The most uninteresting internet talking points

[Travis Retriever]

NOT ALL ANARCHISTS ARE NONVIOLENT! *cites the 1930's Spanish Civil War with Spanish Anarcho Communists/Syndicalists taking over parts of Spain*
Nice.  Except they weren't anarchists.  Why do I say this?  Simple.  It all hinges on one easy question.
How do you handle dissenters?
If I don't want to be a part of your communes or answer to your syndicates, what are you doing to do?
Leave me be? If so, grats, you're an anarcho capitalist.
Use force to stop me? Deadly/lethal force if necessary--even if I'm harming no one else?  If so, grats, you just invented government--you're not an anarchist.

But even if I gave you the benefit of the doubt and said they were anarchists, so what?  How about I point to Stalin's system--and nothing else--as a reason why statism will never work.  Would that convince you that statism is bad?  No?  I didn't think so, Mr. Cherry Picker.  Why not focus on, say, Anarchic Medieval Ireland.  It lasted over 2000 years.  It did eventually fall to the British Empire, but took something like 400 years to do so.  Considering the latter had the biggest and most powerful army at the time, and didn't have the separation of an entire ocean the USA had the benefit of; I'd say that's pretty damn impressive.

[Travis Retriever]

HOW DO YOU GET PEOPLE TO HONOR CONTRACTS/NOT KILL EACH OTHER/ETC WITHOUT THE THREAT OF PUNISHMENT?
First off, you do know that there are other sources of punishment than the state right?  You ever been sent to time out as a kid?  Blocked from someone online/banned from a forum?  If so, there you go.

Second off, you aren't seriously saying that the only reason you don't murder/rape/steal/cheat/defraud is because of the threat of jail-time/getting your nuts tazed/shot, right?  If so, you're not really in a position to be spouting off about that kind of thing.

Lastly, if history--hell, if the present day--is any indicator, social ostracism would be the way to go in general.  With one's credit score being a decent example.  Who's gonna want to associate/trade with a deadbeat?  And basically not forcibly disarming the populace so we can handle self defense against the murders/rapists/etc in the act.  But don't take my word for it, check out the murder rates during the "Wild" West.  Notice how much lower than today's they are.  And that's even after you control for population.  Hollywood lied to you.  The "Wild" West is also something of an example of Anarchy that *did* work, FYI.  

[Dallas Wildman]

"We need a public option for insurance to keep from colluding with each other and forming a monopoly.  UPS and FedEx are competitive simply because they have the Post Office to contend with."

Okay honestly I've tried (repeatedly) to convince my family that this is BS but they're not budging.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

"We need a public option for insurance to keep from colluding with each other and forming a monopoly.  UPS and FedEx are competitive simply because they have the Post Office to contend with."

Okay honestly I've tried (repeatedly) to convince my family that this is BS but they're not budging.

Free market collusion is a myth for two reasons.

1. It's too profitable to break ranks.
2. There's no way to stop some new firm from opening up and competing with you.

Not to mention they're arguing we need a collusion by the government or else there will be collusion and collusion is bad?  Prepostrous

[Travis Retriever]

Free market collusion is a myth for two reasons.

1. It's too profitable to break ranks.
2. There's no way to stop some new firm from opening up and competing with you.

Not to mention they're arguing we need a collusion by the government or else there will be collusion and collusion is bad?  Prepostrous

Not to mention arguing that government forcing everyone to buy the insurance companies policies whether they want them or not is 'fostering competition'.

[dallen68]

Not to mention arguing that government forcing everyone to buy the insurance companies policies whether they want them or not is 'fostering competition'.

I suppose one way of getting a measure is looking at what happened when auto insurance became mandatory.

[Travis Retriever]

Monsanto is TEH EVIL!!
Well yes they are but not for the reasons you think, see below.

GMO's are TEH EVIL!!
GMO's are not a new thing.  In fact, us messing with the genes of animals and plants for our own benefit is the one of the big reasons why starvation is not a thing in your world so kindly get off your high horse and do some actual research before opening your mouth please.

Big Pharma is TEH EVIL!!
Again, they kinda are but not for the reasons you think.

