Libertarian Party Convention Debate - General

[video=youtube;Tb8cErokGFs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs[/video] This video sadly doesn't show one of the politicians advocating the sale of heroin to 5 year olds.

what the fuck

[QUOTE=Idzo;50460091] This video sadly doesn't show one of the politicians [B]advocating the sale of heroin to 5 year olds.[/B][/QUOTE] Yep, that's Libertarians.

"We don't need roads... in the future, we'll have a jetpack." Please OP, this cannot be real. Tell me this is not real. Please... EDIT: I also am just wondering, is that guy basing policy of movies like Back to the Future?

[QUOTE=Elv02;50460481]"We don't need roads... in the future, we'll have a jetpack." Please OP, this cannot be real. Tell me this is not real. Please... EDIT: I also am just wondering, is that guy basing policy of movies like Back to the Future?[/QUOTE] It is my statistic that once we start using jetpacks,the percentage of treadings is going to be lowered.

There was also a bit where the Civil Rights Act came up and was booed

was great and then it ended with asking people to vote for the green party so it dropped to a 0/10 on default

Is this a parody conference?

Oh my god it's a shit show, living in america must be so entertaining.

Should be noted the guy who stripped said he's dropping out immediately afterwards.

where was mcafee? [url]http://www.bealibertarian.com/[/url]

and they said before the debate, they expected the Libertarian party a serious contender in this years election, might actualy get into the presidential debate. NOPE!

Holy shit the guy stripping what the fuck.

The dude stripping reminds me of Anything4Views

[QUOTE=Ithon;50460781]where was mcafee? [url]http://www.bealibertarian.com/[/url][/QUOTE] Wouldn't he be arrested on sight if he entered American territory?

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50460622]was great and then it ended with asking people to vote for the green party so it dropped to a 0/10 on default[/QUOTE] It was pasted on a photo of Jill Stein being arrested so I assume they are letting you know that the green party ain't that hot also?

These guys really give libertarianism a bad name.

Hilarious but this isn't real is it?

Shit I didn't expect fellow Libertarians to be this... weird?

"you don't need government to build roads" yeah because fees for driving on private highways sound so amazing right? a corporation will only build roads if it generates profit. theres a reason why shit like that is publicly funded

So is this why the Libertarian party is never taken seriously in a general election?

[QUOTE=Killer900;50461135][del]So is[/del] this why the Libertarian party is never taken seriously[del] in a general election?[/del][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Freakie;50461024]Wouldn't he be arrested on sight if he entered American territory?[/QUOTE] Where are you getting this from? He's currently living in the US.

This is what it would look like if there was a politics panel at Minecon.

[QUOTE=Dr._Medic;50460969]The dude stripping reminds me of Anything4Views[/QUOTE] Except A4Vs is self aware and does that shit to be funny.

[QUOTE=AhoyMate;50461080]Shit I didn't expect fellow Libertarians to be this... weird?[/QUOTE] libertarians can be divided into two groups: 'bleeding heart' libertarians (not maniacs) - these guys favour libertarian policies which achieve the greatest degree of welfare, and as such make concessions in certain areas true libertarians (fucking insane) - these guys simply favour whatever policy gives the greatest degree of negative freedoms to people and limits the government the most.

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;50461087]"you don't need government to build roads" yeah because fees for driving on private highways sound so amazing right? a corporation will only build roads if it generates profit. theres a reason why shit like that is publicly funded[/QUOTE] Most of these questions have been already answered. Do a bit of research on Google and learn more about libertarianism.

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;50461087]"you don't need government to build roads" yeah because fees for driving on private highways sound so amazing right? a corporation will only build roads if it generates profit. theres a reason why shit like that is publicly funded[/QUOTE] "who will build the roads" is the great libertarian stumping question of our time, there's never an answer, but libertarians think they're above it and try to mock people that ask it How would private roads work? There's only so much free real estate that can be used to build roads, so there'd be no competition unless every road had multiple levels each owned by a different group. Who would manage land rights? What is the incentive to provide well maintained roads without competition? Why would people tolerate driving on roads that all have toll booths when we can just do it through taxes?

[QUOTE=Streecer;50461351]"who will build the roads" is the great libertarian stumping question of our time, there's never an answer, but libertarians think they're above it and try to mock people that ask it How would private roads work? There's only so much free real estate that can be used to build roads, so there'd be no competition unless every road had multiple levels each owned by a different group. Who would manage land rights? What is the incentive to provide well maintained roads without competition? Why would people tolerate driving on roads that all have toll booths when we can just do it through taxes?[/QUOTE] There are private roads in many countries - for example, most motorways in France are privately owned as far as I know. A bigger problem with libertarianism is providing 'pure public goods' to use the technical economics term. These goods are non-excludable (cannot prevent those not paying from enjoying their benefits), non-rival (one more person using the good does not reduce its utility) and non-rejectable. The best example is probably national defence. Roads are an example of a quasi-public good, because although they are excludable (toll booths) they are non-rival to a point (the vast majority of roads do not reach their carrying capacity). And this isn't even bringing in discussions of merit/demerit goods, the problems of organising markets in, for example, pollution (which would theoretically result in those affected by pollution being appropriately compensated - never going to happen due to problems of organising masses of people). And finally, without certain mechanisms in place (private property rights and their protection, the rule of law) markets simply do not function optimally. This is why I don't take pure libertarians seriously.

[QUOTE=Chaitin;50461350]Most of these questions have been already answered. Do a bit of research on Google and learn more about libertarianism.[/QUOTE] I already know what it is. There is a reason why regulations, labour laws, taxes and publicly funded infrastructure is a thing. Pure Libertarian the opposite Pure Socialism but they both suck in their purest form, mixed economics and management work best for the average joe.