/liberty/ - Liberty

>>88643

>Is "leftist hysteria" a name for the constant buttdevastation right-wing imbeciles have about other people trying to improve the world?

Not really, Leftist Hysteria is (by name) a reference to the pure anger and rage displayed by leftist elements in the general civilized world as civilization opts against various forms of legislation and social agendas they THINK will improve the world when really, it's this type of legislation that has caused problems to begin with (this disconnect is due to a lack of understanding of general history and economics on the left). This rage is generally characterized by both emotional and hyperbolic statements (Ie: "TRUMP MET WITH PUTIN, THIS IS TREASON") or in worst cases, attempts at physical violence (which they generally fail at anyways even when met with forces that have barely a quarter of the weapons or men that they do).

>>88643

No, Carl, leftist hysteria is when leftist crybabies get tired of whining and bitching about plain old capitalism and evil white men, so they find new big bad things to trigger them.

>>88650

You're right, even cats pee all over the place to mark their property.

Sorry kitties.

>>88645

>>88644

>>88646

>>88650

>>88652

>>88653

>>88655

>Name a single piece of legislation.

All regulation, all intrusions into the market (ie: The New Deal, LBJ's Great Society), any sort of welfare program, compulsory school programs, Civil Rights and various other left leaning legal and social programs all make for a giant mess which interferes with the economy, creates perverse incentives and leads to significant damage in the long run.

>>88654

> Oh no, people are calling me out on my retardation

> I-I know, I'll call them butthurt

People are laughing at you simply because you're retarded, trying to frame this in some other way in order to preserve your ego is plain sad.

>>88654

>leftist

>pony fucker

>muh butthurt

>>>/sosach/

>>88711

Because the government, being outside of the economy and thus the price system, has no way of calculating where and how resources should be allocated. Even if we assume the government is acting with the best of intentions (an extremely dubious claim) it's fundamentally impossible for it to respond to the wants of consumers and producers. As such, any service provided by the government, whether it's regulation, redistribution, or defense, can only ever be a drain on the economy. With this knowledge, it's only logical to conclude that the less the government intrudes on the economy, the better.

>>88712

>government is outside of the economy

>>88711

>Why do libert*rians think the government should pretend the economy does not exist?

>government isn't an actor that simply leeches on the economy and damages it

I'm sorry, are you a communist now? I already knew you're fucking retarded, but now you're so fucking stupid that you can't even read past the first half of his first sentence without breaking down like a moron in disbelief with the idea that people stealing resources from productive elements of society are perhaps not exactly economic actors as much as they are simple thieves and criminals.

> gee why do gosh darned libertardians beeleev that guvernmunt shud predend ecunumy dusnt exist! GRUG ANGREE

Gee I dunno you fucking retard, maybe it's because they distort the market? Maybe it's because government programs are not only compulsory but also vastly inefficient? Maybe government, by way of not being an economic actor that relies on actually selling people a valuable product or service, have no incentive to give a fuck about being efficient with tax dollars, let alone spending those dollars in an effectively productive way. Maybe you should try and read the rest of that guy's paragraph so you can learn something and perhaps even read the book if you can acquire the patience let alone the ability to read on a higher level than that of a nursery rhyme.

> BUD MUH GUVURNMENT ITH A PARD OF THU ECUNUMY

No, it's not, not anymore so than the local welfare parasite is a part of the economy, but who am I kidding on that? You're probably a fucking NEET to begin with.

Seriously go read a fucking book and try not to post brainlet memes, if /cow/ wanted to dox you then they'd do it, they don't need you posting pictures of yourself you faggot.

>>88720

> oh no he's calling me out on being retarded

> Y-You're butthurt

Kek. You can play that song and dance to make yourself feel a little better, it just doesn't fool anyone. You're a faggot, and more than that, you're dumber than the dirt you sleep on. Drink bleach.

>>88721

Lmao, you're right, nobody will fall for my attempt to portray you with your spergouts as anything but well-rounded, balanced, intelligent, and calm.

>>88762

>stealing something from someone to "give it back to them for free"

>babby tier stuff

You got that right, babby. If you're too stupid to know what to do with your own money and believe some mature "adult" in the government could spend it more responsibly than you could, then you probably don't deserve it in the first place. Meanwhile, I'll keep everything I earn and spend it wherever I want and shoot greedy, thieving commies like you like rabid dogs.

>>88718

>an entity with a compulsory monopoly that can never go bankrupt is a regular market actor

>>88762

>The government has the deepest pockets

Only because they pilfer through everyone else's. If not that, then they devalue the value of the currency everyone else holds through inflation and massive loans. The latter of these also serves to crowd out private investors by making interest rates artificially high

>handle certain things that the public won't do for itself

If these things are as important as you claim, "the public" will be more than willing to pay for them.

>marketplace has no incentive to provide efficiently

And the government's incentive is….what, exactly? And by definition it's impossible for it to do anything efficiently as it acts outside of the price system. The government has no incentive to do much of anything besides sit on their thumbs and fleece the taxpayers. And again, if these precious services are as necessary as you claim, people will be more than willing to pay out of pocket for them.

>Also it isn't "socialism" just because the government acts as a customer on behalf of the public

Huh, if it's acting on my behalf, why can't I choose to opt out of government services?