Fail Quotes

[Lord T Hawkeye]

And I gather there's even less evidence that if it did happen, it's all our fault for being selfish and having children right?

[VectorM]

democratic control cannot be doone by market forces because the rich have too much power. democracy needs equality

first you say true democratic control cannot exist, then it can only exist with market forces

private industry did not create computers, the public sector did.

When you retard libertarians can provide anything other than baseless rhetoric, lemme know

That's xkeltoix from the comments in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLyUeiR7djQ&feature=sub

[MrBogosity]

"The basic point is that the recession of 2001...was a prewar-style recession, a morning after brought on by irrational exuberance. To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble." --Paul Krugman, "Dubya's Double Dip?", The New York Times 2 August 2002 (He later won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2008.)

[Travis Retriever]

"Capital is dead labor, which, vampire-like, lives only by sucking living labor, and lives the more, the more labor it sucks."--Karl Marx

[Travis Retriever]

"What, exactly is blackmail? Blackmail is the offer of a trade; it is the offer to trade something, usually silence, for some other good, usually money. If the offer of the blackmail trade is accepted, then the blackmailer maintains his silence and the blackmailee pays the agreed amount of money. If the blackmail offer is rejected, then the blackmailer may exercise his right of free speech, and perhaps announce and publicize the secret….

The only difference between a gossip and blabbermouth and the blackmailer is that the blackmailer will refrain from speaking — for a price. In a sense, the gossip or the blabbermouth is much worse than the blackmailer, for the blackmailer at least gives you a chance to shut him up. The blabbermouth and gossip just up and spill the beans. A person with a secret he wants kept will be much better off if a blackmailer rather than a gossip or blabbermouth gets hold of it. With the blabbermouth or gossip, as we have said, all is lost. With the blackmailer, one can only gain, or at worst, be no worse off. If the price required by the blackmailer for his silence is worth less than the secret, the secret-holder will pay off, and accept the lesser of the two evils. He will gain the difference to him between the value of the secret and the price of the blackmailer. It is only in the case that the blackmailer demands more than the secret is worth that the information gets publicized. But in this case the secret-keeper is no worse off with the blackmailer than with the inveterate gossip…. It is indeed difficult, then, to account for the vilification suffered by the blackmailer, at least compared to the gossip who is usually dismissed with merely slight contempt."--source: http://mises.org/daily/2572

Sadly, blackmail, libel and slander are all still initiations of force or fraud.
I also don't like how, in that article, Rothbard seems to conflate negative and positive rights.

[MrBogosity]

I think it would probably depend on what the blackmail is about. If it's just about something that's personally embarrassing but otherwise harmless, I can see his point. But not if it rises to the level of a crime.

[Travis Retriever]

True.

"Sorry ShaneDk, you cant have it both ways. Choose.. no taxes or no fundies. :-P"--Vogter2100, source:  [yt]gh_XgfPkGrU[/yt]

Would it kill him to actually put this as a response to one of Shane's videos?

[MrBogosity]

I don't think anyone could Poe someone and be as extreme as Vogter. Could there be ANY better example of a false dichotomy?

[Gumba Masta]

Either you're with me or you're gonna eat bacon.

[Travis Retriever]

Speaking of Vogter2100;

Well.. the day a libertarian can change my mind without some evidence of the free markets invsible hand or a religiosu person cna provide evidence for his god or gods, has yet to come. I dont see that coming in the foreseeable future.

--Vogter2100

[Travis Retriever]

From some fucktard comment on this video by Stefan Molyneux:

So? Why is coercion wrong? I disagree with the libertarian notion. If anything, coercion is necessary for morality and an important component of it, given that humans are stimulus response organisms that respond to incentives and punishments. Operant Conditioning.

[MrBogosity]

(After being asked for proof that the free market is a "failure") "What? Do I have any "data" aka Bullshit to back it up? No I don't. But if you want eyewitness evidence without all the BS feel free to look me up. Or better yet,...look around." --NBAGOATS, commenting on this video.

(Hmmm, who else uses this line of argument?)

[Travis Retriever]

(After being asked for proof that the free market is a "failure") "What? Do I have any "data" aka Bullshit to back it up? No I don't. But if you want eyewitness evidence without all the BS feel free to look me up. Or better yet,...look around." --NBAGOATS, commenting on this video.

(Hmmm, who else uses this line of argument?)

Yeah, when I first read that, I died a little on the inside.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Update again on Saur's "debt is good" thesis.

As you recall, he began with this gem

It's testament to how little you understand of macroeconomics and... well, mathematics, that you can believe any part of this. Numbers *do* lie, all the time, because they're badly sourced, and debt can continue to grow so long as potential value grows at the same pace. Which it probably does, in long term trends. little stock market crashes and depressions happen all the time, but on the whole, the world economy keeps getting worth more and more, and debt continues to increase alongside it. That's how a capitalist market creates momentum and profitable ventures. Debt will ALWAYS increase, it's actually a sign of a healthy economy. Of course, there are bits of debt that are rather bad, but on the whole, saying the economy is terrible because it's in debt shows an utter lack of knowledge about how capitalism works on a grand scale.

And then this

No, because of what I outlined. Listen.

Man has $100. He wants to start a business. He borrows $500 (what the bank will allow based on his existing money), and starts the business. He uses the venture capital to generate profits, paying his debts. He's now worth $600. He could just sit there and continue to make a bit of money, but why do that? he can now borrow 6 times that amount from the bank, so he borrows $3000, and invests it in the same way, growing his business to the point where it can efficiently pay off his debts. He makes the 3000 dollars back. He's now worth 3000 dollars, and why not just keep going? he can now borrow $15000. He is now 30 times more in debt than he was when he first borrowed, but the debt is sustainable because he is worth more. Read my post, I said that

"the world economy keeps getting worth more and more, and debt continues to increase alongside it. That's how a capitalist market creates momentum and profitable ventures. Debt will ALWAYS increase, it's actually a sign of a healthy economy"

I hope this makes more sense with the given example.

When he took offense again at me saying his knowledge of economics is embarrassing, out came this one...

Misrepresentation as usual.

If you have X dollars you can support 2X dollars debt.

If you have 1 you can support 2
if you have 10 you can support 20
if you have 100 you can support 200

So forth infinitely. So yes, you can 'jack up debt infinitely' but only if your actual capital against which you're borrowing increases in proportion*


* actual proportion may be different to 2-1, depending on productivity and stability.

No, you cannot just increase debt infinitely without increasing your own value at a similar rate. If you have issues with this logic, please explain them.

Just stop trying, seriously...

[MrBogosity]

Ask him what the mechanism is that allows debt to magically create capital.