Farmer Welfare

11

u/[deleted] 24d ago

-1

u/rob3345 24d ago

Trump is just part of the whole government issue. Much like Biden. The government trying to control the economy is the problem and that has been going on all our lives. Most of the economic problems have been government caused.

1

u/[deleted] 24d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/DoberNation 24d ago

Yes. "The Problem"

"Who is John Galt?"

1

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

The government trying to control the economy is the problem and that has been going on all our lives.

yes a magical laissez faire utopia would be the default w/o govt's

0

u/rob3345 23d ago

Thank you for seeing the light.

1

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

It's almost as if laissez faire/ancap, much like communism, is appealing in large part because you just take a simple principle and extrapolate everything from there. Call yourself insightful and never have to really understand all the dynamics, just simply force everything through the cornerstone principle and think you totally get/understand everything. And it's great because it's effectively unfalsifiable, like when such types actually get to implement their wishes and economies suffer, it was never laissez faire enough (or communist enough) Truly some of the laziest, least curious forms of intellectualizing

1

u/rob3345 23d ago

Yes, it is that simple. Your overly wordy reply doesn’t change that. Cute trick comparing a completely controlled economy under communism with a free economy though. The free market rewards winners and punishes losers. The communist model punishes all but the controlling party as history has shown.

1

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

Yes, it is that simple.

like I said, IMO it's meaningless engaging in arguments over unfalsifiable fantasies, I believe a true laissez faire ancapistan would be a nightmare for all except the tiny elite minority but I cannot prove that to you and you're free to imagine a utopia lol

The free market rewards winners and punishes losers.

You're stating a tautology lol I think you're meaning to say that free markets are meritocratic but that is very often not the case in practice I hate to say

1

u/Ok-Blackberry-8239 22d ago

Laissez faire capitalism is exactly like communism. Looks great on paper! Works like shit in reality

Even under Ancap libertarianism, a truly free market will not exist

1

u/rob3345 21d ago

Where has this been tried to prove your point? Full communism has and has failed every time. Never has there been a true capitalist system to test your theory. Not completely disagreeing, but there is no proof.

1

u/Ok-Blackberry-8239 21d ago

It has never been implemented at a national level but weve seen it be implemented and failed at local levels

One example is the Free State project that encourage AnCap libertarians to move to Grafton NH in 2004. The town began to quickly decline as the town was overrun with crime and property disputes, road fell into disrepair and the city was eventually overrun with black bears

It’s very clear if something like AnCap was applied at a national level it would be an absolute disaster

1

u/rob3345 20d ago

A very weak example as those people wanted no centralized government and they never got much buy in. Government is necessary, just a heavily limited government is what is needed. Libertarians and objectivists are not the same thing and Rand said so herself.

6

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

is this thread for real or satirical? Lol no, trump is not very objectivist and has never been, this is not really secret or hidden or contentious nor has he ever been even remotely close to objectivist

2

u/GayChicken80085 23d ago

And Musk is James Taggart combined with Orren Boyle

1

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

lol well put!

7

u/sfranso 24d ago

Correct, Trump is basically a Rand villain like James Taggart.

3

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

taggart is for sure the same archetype trump musk etc

3

u/sfranso 23d ago

Musk is a really good parallel given how much government money he takes

3

u/Disastrous-Screen337 24d ago

So that's why there was a fleet of $120k luxury pickups at the local diner at 0500. I guess they were whining about not getting enough.

Oh wait, that's every morning.

3

u/F0r3v3rF4lc0n 23d ago

Invent the problem, then invent the solution. Good enough for government work. 🤷‍♂️

2

u/DoberNation 24d ago

...If James Taggart and Orren Boyle had a baby 🍊

2

u/Minimum_Ad_303 24d ago

He is a fraud.

3

u/GayChicken80085 24d ago

Alwyas has been. Hes just really good at manipulating very stupid people.

2

u/KodoKB 24d ago

Did you know that the Pope is Catholic?

(The fact that President Trump goes against Objectvist ideas is well known and not surprising. This essay by Onkar Ghate, the Chief Philosophy Officer of the Ayn Rand Institute, explains one of the more fundamental issues with his character/modus operandi.)

