Log in

View Full Version : Anarcho-Cappie views!



CCCPneubauten
14th November 2005, 23:20
ECONOMIC ISSUES

WELFARE

is for lazy assholes who dont want to get a fucking job.


TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH

What a cliche phrase. But those rich people deserve what they earned. Let them fucking keep it and spend it however the fuck they want to spend it.



DRILLING IN ANWR

Let them drill. The environment up there is just snow anyways and we need the fucking oil.


REGULATIONS

Fuck these fucking fuckers who fucking think they can fucking write a fucking law telling me how to use a fucking toilet. I dont fucking want your fucking sissy-ass regulations and your shitty red tape.


FREE TRADE

Yep. Exactly what it says.



Any one care to smash this? I will take the best views againt it and tell him them.

Thank you.

Master Che
15th November 2005, 00:09
Anarcho-Capitalism doesnt work!

bcbm
15th November 2005, 00:32
Yaaawn.


WELFARE

is for lazy assholes who dont want to get a fucking job.

Many welfare programs require the recepient to hold a job, so this accusation is without merit. Programs that don't are generally used as a survival strategy for people with few options, ie those in the inner-city. If you have a kid, would you rather work a minimum wage job for most of the day, or stay home with your kid?


TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH

What a cliche phrase. But those rich people deserve what they earned. Let them fucking keep it and spend it however the fuck they want to spend it.

This would only make sense if everyone who worked no longer had to pay taxes. Otherwise, its just more of the same, since the rich pay the least in taxes statistically, as it stands right now.


DRILLING IN ANWR

Let them drill. The environment up there is just snow anyways and we need the fucking oil.

Or we could find alternatives. :rolleyes:


REGULATIONS

Fuck these fucking fuckers who fucking think they can fucking write a fucking law telling me how to use a fucking toilet. I dont fucking want your fucking sissy-ass regulations and your shitty red tape.

This one pretty much discredits itself.


FREE TRADE

Yep. Exactly what it says.

So everything will be traded for free? Count me in.

enigma2517
15th November 2005, 00:48
Honestly, I wouldn't even bother.

We have many intelligent libertarians/capitalists here.

Argue with them...not this trash.

ComradeRed
15th November 2005, 01:07
Anarcho-plutocracy! What a brilliant idea! Just like the steam powered car...

Tungsten
15th November 2005, 16:07
CCCPneubauten

Some advice: Don't fight battles you don't know how to win.

Free Palestine
15th November 2005, 17:41
There's no such thing as an "anarcho"-capitalist. Their ideas are completely at odds with Anarchism. Maybe you could make this claim using the dictionary definition of Anarchism (i.e. opposition to government), but using Anarchism as a political theory (what Anarchism is more than.. i.e. opposition to capitalism/exploitation/private property)? No.

CCCPneubauten
15th November 2005, 21:28
Tungsten, Believe me, it isn't that hard, but I don't want to just know what I know, I would also like to hear others arguments.

red team
19th November 2005, 06:39
Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 11:25 PM

ECONOMIC ISSUES

WELFARE

is for lazy assholes who dont want to get a fucking job.


TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH

What a cliche phrase. But those rich people deserve what they earned. Let them fucking keep it and spend it however the fuck they want to spend it.



DRILLING IN ANWR

Let them drill. The environment up there is just snow anyways and we need the fucking oil.


REGULATIONS

Fuck these fucking fuckers who fucking think they can fucking write a fucking law telling me how to use a fucking toilet. I dont fucking want your fucking sissy-ass regulations and your shitty red tape.


FREE TRADE

Yep. Exactly what it says.



Any one care to smash this? I will take the best views againt it and tell him them.

Thank you.

ECONOMIC ISSUES

WELFARE

is for lazy assholes who dont want to get a fucking job.


Oh this is classic isn't it? Blaming the exploited for not being more exploited. :lol:
There's so many ways to rip this one to shreds that I wonder why I even bother.

First off, the capitalist system being structured as it is, it is impossible for there to be no unemployment. And actually, it would be an undesirable for a zero unemployment policy to be implemented even if it is possible which it isn't.

If there were more people working the bargaining position of employers would be undermined. Its very simple. The only thing that matters to a private business in a private investor dominated economy (Capitalist economy) is profits because with more profits the company can enlarge their operations increase their production improve their marketing reach and generally edge out their competitors in the free market. But I'm only outlining the nature of all private businesses and all businesses especially the big corporations act in this way. As to why businesses do this, all you have to do is look at the stock market. The investors in the stock market is all chasing after the company that can give the biggest return on investment. The company that can sell their products for the most profits to be returned to the investors win in the stock market. And those that win keep on winning because more investment capital will be invested into your successful company. That's why unemployment is actually a good thing because it helps desperate people work longer and harder for their boss while demanding less in wages so as to lower labour costs. Lower labor costs implies increased profits for the investors. Chances are for anybody who has worked, they would have run into the classic threat from their boss: "don't like the pay or working condition or hours or .... Alright, you can quit. There's plenty of people who would love to take your job". Let's take this threat at face value. There are not that many people who would "love" your job unless they're real masochists. People who take your job because you've quit or was fired don't do it out of "love" for your job or envy for your position. They do it because they're more willing to trade in they're pride, dignity and health (mental and physical) in exchanged for being a good wage slave because the alternative would be even more horrible like being homeless and/or hungry. The truth is unemployment is a very good weapon for the bosses in addition to other weapons like police, military, courts and prison. The "lazy asshole" justification is just the other side of the same threat because by being super hard-working and dedicated to the company only lets the company save more money to be returned to investors and let go of "redundant" workers who are "lazy assholes".

