Fail Quotes

[Ibrahim90]

Granted, many deontological libertarians have advocated a role for government while maintaining a natural rights framework, like Ayn Rand and John Locke. To these thinkers, a limited government is a "necessary evil," to borrow Thomas Paine's famous phrase. It's necessary in that it provides services such as police, courts, and the military that protect against the initiation of force; however, it's evil in that these services paradoxically requires the initiation of force to exist. 

nice strawman.

Unfortunately, this contradictory acceptance of the initiation of force in the name of ending the initiation of force raises an uncomfortable question that leaves any libertarian evangelizer susceptible to argumentative attack. Namely, if the government's initiation of force is acceptable for "the greater good" in providing limited services like police, courts, and the military, why couldn't it have a larger role for the benefit of "the greater good" in providing even more services?

funny you should ask why....I mean, I'm sure the fact that they can and do a very atrocious job at these other services, or that if they can give it, the can and do take it away, or that it's even more open to abuse than private means?

I mean, I can't name any examples myself of that...I'm totally stumped as to why *cough*waitlists*coughs*in*cough*NHS*cough*or*cough*overpriced*healthcare*cough*in*cough*the*USA*cough*

[evensgrey]

Funny you should mention NHS waiting lists...

I recently shredded a guy who was pining for the good old days (before the reintroduction of privately run hospitals in the UK) when he claimed the NHS worked better.  The multi-YEAR waiting lists for even the simplest, most routine surgery didn't seem to phase him at all.  I don't like to think about how long it must have taken to get something requiring a specialist surgeon like orthopedic surgery done (never mind that a week in bed waiting for it can be fatal if you're 70 and need a broken hip replaced, never mind a YEAR).

Now, when they go over the limit on your wait time, you can get transferred into the private system, and suddenly you get your appointment with the specialist in about 2 days, and surgery in about 3 more, and a few more days recovery, and you're well on your way back after 14 days from referral, when you've already been 14 weeks waiting for the NHS.

[AnCap Dave]

[Travis Retriever]

whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-the-lowest-difficulty-setting-there-is/

So I'm on AIM with D, and he says he'd like to nominate the author of the above article for Idiot Extraordinaire.  I second this.

[MrBogosity]

Biggest economic fail EVER!

[yt]LKEcsAx8h7k[/yt]

[Travis Retriever]

Biggest economic fail EVER!

[yt]LKEcsAx8h7k[/yt]

Christ!
I read some of the comments from this guy.

"In a competitive market, they will produce until the profit they make is equal to the opportunity cost of what they're doing. That means profit is zero if you consider opportunity cost a cost."
"In a monopoly, the equilibrium price is not the point of intersection of the curves, but the price which maximizes producer surplus. That only makes your problem worse; I was being generous to the libertarians by assuming the industry was perfectly competitive."

Biggest economic fail is an understatement.
I never thought I'd see the day when someone out econ-illiterated the socialists.  At least they understand that in a free market, companies try to maximize profits!

[Ibrahim90]

Christ!
I read some of the comments from this guy.

"In a competitive market, they will produce until the profit they make is equal to the opportunity cost of what they're doing. That means profit is zero if you consider opportunity cost a cost."

so how do businesses expand again? and how is "opportunity" a cost? taking advantage of it might, but the opportunity?

"In a monopoly, the equilibrium price is not the point of intersection of the curves, but the price which maximizes producer surplus. That only makes your problem worse; I was being generous to the libertarians by assuming the industry was perfectly competitive."

oh, yeah, your generosity is all-encompassing! 

which is interesting, because I'm not aware of any exception to the rule about price equilibrium--including monopolies--unless he for some retarded reason thinks that the price equilibrium doesn't shift.

oh, and why would a company maximize surplus? I mean, the guy knows what surplus is, right? or is he really as retarded as I fear? is he seriously implying that "monopolies" produce shit for the lulz?

[Goaticus]

Enthalpay needs to actually do some of the supply and demand graph homework from the Open Courseware he pretends to have read. 

[Travis Retriever]

how is "opportunity" a cost? taking advantage of it might, but the opportunity?

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/opportunitycost.asp

In all fairness that is an economic term.

But the way he uses it seems more to cloud, rather than reveal.

[Ibrahim90]

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/opportunitycost.asp

In all fairness that is an economic term.

But the way he uses it seems more to cloud, rather than reveal.

fair enough. even then though, what he stated was still too vague, even misleading.

[Travis Retriever]

what he stated was still too vague, even misleading.

Seconded.
Speaking of which, when he says, "maximizes producer surplus" that is also an economic term.

This image illustrates it:


But why he couldn't just say, "monopolies maximize the profits by increasing price and reducing supply (shifting the supply curve to the left)" isn't beyond me.  It seems, like you said, that he's trying to mislead and vague it up.  Then again, he seems to think that if one of the curves shifts, there is no intersection between the curves (basic visual-spatial memory fail).  So there you go.

Really, he strikes me as a pompous pseudo-intellectual dickhead in general.

[Travis Retriever]

Every comment by DeepRainForest on this video:
[yt]yAa6dYBwy7M[/yt]

Long story short, she opens up with a bullshit accusation of hypocrisy for using gov't services (that we are forced to pay for and more often than not have no other alternatives because GovCo legislated them away).  And how civilization is evil and requires a state.  All typed up and using a computer and an internet connection on a private website:  three things that would not and could not exist in the romanticized hunter-gatherer fantasy she masturbates to each night.
I guess that makes her a hypocrite and her own arguments invalid too (oh snap!).

After we explained why her position is something pulled out of an ass regarding civilization and the state (that those two are both contradictory concepts).
Her response?
The old tired "well can you show me any examples of a stateless civilization; no you can't!"
So after sharing at least three: Anarchic Medieval Ireland; Anarchic Medieval Iceland and the "Wild" West;  she attempts to blow off the former (Ireland) by saying, "THEY HAD CHIEFTAINS THEY DON'T' COUNT!!!111"
To which Shane points out that people could choose a different one without even moving (and to show him a state that would allow you to do that) or even not have one at all if you so wanted.  After she blows this off (because it made her sad in the pants? I forget).
After (or during?) which she posts a bunch of refs from some bullshit website going on about how, "economics is just political control yada yada yada", etc; with arguments that would make a creationist facepalm.
After which she starts spamming (or at least posting) a bunch of posts with random caps wherein she just repeats her bullshit mantras about private property requiring the state, etc, etc; and after I told her to GTFO, still insists that she won the argument.
Meanwhile, back in reality,

She:

[MrBogosity]

Really, he strikes me as a pompous pseudo-intellectual dickhead in general.

And the FAIL just keeps on coming:

the supply curve is based on costs and that the equilibrium is not the point of intersection in a monopoly...It is above the point where the graphs intersect. It DOES create a surplus.

Yeah, that's why electrical monopolies generate more energy than they can sell...that's why DeBeers puts more diamonds on the market than they can sell...geez! I don't think I've ever seen a statist this deluded before.

[AnCap Dave]

Also adding this, which was said in the conversation above:

[Ibrahim90]

Also adding this, which was said in the conversation above:

apparently, some dumbass never went to Kuwait or the UAE.

yeah, they're not perfect, but comparing them to SA or N. Korea?