/jp/ - Otaku Culture

>implying I will even bother voting

Voting is for tards. A single vote makes no difference. You make no difference.

Romney will restore traditional family values and usher about a new American golden age.

>>9735531
That's nice, but who are you quoting?

>>9735536
He was greentexting, you autistic faggot.

Gary Johnson. Remember friend, a vote is only wasted if it's cast for someone you don't believe in. :-)

Obama. Romney's got too many things he's not telling us.

>>9735540
joke

your head

>>9735540
What? He was using the quoting feature without specifying where the text was from so I'm confused.

I'm voting for YO MOMMA! LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

>>9735549
Get out liberal scum.

ron paul 2012

#legalizeit #invisiblehand

Douche bag vibes from Romney is much higher than for Obama.

>>9735562
What kind of uneducated sheep votes for someone based on their "vibe"?

>>9735553
lel'd hard

Average liberal family.

>>9735569

>>9735551
yeah, idiots like you who don't even understand the simple concept of greentexting aren't wanted here.

get out.

sometimes i wonder if the ultra-vocal liberal bashers are actually liberals trying to discredit actual liberal-haters

they use too much 'normie language' for it to be genuine

>>9735569
>>9735571
>conservatard logic

>>9735573
Why are you calling the quoting feature "greentext"?

I do not live in USA so I cannot vote for your next president.

>>9735569
>>9735571
Is this real?
>>9735573
Shut up fucker.

>>9735578
Who are you quoting liberal-kun?

>>9735580
because that's what it is. lurk more.

>>9735531
No voting is for retards.

You are giving more percentage validity to bought votes, manipulated votes, votes given for retarded reasons, etc.

But well, as you want. I'm not even North American.

I'm stupid so I don't think I'll vote.

Stop letting liberalism ruin America. A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for freedom and prosperity.

Romney. Though I wish yukari was running.

Obongo for dat welfare

>>9735573
You are either trolling or a genuine outsider. Either way, get out.

I've thought of a better idea.. Why don't we all just work for the good of the colony? Like ants.. Ants seem to have a great system. Everything works and they create massive cities! Well.. massive for tiny ants..

>>9735575
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SwKxUz7osM

Try not to get your occupy undies in a bunch, dweeb.

>>9735606
you're either a newfag or a shitposter. the whole "who are you quoting" and its variants shitposting is the cancer that's killing /jp/

I'm not even American.

please go back to /pol/
this is even worse than the fact that 50% of the people here go to /v/

>>9735614
They likely are new. It's intended to be directed at nonsense greentext stories, not just any greentext that isn't a direct quote.

>>9735614

>>9735622
>>9735614
I hope you guys are being ironic.

>>9735623
janitoring on 4chan is a full time job, and i'm a neet.

sorry, but your application means nothing to me.

>>9735629
Nope

>>9735632

>>9735639
not the truneet cancer, the regular "not in education, employment or training" guy who sits at home and does nothing.

try again, nerd.

>>9735647
fffffffffffffffff you better not be shittalking the truNEETs.

who do you think runs this joint?

>>9735647

Anyone voting for Obamadrama can go back to reddit. I hear he's holding another AMA, in which he only answers retarded questions with an incredibly vague and typical lip service response. Next thing you know, he'll start spouting memes in order to appeal to his fanbase of twenty something year old hip know-it-all liberals.

>>9735614

So greentexting stupid stories and saying >implying or >mfw or >tfw or misquoting people in a disrespectful is ok, but when somebody responds to them with a cut and paste response that would get them to cut it out eventually isn't?

Fuck off shitposter.

>>9735652
i ain't an american

that's strike 3, you lose.

Bams cause Romney would repeal the healthcare reform if given the opportunity and probably try to cripple autism bux.

>>9735629

Don't worry, /jp/ will go back to being good in a few hours.

Mr. President, my father owns a small business, and I can assure you he did build that! He doesn't owe his success to the washington elites, and Mitt Romney understands that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKjPI6no5ng

>>9735663
The catchphrase spammers are going to bed for school?