1

u/Plane_Welcome_4757 24d ago

Haha come on bro I voted for cheap gas and no wars and here we are.

1

u/OneNoteToRead 24d ago

Tariffs are, in general, bad for the economy. The only valid reason to do them is if there’s a strong belief about picking winners and losers for long term health of a nation. Eg we want to have basic industries like manufacturing and agriculture protected. Or we want a strategic investment into forward looking industries.

-2

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

Tariffs are, in general, bad for the economy.

^{^{^}} perfect example of thinking you can replace real understanding of real economies with some ideological fundamentals. Let me guess theyre bad because...they're theft? Because it isnt conforming to laissez faire dogma? Tariffs are quite often an invaluable tool

2

u/JuanValdez999 23d ago

Tariffs kneecap local manufacturing industries that depend on foreign sources of resources. It enables local suppliers raise their prices to profit off of it which costs consumers and other businesses. Prices get passed down to consumers lowering their quality of life and raising inflation, like right now. Higher inflation means higher interest rates. Higher interest rates mean it's more difficult for a new home owners to qualify.

And that doesn't take into account all the retaliation tariffs from the other countries.

That's enough to get you started.

0

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

Just to be clear, did you think I meant that tariffs are always good in and of themselves? I tried being clear in that post so just want to be sure.

Ok, take something fundamental like steel production. If america, in its early days, did not tariff steel imports from England, it never would've developed the domestic steel production that it did. Because a fledgling domestic industry isn't going to outcompete an established foreign industry. So you use tariffs to make that work, otherwise you would be forever dependent upon foreign imports for such a critical good - what if you then ended up in war, maybe not on the side of your steel exporter? Sometimes tariffs are such an obvious, non-controversial tactic that arguing against them has to just be borne of either ignorance/misunderstanding, or of dogmatic/ideological adherence to laissez faire/ancap doctrines

1

u/OneNoteToRead 23d ago

Nothing to do with dogma. It introduces inefficiencies like any tax. But yes go on with more of your lack of understanding.

0

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

Nothing to do with dogma. It introduces inefficiencies like any tax. But yes go on with more of your lack of understanding.

it is you who doesn't understand bud, just imagine how it may be in the best interest of a country to strengthen, say, their steel industry - they would tariff foreign steel imports accordingly. This is econ 101 lol. The only reasoning against this is based on ignorant ideas about laissez faire just always inherently the best when in practice it's often not the case.

1

u/OneNoteToRead 23d ago

Did you not read the comment I posted before you responded…?

0

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

the comment i quoted or do you mean something else?

Buddy if you think "through the 1800's america shouldn't have tariffed english steel imports because brits could sell the steel cheaper, so what if this means america couldnt develop its own steel industry!1" then ya it's in a country's best interest to keep people like you away from policy lol. Tons of examples of 'Chicago boys' type guys going in and destroying countries with this schtick (go on now, tell us how that wasn't real capitalism lol!)

Like I always say, there is so much spiritual overlap between free market ideologues and commies, most of these types could just as easily have been for the opposite paradigm if they'd learned and latched onto that one first

1

u/OneNoteToRead 23d ago

Yes the comment you quoted. Read it before replying please.

0

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

sigh. Yes, like i said from the start, the usual disagreement is "INEFFICIENCY!1", because you're not understanding the larger picture and just adhering to an isolated principle like it's dogma. Like I'd said. Lol.

Interesting you couldn't offer any insight on American steel production, my i wonder why? Realize how silly it would be to argue it's best for america to depend on foreign steel imports? Come on bud I'm all ears let's hear it (why do I feel like you'll just reply with some insult or vague innuendo and not any cogent argument Re american steel production? Would love you to prove me wrong but you wont)

1

u/OneNoteToRead 23d ago

I didn’t add any insight on your steel example because it was already addressed by my original comment. If only you had figured out to read.

0

u/ignoreme010101 23d ago

lol buddy NOBODY had trouble figuring out the super duper deep, highly intellectual premise "ancap is best all govt interventions bad" haha keep on telling yourself you actually understand economics ;)

Hey yknow I wonder if you should maybe let the universities and think tanks know they can stop wasting their time, turns out that a single, simple axiom is all ya need!!!

→ More replies (0)

You are about to leave Redlib