No.99614
When a libertarian decries the minimum wage, they are only focusing on the costs the employers’ face, that is what is seen. However, they fail to notice the unseen, namely that as employees wages are higher, they spend more, hence sales and revenues of a business rises. Minimum wage doesn't create unemployment. The broken window fallacy that the libertarians use so often shows that we could have a minimum wage law. Further the broken window fallacy is retarded because it can apply to the private sector too. If a restaurant owner sets up a restaurant aren't other owners being deprived of rental space? Libertarians also like to say that the public sector cannot create jobs. But they do not realize that the public sector brought the world out of the Great Depression via the military. They also say that there shouldn't be any public spending during a recession but they do not realize that people have less money to spend in the private sector because very few people have jobs.
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99616
>>99614
<Hey guys have you ever heard about this theory of how consumption drives the economy? It's this radical new thing made up by some guy named John Maynard Keynes, I'm not sure if you've heard of him, he's really obscure and stuff.
<Anyways, Keynes had this equation he made with aggregate demand, and he basically proved that investment and savings don't actually mean anything, and you can magically uplift the economy through consumption
OP, I think you should kill yourself, pay someone to dig up your corpse, then pay someone else to cremate it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99617
with minimum wage all the jobs that would be payed below the minimum disappears. For example I may pay a person 2$ to fix my lightbulb, but I would never pay him 4$. If the State force me to pay 4$, I don't get my lightbulb changed and the person who needed and wanted the 2$ gets 0$. The overall wealth of society diminishes.
Also if you set a minimum wage it means that the prices of good and services will rise and won't be able to ever get below a certain amount. People who are poor will less able to afford good and services.
We can also suppose that even if people who receive a minimum wage were to spend more, what would happen is that the prices of certain goods and services commonly needed will rise. Again, the poor will be less able to afford those good and services.
> Further the broken window fallacy is retarded because it can apply to the private sector too. If a restaurant owner sets up a restaurant aren't other owners being deprived of rental space?
What the hell is your point?
I will not get into the whole public spending thing because I don't have the patience right now and also are posed in an even shittier way than the other arguments.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99618
>>99614
The problem isn't that the increased cost of a minimum wage will push companies out of business, or force them to fire people; they'll just increase prices to compensate. This is exactly the reason why minimum wage laws are ineffective, however: they don't result in an actual increase in purchasing power for minimum wage employees, and cause the gap between skilled and unskilled labor to shrink, effectively punishing people for not being faceless mooks working at your local Starbucks.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99620
>>99616
whats your gripe with Keynes? he solved the great depression.
>b-b-b-but muh broken window fallacy
do you not want to create jobs and get out the recession or will your feels be too hurt because your precious private sector jobs that never existed wont become a reality. >>99616
>and you can magically uplift the economy through consumption
consumption creates as much growth as saving. besides saving is retarded because no one wants to save because banks will just force low interest rates.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99623
I wrote a dissertation (or whatever those fucking academics call it) about the minimum wage.
Here are a few of my findings.
Minimum wage:
a) Does not make up more than a couple percent of hourly-paid employees, but it DOES have a devaluing effect on jobs of higher skill than those. That is, everyone has to push up their wages, so many mid-skill jobs see a vacuum of laborers to easier jobs that pay the same. Only the virtuous and responsible usually find meaning in higher work.
b) The adjustment to minimum wage always lags behind inflation and must be constantly corrected. One could fix it to the inflation or GDP growth rates, but that process would be victim to the same bureaucratic inefficiency just like the current process. Plus, there would need to be a decided "refresh rate" for the wage. Every quarter? Every year? If the economy crashed then wages would still be required to be high until it adjusted at the next period.
c) Finally, as it relates to immigration, setting a minimum wage prices zero-skill laborers out of the market and this is where much joblessness comes from. This is not the same as unemployment, which doesn't include those NOT SEEKING EMPLOYMENT. Those are the lost people who aren't accounted for and actually can't get a job for a couple reasons:
They either can't bring enough value to a firm to justify hiring them, or the zero-skill jobs are taken up by illegals or "undocumented job-migrants" who the firms CAN hire at a sub-minimum wage.