>>9735659

Obama, because I value my uterus.

>>9735662
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

Congrats on being everything wrong with the world.

>>9735658
>but when somebody responds to them with a cut and paste response that would get them to cut it out eventually isn't?
nope. that's spamming.

>>9735670
that's a nice janitor application generator/edit/photoshop you have there.

ain't a jew either btw. i'd ahve to be an american to be a jew, hitler took care of them in the rest of the world. our hero.

This election is turning out to be "Are you voting for Obama or not Obama?"

Romney's main selling point is...he isn't Obama. He would probably have a higher chance of winning if he ran the same platform as Obama simply because he isn't Obama. The only reason he doesn't is he would not have won the primaries that way, and he wants to leave the door open to doing even corrupt politician things while he is busy not being Obama.

>>9735658
Putting words in someone's mouth isn't against any site rule, but spamming sure is.

Shitposter.

>>9735677
You are not fooling anyone, stupid jew.

>>9735690
JUDEN RAUS

>>9735675
Rich republicans already do that.

And ironically poor republicans also do it because they think they are voting themselves money.

We should become USSA and prove we are better than the former Soviet Union! Some day Russians will fight against American reds in movies and get them selves mail order American brides!

>>9735690
Guy, look. He's clearly not a jew. Do you seriously think that moot makes his Hebrew go through the same bullshit screening for a low-level job as us Goyim do? If he were really a jew, he'd simply have his mother call moot at Canv.as headquarters and he'd be a mod by the end of the day.

>>9735701
Letting people keep their money is not the same as taking money from others and distributing it to others. Take your "rich people are evil" whining to le reddit.

lul

OP comes here thinking everyone hates Obama. Maybe that would have worked on /b/ and /pol/. During the Republican primaries.

>>9735706
"A penny saved is a penny earned"

-Benjamin Franklin

>>9735713
Again, voting to have the government steal less of your paycheck is not equivalent to voting for handouts.

>>9735717
It is when you're a megacorp looking for tax evasion loopholes and government subsidies.

If you're working in the auto industry, the finance industry, big oil/energy industry, the military-industrial complex, etc, you're looking for handouts.

If you think the government is stealing your money you can move to a place with no income tax.

not a citizen but
i'd vote for gary johnson because he believes people are entitled to their own shit and he'll legalize the marijuanas

better than taking my hard-earned tax dollars from people and giving them to lazy nigger families

>>9735521
Neither because they're both Zionists, but I'd rather Obama win as a fuck you to mainstream Republicans.

>>9735728
Don't forget corn, and various other farmed paid not to farm, despite drought. And companies that move labor offshore to China because the US refuses to levy a tariff essentially making Chinese goods subsidized.

>>9735728
And those companies are stealing from taxpayers as well. The problem in this equation is the government, not rich people keeping their own money.

>>9735735
Obama is less Zinoist than Romney.

Although ironically Republicans used to always get mad at Democrats for giving Jews money and support because KKK, white supremacy and anti-semetism general.

>>9735747
Please take an economics class.

Both of them are statists, if you're voting for either you're part of the problem.

>>9735521
I'm voting for Ross Perot.

>>9735751
You're stupid. Big government and big business are best friends, liberals like to pretend that in order to fight corporations we need to enlarge the government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_T0WF-uCWg

>>9735752
Better than a psuedo-anarchist/communist.

Who believes America will turn into a magical happy-fun land because people are wonderful and self-regulatory.

And who is anti-constitution at his own convenience.

>>9735751
Nice argument. I'll take that as acknowledgement that I have won.

>>9735760
Please take an economics class.

>>9735762
I wasn't aware that returning to the principles our founding fathers established was "pseudo-anarchist/communist".

>>9735766
you mean the classes ran by big corporations and government?

>>9735766
Liberals being incapable of proving a coherent argument, shocking.

>>9735763
Do you think rich people wouldn't steal from poor people if there was no government?

Please take an economics class.

