>_>

sure...

Are the Koch brothers libertarian or nah?

@emily, how have you been?

ive been good but really tired n stressed

how about u?

Mainly just bored, joined about 2 days ago.

Same though.

:P

and welcome

;p

Thank you.

ur welcome :)

Any plans later?

Hm, no i dont rlly have any soon :/ except stare at my computer screen for 15 hours

how about you

Kind of similar, but more work related.

oh dang

<:dab:533433336966807572>

that sucks man

I enjoy it.

oh nevermind then

what do you do

I mostly just research things to work with.

thats sounds very fun

<:Ancap_Smiley:538150164800733204>

@Deleted User everything I've heard about them has been good

<:fry:550907996163670017>

I think they use the libertarian label to gain support and independence from the two parties but they didn’t endorse Ron Paul or give him one dime. They also endorsed mitt Romney in 2012 and have given billions of dollars to republican candidates. They’re against a strong border or legalizing drugs. They don’t seem libertarian to me.

That sounds very libertarian to me

Minus the support for Mitt Romney

How do you prevent monopolies in a libertarian society?

You don't. You just do your best to support only large businesses you agree with and maybe try to compete if there's a glaring flaw with the monopoly. Monopolies aren't inherently bad. I mean, if you have a good business that's satisfying a huge amount of customers, you're bound to end up with the monopoly status.

The problem with a lot of modern "monopolies" is that they use government power rather than market competition to solidify their status and prevent competition, which gives them room to engage in asshole business practices.

irregardless of the interests of the majority populace of course

in a libertarian society a malevolent business or entity would lose all means of acquiring capital, as they have no centralized coercive means of enforcing a monopoly... but now they do thanks to our (((elected representatives))) and their lobbyists

communism attempts to refuse this by restricting the means of accruing capital, however all this does is further combine the lobbyists and statists into a oligarchy (functionally speaking) for the purported purpose of "preventing capitalist tyranny", but through seizure of the means of production, achieves the same monopolitical malevolency as a corporatocracy if not worse, thanks to the restrictions placed on individual means of exchanging (often necessary) goods and services...

Plus there are degrees of libertarian. Not every libertarian thinks the state should be abolished. The state could hypothetically serve a purpose that prevents unjust monopolies while allowing legitimate businesses to hold a top dog spot.

or simply by not allowing any further laws to be passed besides the constitution etc... for better or worse of course

"worse" imho still being better than globalistic new world order governance, but thats just me

Anything that slows down development should be seen as something bad right?

Pretty new to libertarianism but I think there should still be some form of a state