Overall, minimum wage isn't the worst idea in history, but it has an ass-load of flaws. I'm personally against it, but I'm just a faggot and wanted to give you Anons my findings.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99624
>>99623
I should add that the people who I said are replaced/unaccounted for are part of America's welfare class, which is burdened by the lazy, unskilled, replaced, or dishonest together.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99626
>>99614
>>99620
Given the change of flag I'm almost certain you're having a giggle, but I'll indulge my autism and reply anyways.
> they are only focusing on the costs the employers’ face, that is what is seen
Wrong. The fact that a higher minimum wage reduces employment is always emphasized in Austrian school arguments, which is a cost faced by employees.
>namely that as employees wages are higher
There are also fewer employees earning wages.
>they spend more
They spend more on goods that are now more expensive thanks to increased cost of production. Even if we take it as a given that an increase in consumption is the only relevant metric (an extremely suspect assumption to make), consumption has only increased nominally, and not in any real sense.
>Minimum wage doesn't create unemployment
Do I really need to get out the Supply/Demand graph and show you how to calculate deadweight loss from the intercept points? Either people get laid off due ot increased costs, prices increase due to increased costs, or both.
But, let's pretend none of those arguments exist, and assume for the moment your argument is valid. Explain to me why a $15/hr minimum wage is desirable but a $1000/hr minimum wage is not. After all, wouldn't that stimulate consumption even more, as the employees have even more spending money to throw around, to get expanded through the magic money multiplier? If not, if a $1000/hour minimum wage would in fact hurt the economy, then explain to me what detrimental effects it incurs that are exclusive to that high wage, and not also incurred by the lower wage but to a lesser extent. There is no conceptual difference between these two price floors, ergo the effect they have must be the same, different only in magnitude. Future reading can be found here:
https://mises.org/wire/minimum-wage-doesn’t-do-what-you-think-it-does
>Further the broken window fallacy is retarded because it can apply to the private sector too. If a restaurant owner sets up a restaurant aren't other owners being deprived of rental space?
The broken window fallacy denotes specifically the unseen losses incurred by a destruction in goods or of productivity, hence broken window fallacy. It isn't the same thing as scarcity.
>Libertarians also like to say that the public sector cannot create jobs. But they do not realize that the public sector brought the world out of the Great Depression via the military
[laughs in moneyprinting]
https://mises.org/library/how-fdr-made-depression-worse
https://mises.org/library/great-depression
>They also say that there shouldn't be any public spending during a recession but they do not realize that people have less money to spend in the private sector because very few people have jobs.
Where's that money coming from? You can't make a rug longer by cutting a foot of the top and stapling it to the bottom.
>inb4 muh temporary deficits
See above links about the Great Depression, and how the original cripplekike worsened it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99627
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99628
>>99626
>Wrong. The fact that a higher minimum wage reduces employment is always emphasized in Austrian school arguments, which is a cost faced by employees.
Higher minimum wage increases employment because there is more of demand for people to go to work because the higher wages. Everyone loves higher wages!
>There are also fewer employees earning wages
Even if employers lay off workers to compensate for the higher minimum wage it still does not kill jobs! When the workers get more money to spend from the minimum wage they are able to buy more products or save thus creating more jobs.
>>99626
>They spend more on goods that are now more expensive thanks to increased cost of production
That is what price control is for. Even then price control isn't actually needed because you're assuming that labor is the full cost of a product. I reality, they must buy producers goods, pay for electricity, buy fuel for delivery, pay rent etc…
>Even if we take it as a given that an increase in consumption is the only relevant metric (an extremely suspect assumption to make), consumption has only increased nominally, and not in any real sense.
See above
>Either people get laid off due to increased costs, prices increase due to increased costs, or both.
Again, labor isn't the full cost of production
> Explain to me why a $15/hr minimum wage is desirable but a $1000/hr minimum wage is not
You have to progressively increase wages otherwise you'll damage the economy too much
>[laughs in moneyprinting]
Taxation does not equal quantitative easing.
>Where's that money coming from?
Foreigners and other countries buying treasury bonds. They will eventually be paid off with taxation after the recession is over.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99642
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99643
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99649
>>99614
>However, they fail to notice the unseen, namely that as employees wages are higher, they spend more, hence sales and revenues of a business rises.
