you think about for-profit education establishments? You might create an elite with know-how and bunch of wage-slaves.

What do you do if you're born from poor parents and you want to be successful in life?

What do you do if you're born with a disability?

Why do you think negative rights are more important than positive rights?

Is this true?