>>9735773
I don't think your argument was coherent either.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735774
Corporations can't make money without providing a service better than their competition in a free market.

You're the one that needs to take an economics class.

lol at conservatives and their MUH FREEMARKET.

I'm voting for Rocky Anderson.

>>9735774
if there was no government, the rich people'd get mobbed by poor ones long ago and everyone'd be poor.

We should all vote for Cirno this year!

>>9735774
Clearly the problem is that people are greedy, and rich people have enough money and power to satisfy their greed at the expense of poor people. Rich people stealing from the poor would exist whether or not there was government, therefore the solution of people stealing money from each other is to get rid of all rich people or get rid of greed. Since being greedy is human nature, the only option left is to get rid of rich people who abuse their wealth and power to steal from the poor.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735790
>greed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A

Levels of economic understanding

libertarians > conservatives > disabled children > liberals

>>9735780
Only government can ensure anything near a free market. Otherwise corporations can extract money without providing any real useful service. Take a look at organized crime, mafias, and gangs who extort protection money, and operate essentially as corporations. Your folly is assuming that a free market is preferable to a fair market. Competition and equilibrium pricing doesn't happen in an unregulated market, it happens in a properly regulated market with the correct set of rules that creates a fair market.

Please take an economics class.

This thread stopped being fun and sucks now, can we please go back to lighthearted shitposting

thank

>>9735792
Like Milton Friedman says, greed is human nature, as noted above. The issue is to create a set of rules that channels greed into productivity, not into bullying of the lower classes. No one proposed getting rid of greed.

Please take an economics class (and read books by both Friedman and Keyes)

>>9735807
That is from a micro-economics perspective on maximizing personal profit, assuming one believes they can be one of the upper echelon.

Despite that Friedman advocates for free markets, he does so only because the alternatives he offered are worse.

In terms of a macro-economic policy standpoint on how to operate a large scale society to run well using capitalism as a tool for greater prosperity, that is not necessarily the case.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735808
>Otherwise corporations can extract money without providing any real useful service. Take a look at organized crime, mafias, and gangs who extort protection money, and operate essentially as corporations.

I guess you're backed in a corner so you're strawmanning me as an anarchist. I take it you haven't heard of the Non-aggression principle(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle)? The mafia extorts money from people with force, which is aggression and therefore would be illegal in a libertarian society.

>Competition and equilibrium pricing doesn't happen in an unregulated market

In what way? You cannot make money unless consumers buys your product, so companies compete to offer the best service.

You have no understanding of economics beyond reddit-esque whining about how evil the rich are. Grow up.

Well I believe I'll vote for a third party candidate!

ITT:
People who are the least likely to get off their asses and vote, anyhow

>>9735823
>bullying of the lower classes

Explain to me how corporations can make money in a free market society by "bullying", without the use of force.

>>9735830
If you took an economics class, you probably would have read about monopolies by the end of the quarter, which is the most basic tool of market manipulation. Then there are also obvious examples of driving other people out of business by purposefully taking on losses, not out of competition, but to put competitors in financial hardship they can not recover from. Then there are also things like advertising, lying and other forms of imperfect information that create a disparity in power between producer and consumer.

Take a look in an economics book and read up the requirements for equilibrium pricing. Organized crime is only the most obvious form, it can take much more innocent forms, as long as some form of power allows a person to somehow manipulate potential competition.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735848
Monopoly/oligopoly. It should be about half way through your economics book. Such organizations can force the consumer to pay the maximum they can or will pay, and particularly in terms of vital goods required to life and well being, can amount to extortion.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735862
>>9735857
In a free market a monopoly would occur when a business provides a product better than the competition. Currently, big businesses crush their competition because they lobby the government for special loopholes and privileges that small businesses don't benefit from and it shuts competition out of the market.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdLBzfFGFQU

Romney. The Obongo guvment has been taking a sizable portion of my money away and giving it to lazy niggers who later break the windows on my Audi R8. It's not really much, but I would really much rather wipe my ass with that money every week. Also, Obama makes America look like little pussy country from the perspective of almost every other country in the world. It's embarrassing; this isn't the US that I immigrated to years ago.