Secondly, who's to say that work can't be shared or organized more rationally for the interests of the workers. But the thing is WHY you work, WHAT you work at, WHEN you work, WHERE you work and HOW you work are all controlled by WHO you work for. And the majority of the population in capitalist economies work for private interests that is people who are only interested and are driven to be only interested in one thing PROFITS (see above). So not only are you exploited when you do work and then told HOW you can be exploited. The whole way you go about finding work so that you can be exploited is set up by those with the money to do the exploiting. For example, you just can't barge into any business and say you want to work for a few days or weeks or months because your wallet's empty even though the work is boring as hell, unskilled and can be performed by virtually any moron with a half a brain. It doesn't work that way. Its "undisciplined" and "unorganized" according to business owners. First you've got to fill out a piece of paper stating when and where you've worked so they check up on you from other business owners to make sure you've been a good boy/girl. And once you do find work your stuck with how your boss wants to organize your pay, hours, schedule and vacations even though there's plenty of people willing to share your work if you get too tire or bored with it or want to take a break. Don't like all that control your boss have (see above).



TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH

What a cliche phrase. But those rich people deserve what they earned. Let them fucking keep it and spend it however the fuck they want to spend it.


If deserve means that a theif deserve his loot because he works hard at coming up with an ingenious plan to steal money then yeah, but I don't really have respect for the rich theives no matter how "hard working" they are.

First off, you can't get rich by being a worker, everybody knows that. And when I mean rich I mean rich by capitalist standards which is at least in the tens of millions. Do you know of any multi-millionaire workers (besides lottery winners which doesn't count).

Where do profits come from? The thing is when you work for a wage you are ALWAYS getting less than the value of your work, otherwise profits would be impossible. The less you get in return for the value of your work the more profits. If you want to talk about tax then profits are the ultimate tax if you are earning a wage, but this isn't popularised because the people which control the economic system and hence the media don't see it that way because they are the beneficiaries of this particular tax. Taxes from the government on the rich to support public services is the reverse of the rich man's tax PROFITS. Isn't it any wonder they oppose this sort of thing. Besides if you are a rich caviar eating, designer clothes wearing, limo riding member of the capitalist royalty you're likely not to rely too much on public services. Most rich people wouldn't want to be caught dead in the company of lowly commoners.



DRILLING IN ANWR

Let them drill. The environment up there is just snow anyways and we need the fucking oil.


First of all thats not entirely true. ANWR stands for Alaska National Wildlife Refuge so the name says it all.

Secondly, alternative energy resources can be implemented today or are in the development stage. The reason why they're not being used or developed fully from the experimental stage is again profits.

Its not profitable for the investors to implement something else. Investors are very narrow minded people. Why implement something new and revolutionary if you got a sure bet like fossile fuels which been around since the 18th century. All you need to do is pump it out of the ground, no R&D, no hiring egghead scientists, no enviromental wackos. Remember, the most important thing is ....

Thirdly, if society widely adopt alternative energy resources your stepping on the toes of a lot of powerful people whose business interests you've just threatened. They like dividends from oil company stocks and not working for a wage. They like huge mansions and private jets. They like wearing and throwing out designer clothes every week. They don't like hearing about global warming and ecological collapse. That's just too much of a party pooper.



REGULATIONS

Fuck these fucking fuckers who fucking think they can fucking write a fucking law telling me how to use a fucking toilet. I dont fucking want your fucking sissy-ass regulations and your shitty red tape.


Regulations are more about keeping these rich assholes from getting away with: slavery, child slavery, murder, assault and homicidal negligence. All punishable crimes by the way if done individually, but what these rich fucks want to do is disguise it so it doesn't become a crime if done by institutions owned and operated by them where workers work long hours in dangerous conditions and produce wealth for them by making cheap unsafe products. They also don't want to get sued if some worker gets hurt or killed by using some low quality unsafe product made in companies by other workers. These assholes want to have their cake and eat it too.

Seriously I couldn't care less if they stuff food up their ass and shit out their mouths.



FREE TRADE

Yep. Exactly what it says.


This has more to do with inter-imperialist struggle and imperialist nation - oppressed nation struggle.