Continuing from those ones:

ORGANIC FOOD IS BETTER FOR HEALTH/ENVIRONMENT!!!1
If we went all organic over 3 billion people would die from starvation caused by shortages.  Also, you're 8x more likely to get e. coli because of the poop they use to fertilize it; which will probably undo any of the alleged health benefits (that I've yet to get evidence for anyways http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120903221122.htm http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/comprehensive-study-100-billion-animals-finds-gmos-safe-livestock ) for the stuff in the first place.  And yeah, because of how inefficient it is, it actually is even worse for the environment.  Deal with it.
And the best part? The people selling this stuff know that it is a scam:  http://academicsreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/AR_Organic-Marketing-Report_Print.pdf  Now stop wasting your money on hippy voodoo bullshit and snake oil and start listening to REAL scientists like the late and great Norman Borlaug whose work saved over a billion lives from starvation via GMOs.  Sorry, folks, but you cannot bash and defame someone who saved over a billion lives and claim the moral and scientific high ground.

GLUTEN FREE FOODS ARE BEST!!!!11
Only if you have Celiac disease and maybe allergies.  If not, you do more harm than good by going gluten free. http://gizmodo.com/why-you-might-want-to-rethink-going-gluten-free-1475646469  Just chill.

ALL NATURAL IS BEST!!111
You say while typing on your blatantly artificial computer.  Also, naturalistic fallacy:  arsenic & copperhead venom are "all natural" but they'll still kill you regardless.

THE FOOD COMPANIES TRY TO KILL US WITH THEIR CHEMICALS!
So they'll get rich by murdering their consumer base?  What possible sense does that make?  Think before you speak.

NUCLEAR IS TERRIBAD! JUST LOOK AT CHERNOBYL FUKUSHIMA AND THREE MILE ISLAND!
Nuclear power--even taking into account all of those things is the safest and cleanest (and one of the most efficient) energy sources we have.  A single perfectly functioning coal plant produces about 50 tons of nuclear/radioactive waste per year.  More than the initial blast at Chernobyl (15 tons), Fukushima (5 tons) and Three Mile Island (zilch) combined.  Also, the other sources of clean power like wind and solar are too inefficient (no 3 phase power) and unreliable (no power on demand) to be of widespread use.  Stop listening to the hippies and go nuclear already.

MEAT IS INEFFICIENT!
I'll quote a bit from Hawkeye on this one:  "Some land is good for raising livestock but not good for growing grain. (try raising grain up in the mountains, doesn't work) livestock eat plants that we can't eat (humans can't eat grass for example) and turn it into something that we can.
It's simple. For most of human history, farming efficiency was literally a matter of life and death. So if farming animals for their meat, milk, eggs, etc were inefficient, there is 100% NO conceivable way we'd have done it for thousands of years. Stop getting your info from hippies who don't know what they're talking about."

[evensgrey]

Continuing from this one:

ORGANIC FOOD IS BETTER FOR HEALTH/ENVIRONMENT!!!1
If we went all organic over 3 billion people would die from starvation caused by shortages.  Also, you're 8x more likely to get e. coli because of the poop they fertilize it; which will probably undo any of the alleged health benefits (that I've yet to get evidence for anyways) for the stuff in the first place.  And yeah, because of how inefficient it is, it actually is even worse for the environment.  Deal with it.

GLUTEN FREE FOODS ARE BEST!!!!11
Only if you have a pre-existing sensitivity/allergy to it.  If not, you do more harm than good by going gluten free.

ALL NATURAL IS BEST!!111
You say while typing on your blatantly artificial computer.  Also, naturalistic fallacy:  arsenic is "all natural" but it'll still kill you regardless.

THE FOOD COMPANIES TRY TO KILL US WITH THEIR CHEMICALS!
So they'll get rich by murdering their consumer base?  What possible sense does that make?  Think before you speak.