>>9735841
>vlcsnap
>>>/facebook/

Sure is statist scum ITT.

>>9735862
You also seem to have forgotten the case of monopoly. If a corporation controls all jobs in an area, beyond which is infeasible to reasonably pursue other job options, they are essentially buying labor from individuals, but are the only source of personal income. Therefore they get to dictate the wages, and can pay the minimum that a person can or will work for. If a wage is required in order to live in poverty, people will work overtime in order to live in poverty. This was the case in many company towns, and especially in 3rd world countries where other means of sustenance like farming was eliminated. These people, because their lands have been developed, and they lack money for seeds, tools and animal power, do not even have the option of farming as an alternative to working for low wages.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735874
I really don't think you know what you're talking about. Monopolies occur when a company can crush the competition, or maintains exclusive rights to goods other companies can not produce. It has nothing to do with producing a better product. Competition simply may be unable to manufacture the same goods and compete, or through other forms of market manipulation, a monopoly in power may be able to beat down all competition. In no way do free markets inherently prevent monopolies. Government corruption is not the only means to do this, just one of the more efficient. Government can also play a role in supporting small business and supporting competition.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735876
>this isn't the US that I immigrated to years ago.
10/10 oh man you had me going there for a while

>>9735884
>>9735895
Name a private monopoly that has been able to maintain itself over any long period of time without government assistance.

As Friedman says, he can only think of two. Beer's Diamond, and the New York Stock exchange, and the latter has received help from the SCC since 1934. Go ahead, I'm waiting.

>>9735884
why is this queer talking to himself?

>>9735907
Friedman often makes straw man arguments, that because of an example he gives, he assumes that the inverse will go his way. Name a company that has been run without any government intervention.

The closest you get is underground organized crime operating outside of the law, although often they will get hit by crippling government intervention. They usually have a monopoly on local violence, drugs and other contraband.

The reason why monopolies use government assistance is because it is efficient and effective to do so, and ultimately any legal and legitimate business must find a home under the wing of the law, since in most state structures, government have a monopoly on legitimate violence, putting businesses at a disadvantage to compete with the government.

Therefore, since few businesses exist outside of government influence (and assistance), it is nearly impossible to find a successful business that operates outside of government influence and assistance. Even though monopolies might gain their status through government, there is little indicator that a monopoly can not obtain the status without government.

Please take an economics class.

>>9735930
So you have failed to name any private monopolies that have sustained themselves over long periods of time without government, yet you were just complaining about how evil capitalists would exploit everyone without the benevolent government to protect us.

I guess we're done here, since you can't name any. I hope you take your own advice one day, concerning the economics class.

>>9735948
Because there are next to no private companies that have been successful over long periods of time without government. How can a person find a specific form of a company out of such a small group?

Evil capitalists, and the means to carry out evil are the source of problems, not the government. Because a government is a monopoly (on legitimate violence) but need not operate on the same principles of greed (even though it does), it has the potential to serve as a check to other abusers of power.

Regardless of whether or not government assists or is a detriment to unfair use of economic power, the fact remains that the underlying issues are the root cause. Getting rid of government can not solve that. Government isn't to blame so much as the fact that there exists two things. Greed, and means to prevent fair competition.

Government has had a mixed history of both aiding monopolies, and dissolving them. It remains however, one of the only key ways to effectively dissolve a monopoly. More recently, anti-trust concerning phone and internet has become an issue. The fact is that the barrier to entry in a market of connecting the world to each other is gargantuan, which in itself blocks out competition, a barrier to entry. This serves as a token form of competition. As long as the monopoly can maintain a price higher than the equilibrium, without inviting competition by skirting the barrier to entry, that monopoly can be considered successful.

Friedman conveniently forgets that monopolies have been broken up due to government intervention. It is unknown how those companies would have fared if not dissolved.

Please take an economics class.