That is true, but it's not unseen. We are probably all familiar with this argument. However, what you don't see here is that while their spending increases, the business has higher expenses forced on it, meaning that the profit margin decreases, so it will spend less money on other things. Overall, the same amount of money is spent.
The problem with the minimum wage is not per se that it diverts purchasing power, at least not from the economic side of things (ethically, that is another matter entirely). The problem are the layoffs that ensue. About this, you say:
>Minimum wage doesn't create unemployment.
Your case, if I understood you correctly, is that as employees receive a higher wage, they spend more money, hence the businesses make a higher profit and don't have to lay anyone off. However, the closing of profit margins is not the only factor creating unemployment.
To understand the more important factor, the one not offset by increased spending, you need to know how wages are determined on the free market. Employees are paid close to their discounted marginal value product, that is, the value of their individual contribution to the production of the business (hence why it is marginal), discounted by time-preference as they are paid in advance of successful sales. Competition ensures that employees are paid close to this amount.
If you raise the minimum wage, the work of some employees becomes unprofitable, as they are henceforth paid more than what they contribute to the total revenue of the company. Hiring them effectively turns into consumtion, the company loses more than it makes. Hence, it will lay them off, unless it wants to essentially give to charity (and we know that businesses cannot remain in business if they give all they have to charity).
Ask yourself, what would happen if the janitor at your workplace was henceforth paid ten thousand dollars per hour? Would he remain at his job, or would he be fired? Of course the latter, and rightly so.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99650
>>99649
In other words, a minimum wage is a wealth transfer not just from the business to the workers, but from the submarginal workers to the supramarginal ones.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99677
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99679
All of these minutia are totally irrelevant. The only question is the moral one: should I have the right to forbid employees from working at whatever wage they're willing?
Obviously NO!
If all restaurant workers want to organize to insist on $15 untipped that's totally up to them. Leave your Keynesian textual diarrhea in the toilet >>>/leftypol/
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99680
>>99679
please leave your Austrian shit in the grave. it's been debunked over and over and over and over again. Milton Friedman debunked the business cycle, it gets btfoed all the time by Krugman. it's not even accepted as mainstream anymore
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99681
>>99680
What did I say thats possibly opposed by friedman
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99682
>>99614
This whole thing reads like something from someone who hasn't actually read into economics but is trying to give us the 'gotcha' with some Bastiat-esque lines that are completely misapplied.
>When a libertarian decries the minimum wage, they are only focusing on the costs the employers’ face, that is what is seen. However, they fail to notice the unseen, namely that as employees wages are higher, they spend more, hence sales and revenues of a business rises.
This is like the whole fallacy of the welfare argument, "Well if we give the poor money, they can spend it and that can stimulate growth". It's just not correct, first and foremost you've already distorted the market by forcing employers to pay a janitor more than the value he's perceived as providing, that is the job isn't just completely eliminated outright or combined with other jobs for the sake of reducing as much redundancy as possible. More than that, the business ultimately suffers when the business owner has to inevitably raise prices in order to stay afloat with these new wages, which unfortunately damages the business' ability to do commerce as efficiently as it had before.
>Minimum wage doesn't create unemployment.
Except it does, this is basic economics 101 and you don't have to be an Austrian to realize that. I hate to sound so pompous but in all seriousness: Price ceilings and price floors, look them up and pay very good attention to their effects.
> If a restaurant owner sets up a restaurant aren't other owners being deprived of rental space?
I think you kind of miss the point of the Broken Window fallacy and it shows because what you're concentrating on is fairly odd in of itself.
The point is that when government spends money, it doesn't just spend money of it's own willy nilly, it taxes or it inflates (which many would argue is just a more perverse form of taxation) which means that the population loses its money, money that could have been spent on valuable goods and services in the market as opposed to something that people don't actually value to begin with. No one values the breaking and then consequential repairing of windows because had that window not been broken, and the tax-payers been forced to pay for it, the money could have been used in different way that actually provided value to the community, ie: buying new shoes, investing in new projects, etc etc.
tl;dr : The broken window fallacy doesn't lie in the fact that there's opportunity costs in a resource being used or utilized (ie: the restaurant space scenario), it lies in the fact that resources have been deployed in a way that's not actually valuable in the market, as such it's a waste of time and resources that doesn't help build wealth in the least.