First off there's no such thing as free trade in a competitive capitalist world. Every capitalist uses the nation state in which he bases his operations to gain a better bargain when trading their products and services. The best bargain is zero for everything as when an imperialist country goes to war to plunder the resources of the conquered country. Failing that, instead of outright war a corrupt government and bought-off administrators are installed into the country of choice so the bargain is something like 1 for 30 in terms of wealth transfer. For countries with about even parity in terms of industrial development and financial resources. Competition takes place by lowering the wages of workers so the products and services they provide are more easily sold to the rival country's population. That's all well and good (for the capitalists) but the thing is the other country's capitalists are adopting the same strategy to be used on "your" country.

What if the workers in most countries are too poor to buy back the products they made? Then its inter-imperialist war and ... REVOLUTION.

sfliberty
21st November 2005, 01:23
WELFARE

is for lazy assholes who dont want to get a fucking job.

Welfare has some who really need it. However, welfare turns into welcrack, people just sit at home on their welfare check and don't have an incentive to get a job. Government welfare doesn't make you get a job. If you're a mother with kids, there is no reason that you can't get a job. If it doesn't make sense, you can go towards private charities in order to recieve help, maybe a free daycare service.

The welfare system, like all government, is inefficent, and doesn't work. The amount of paperwork and beraucracy involved is outrageous. There is way too much overhead going to heartless bearaucrats who don't care about the people they're supposed to be helping.

A charity could way out perform the government. It would be incentived to work for private contributions. "We got half a million people into jobs this quarter...That's why you should contribute to us" The people working for the organization would actually care about what they're doing. In an organization that's trying to raise money for their organization would want to have as little overhead as possible, meaning less on the paychecks of their workers. Their workers would have to actually care.



TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH

What a cliche phrase. But those rich people deserve what they earned. Let them fucking keep it and spend it however the fuck they want to spend it.

George Bush is not an anarch-capitalist. He doesn't believe in smaller government. He has increased the government at a pace that Bill Clinton could only have dreamed of. Real anarcho-capitalists don't support taxes period. No matter who is being taxed. People do deserve what they earn. But the same goes for the rich as does the poor.



DRILLING IN ANWR

Let them drill. The environment up there is just snow anyways and we need the fucking oil.

The problem is that the government owns the property. Anarcho-Capitalists believe that there shouldn't be any "public", "communal" property. When the government says that oil companies can drill in the wildlife preserve, they mean on public property. They're simply leasing the property to the oil comany at a miniscule rate.

And what do the oil companies do, act like renters. They have absolutely NO incentive to make sure they do their job cleany. They no incentive not to trash the land. If they owned the land, and had a stake in what they did to the land they would have an incentive to keep the nice and tidy. If this means drilling cleaner, they would do that. If this means not drilling at all, they would do that. That land is worth a lot to some wildlife organization who wants to save it. If it's worth a lot of money now, and then they trash it, ruining all the wildlife, it won't be worth nearly as much and they run the risk of losing out on profit they would've otherwise had.


REGULATIONS

Fuck these fucking fuckers who fucking think they can fucking write a fucking law telling me how to use a fucking toilet. I dont fucking want your fucking sissy-ass regulations and your shitty red tape.

Very well said. A world without regualtions is better for everyone. Over 90% of the regulations out there actually help existing buisnesses. For example, insurance regualation, they exist to help the existing insurance agencies. In Massachusetts they are regulated to death in the insurance industry. Therefore, there are only 5-6 different insurance agencies that operate there. Even big agencies that you always see commercials for (names are slipping my mind right now) don't operate there. They see commercials for them but they can't use them.

That is just one of countless examples. Just do some research, use some common sense.


FREE TRADE

Yep. Exactly what it says.

How can you say no to freedom? Free trade benefits everyone. Buisness owners, consumers. Free trade doesn't involve government at all. In a truly free market there is no government intervention, PERIOD. You wouldn't be able to use the government to your good, or have it used against you.

We don't live in a capitalist, free market society. We haven't seen a comletely free society for several centuries now. However, we have seen communism. We have seen socialism. We have somewhat socialism now, and it's not working.

dakewlguy
23rd November 2005, 20:08
I don't see how that is in any ways 'anarcho' capitalistic. Seems like classical liberal capitalism to me. Where does it say it wants states and governing bodies completely removed. Anarchism isn't compatible with capitalism anyway. Anarchism looks for the removal of all authority. However capitalism naturally produces inequality, and with money comes power, and with power comes authority. There is always dominant authorities or powers in capitalism.

sfliberty
24th November 2005, 20:55
Anarchism is the abscence of government. In anarchism you can look towards any authority or no authority that you feel like. You aren't forced to be under the rule of a certain group or any group if you so choose.

Nyder
29th November 2005, 03:59
Shouldn't anarchism be - do whatever you want, as long as you don't harm anyone else? Isn't that the true principle of anarchism. I don't buy certain people's various versions of anarchism. Anarchism isn't 'anarchy, as long as it is done this way' because that instantly becomes authoritarianism.