NUCLEAR IS TERRIBAD! JUST LOOK AT CHERNOBYL FUKUSHIMA AND THREE MILE ISLAND!
Nuclear power--even taking into account all of those things is the safest and cleanest (and one of the most efficient) energy sources we have.  Stop listening to the hippies and go nuclear already.  Coal plants produce about 50 tons of nuclear/radioactive waste per year.  More than Chernobyl (15 tons), Fukushima (5 tons) and Three Mile Island (zilch) combined.  Also, the other sources of clean power like wind and solar are too inefficient (no 3 phase power) and unreliable (no power on demand) to be of widespread use.  Deal with it.

MEAT IS INEFFICIENT!
I'll quote a bit from Hawkeye on this one:  "Some land is good for raising livestock but not good for growing grain. (try raising grain up in the mountains, doesn't work) livestock eat plants that we can't eat (humans can't eat grass for example) and turn it into something that we can.
It's simple. For most of human history, farming efficiency was literally a matter of life and death. So if farming cattle [or any kind of animal for meat] were inefficient, there is 100% NO conceivable way we'd have done it for thousands of years. Stop getting your info from hippies who don't know what they're talking about."

Don't forget the 'raw foodies' stupidity. If raw food is so good for you, why is it that not cooking your food requires you to put more time and effort into processing it so you can digest it well enough to not starve to death on it than if you just cooked it?

[Travis Retriever]

Don't forget the 'raw foodies' stupidity. If raw food is so good for you, why is it that not cooking your food requires you to put more time and effort into processing it so you can digest it well enough to not starve to death on it than if you just cooked it?

Indeed.  Hell, for the raw foodism crap (see what I did there?) I can do you one better:  http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/simply-raw-making-overcooked-claims-about-raw-food-diets/
Chew on that, Spurlock!

[Travis Retriever]

I KNOW THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM/YOUR PARENTS/SOMETHING ELSE OUT OF YOUR CONTROL FAILED YOU, BUT YOU HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY!
For what?  I never had a say in the matter, and all those things were forced on me or imposed on me.  You might as well be saying to a rape victim, "you need to take responsibility for being raped."  Also, if I'm still gonna be responsible regardless, then why even 'provide' the shit in the first place?  Especially at the point of a gun?

[dallen68]

I KNOW THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM/YOUR PARENTS/SOMETHING ELSE OUT OF YOUR CONTROL FAILED YOU, BUT YOU HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY!
For what?  I never had a say in the matter, and all those things were forced on me or imposed on me.  You might as well be saying to a rape victim, "you need to take responsibility for being raped."  Also, if I'm still gonna be responsible regardless, then why even 'provide' the shit in the first place?  Especially at the point of a gun?

I think what they're trying to say is "you don't get to use something that happened to you when you were a kid as a free pass for wrong doing today."

[Travis Retriever]

THE MEDICAL PROFESSION IS TRYING TO KEEP US SICK SO WE'LL KEEP GOING TO THEM FOR HELP/SPENDING MONEY ON THEM!
1)  Massive defamation of character to every medical professional ever.  2)  NOT true, and even if it were, it's because of government barriers to entry allowing it to happen in the first place.  3)  If you go to a doctor who doesn't help you, and only just seems to pad his wallet, you really don't care about this as much as you think, huh?

[MrBogosity]

Not exactly a talking point, but it happens too often to go unmentioned:

You post to a forum that lets you edit posts, while marking them as having been edited (which is perfectly understandable). You make a typo, and then go and change it, which, of course, marks your post as having been edited.

Internetwit: "How DARE you say that black people should be shipped back to Africa!" (Or whatever.)

You: "What are you talking about? I never said that!"

Internetwit: "You edited your comment to take it out!"

[dallen68]

THE MEDICAL PROFESSION IS TRYING TO KEEP US SICK SO WE'LL KEEP GOING TO THEM FOR HELP/SPENDING MONEY ON THEM!
1)  Massive defamation of character to every medical professional ever.  2)  NOT true, and even if it were, it's because of government barriers to entry allowing it to happen in the first place.  3)  If you go to a doctor who doesn't help you, and only just seems to pad his wallet, you really don't care about this as much as you think, huh?

4) If a doctor really did that, he'd very quickly get a bad reputation and wouldn't have that many patients to pad his pocket with.

[AnCap Dave]

I've mentioned this on Facebook, but the "Back in my day" bullshit needs to die the death.