>But they do not realize that the public sector brought the world out of the Great Depression via the military.
>mfw
Nigger what. The public sector didn't help at all with the Great Depression, it just made it worse via the new deal. Taxing the hell out of people and then allocating that money towards useless fucking jobs that no one gives a shit about doesn't help the market in the least. Look at the WPA, the NRA and AAA just for some examples of horror stories in regards to government inefficiency, they basically paid people to chase tumbleweeds for fuck's sake. This didn't help the economy, this prolonged the depression. You don't solve a problem of government interference within the market with more government interference. That just simply makes a bad situation much much worse.
>>99680
This is bait if I've ever seen it.
>krugman
Top fucking kek.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99683
>>99679
please leave your Austrian shit in the grave. it's been debunked over and over and over and over again. Milton Friedman debunked the business cycle, it gets btfoed all the time by Krugman. it's not even accepted as mainstream anymore
>>99682
>This is like the whole fallacy of the welfare argument, "Well if we give the poor money, they can spend it and that can stimulate growth". It's just not correct, first and foremost you've already distorted the market by forcing employers to pay a janitor more than the value he's perceived as providing, that is the job isn't just completely eliminated outright or combined with other jobs for the sake of reducing as much redundancy as possible. More than that, the business ultimately suffers when the business owner has to inevitably raise prices in order to stay afloat with these new wages, which unfortunately damages the business' ability to do commerce as efficiently as it had before.
<HURR DURR PAY ON PRODUCTIVITY
see pic related
> This is bait if I've ever seen it.
>>krugman
> Top fucking kek.
http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99684
>>99683
>see pic related
>no pic
>repeat reply
>socialdemocracy21stcentury
You're not very good at this, are you?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99685
>>99684
here's the pic and the blog debunks Austrian economics
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99686
>>99685
I'm kind of baffled from trying to figure out what your argument is. Again, these gotchas aren't really working, you kind of have to present your actual argument, like what's the implication here? What is the argument that you are trying to throw at me here? That workers don't get paid based on productivity? Are we going to look at things like automation, foreign factories, etc?
What is the argument I'm supposed to derive from this post? What about this image debunks Austrian economics?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99687
>>99686
that picture proves that workers aren't paid based on productivity
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99689
>>99687
>that picture proves that workers aren't paid based on productivity
Okay three things:
One, that's not a thesis that has anything to do with argument at hand, so I don't even know where you got that implication from.
Two, just for the sake of my autism it's worth pointing out that the graph unfortunately isn't very comprehensive, that's not to say the data recorded is wrong per se but that it doesn't account for things like job benefits, consumption rates per person, part time workers and their effect on wages, automation, etc. It's also worth noting that such graphs that depict real wages decreasing tend to rely on CPI which unfortunately isn't a very good measure in this case due to the overstatement of the effects of inflation meanwhile other (generally more accurate) measurements of wage growth (done via Gross Domestic Product Deflator) place it around an 18% increase from the 70s to about 2006 while something like the PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures Deflator) would help you arrive to the conclusion that wages have increased by about 10% in the same era.
I've found two good graphs that actually sort of puts a good perspective on things that are worth checking out. The idea that wages have been stagnating since the 1970s is unfortunately a thesis that's not presented on solid evidence unfortunately.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99690
>>99689
TL;DR: the data you have was received via CPI, and CPI unfortunately isn't very useful in this case. There's more accurate indicators that we can use to measure such things in the economy that don't give us inaccurate implications about on-going inflation.
Oh and I forgot the third point: If you're going to make an argument, make it and stay on topic. You can't just rely on posting a picture or a link to SOCIALDEMOCRACY21stCENTURY (which is shitposting 101 on this board) and act like you've completely debunked Austrian economics like every other commie fag who pops up on this board. You posted a graph that really had nothing to do with the argument about minimum wage and the Broken Window Fallacy, and as such the next post devolved into something that had barely anything to do with the original topic at all.
>webm unrelated.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99708
>>99628
Nominal wages increase for those not laid off by minimum wage, but real wages (i.e. purchasing power) does not increase. Because real wages do not increase, you have a net loss of employment.
>That is what price control is for.
Price ceilings ceases shortages and price floors create surplus. Minimum wage acts as a price floor (assuming it is above equilibrium price for unskilled workers) creating surplus labor (i.e. unemployment).
>you're assuming that labor is the full cost of a product.
Only you are making that assumption.
>labor isn't the full cost of production
This is irrelevant since what matters is the labor cost relative to the profit margin.
> You have to progressively increase wages otherwise you'll damage the economy too much
This does not explain the mechanism whatsoever. How is the economy damaged and why does this not apply to progressive minimum wage increments?
> Taxation does not equal quantitative easing.
Increasing the money supply is effectively inflation, and hence taxation)
> They will eventually be paid off with taxation after the recession is over.
And that is where we approach deficit spending as the state continually feeds the bubble and the interest payments.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99723
>>99685
>>99687
See:
>Government mandated benefits
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99726
>>99614
>However, they fail to notice the unseen, namely that as employees wages are higher, they spend more, hence sales and revenues of a business rises.
Alright anon, let's raise minimum wage to $100. Why not $500/hour? Let's go full Reichsmark and make it fucking $1,000,000,000,000 per hour! After all, higher wages mean more spending hence sales and revenues of business rises! Let's see what wise baby's first macroeconomics class wisdom you have below for us…
>Further the broken window fallacy is retarded because it can apply to the private sector too. If a restaurant owner sets up a restaurant aren't other owners being deprived of rental space?
Wow, I never thought that people couldn't, like, build buildings to house businesses. You'd think space was unlimited with all these open plains and empty land with nothing on it, but I guess the only place you can open a business is within a 10 minute drive of the center of the downtown area, and we can't have more than three stories on the buildings either!
>But they do not realize that the public sector brought the world out of the Great Depression via the military.
Fuck this, fuck you. The Great Depression was extended an additional four years due to your people's fucking interference and then another two years due to fucking war rationing and military interference into the market, with the entire system only NOT collapsing because of women entering the work force because they had to in order for the rationing/military occupation of the market to not collapse the entire fucking country under its own bureaucratic weight.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99728
>>99726
>You'd think space was unlimited with all these open plains and empty land with nothing on it,
That's all owned by the BLM and they won't sell any of it. And even if you were able to buy a plot of land, you'd need dozens permits that cost as much as the building itself. And even if you built a building, you probably couldn't make it a restaurant unless the area was zoned for it. There's so many restrictions on when and where and how you can build that it's very rarely worth it except for well established companies with strong connections with all of the various regulating bodies.
I agree with you otherwise.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99729
Shit guys, this is why I love you
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99752
>>99729
The argumentum ad absurdum always kills the arugment when discussing minimum wage.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99756
>>99752
>The argumentum ad absurdum always kills the arugment when discussing minimum wage.
It really doesn't (in theory) since there's still valid arguments that can be made within the reductio ad absurdum for minimum wage. It's just you very, very rarely encounter them since most anons can not or will not dig into that can of worms either because they don't think their audience will follow, they're worried their audience will follow and post a counter-claim that requires some level of thought put into answering it, or because (most commonly) they don't know them.
t. Tried to claim argumentum ad absurdum on minimum wage to a Philosophy PhD (who happened to be libertarian in his own… Drug fueled/autistic sort of way) and got his ass handed to him and then the fag proceeded to agree with me anyways using his own argument.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99767
>>99729
To be fair I thought some of my posts were poorly written but at least it's good enough to make it into an infograph.
also
>deutsch anon
Were you the guy who had a liberty bookdump a while ago? I lost all my shit recently, if you could reup that would be nice pls.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99783
>>99767
Certainly, I can do so, my man.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99790
>>99767
Check this one out:
https://mega.nz/fm/DywnzDiC
From Discord, includes most of my stuff.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99803
>>99790
>discord
Still, thanks anon.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99903
>>99790
that link doesn't work anon
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99954
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99956
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.99982
>>99756
>Philosophy PhD
In my experience, these guys are just as bad as Marxists, because they just start arguing semantics as soon as they get cornered in an argument.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.