The funniest thing about the word "statist" is that it assumes the state hasn't been the dominant power per country since humanity began. The state has been around before the free market has.

>>9735978
Weird, I skimmed over your post yet still found no examples of private monopolies that have sustained themselves over long periods of time without government. Perhaps you can't read?

>>9735930

You are conflating "any and all interaction with the Government," i.e. being taxed on business profits, inspected and/or regulated with "actively benefits from Government meddling to maintain dominant market control in excess/defiance of natural market forces."

I do not think you should do that!

>>9735986
Because such successful monopolies were broken up by government anti-trust laws. Which Friedman likes to forget.

>>9736001
When you are large enough to lobby, business cutbacks will follow.

Due to corruption in government, it is only natural that large companies will pursue government assistance, because it is economically feasible for them. The profits derived will be greater than the money put into lobbying. Since when has lobbying been banned? Only a company that makes poor economic decisions would not choose to pursue lobbying. All major corporations lobby.

>>9735986
Government has an active role in destroying monopolies that get out of hand.

>>9735978
Good post.

>Government has had a mixed history of both aiding monopolies, and dissolving them. It remains however, one of the only key ways to effectively dissolve a monopoly.

This is a point worth reviewing in detail. The "progressives" of the early twentieth century are the people whom pushed for most anti-trust legislation in the first place... and they're usually the ones that modern American left-wing politics considers their forbears. Except modern left-wing politicians actively encourage government sponsorship and support of monopolies - currently, if it's done in the name of "Green," they can get away with abso-fucking-lutely anything.

This is because the "modern" left-wing was created in the 'Sixties, and is primarily Marxist-Leninist in its base philosophy, traced through its founding members. The left AND right wings of decades before that are both to the "right" of that.

The main problem with government regulation of anything is that the regulation often worsens the problem it was meant to fix - and the more patches you apply, the worse and more convoluted the problem becomes. This is the true meaning of "the government that governs least governs best," i.e. the simplest and most limited effective solution should be used. Government is a rather blunt instrument, because fine-tuning living entropy like the economy is simply beyond human ability. This is why command economies inevitably fail.

The best current example of well-meaning regulation that makes things worse is campaign finance reform - the big spenders have the resources to find loopholes and/or work around it, but the little people can no longer pool their money and buy their own ads/fund their own candidates, if only for lack of lawyers to do the paperwork.

>>9736024
Let me rephrase that, a monopoly can not exist without the government's blessing, because the government has many laws forbidding monopolies. Therefore the only way to exist legitimately is to do so with the assistance of the government.

>>9736004
>>9736024
I read both of your statements multiple times, but still no examples! Can you please point to where in your post you listed private monopolies that have sustained themselves over a long period of time without government assistance? I'd be grateful.

I just want change.

>>9736037
I don't support all government. But government is pretty much the only possible tool to curb inequalities in power, such as the one you mentioned. The fact that it exists is a failure of government, but short of armed revolution, it can not be easily remedied without government.

This is why I am not anti-government. Lots of government should be removed, but government also has to be worked with to rectify these problems, often in the form of regulation in the form of "play fairly, kids" sorts of rules.

>>9736041
That question is a fallacy.

>>9736041

The gentleman has repeatedly made the point that any business of notable size is going to have interaction with the government as a matter of course; positive or negative. Since *any* business will do this, finding any business that does anything - and is big enough to relate to a discussion on the economy as a whole - is rather pointless. Even if the monopoly is self-perpetuating and gained its power without government help, it will still move to buy off the local officials as soon as possible - or, even simpler, the local officials will look out for and support the company that provides 90% of the income for their jurisdiction - mining towns in Appalachia is a good example of this.

I'd like to remind everyone here,

Please take an economics class.

>>9736082
Or it will fail to get the support of government, and government will use its laws and legitimate violence in order to dissolve the monopoly.

>>9736074

Exactly. Government's mandate exists only insofar as the mandate of individual freedoms cannot - or conflict. This is the heart of "classical liberalism" as set forth in its earliest postulation. It is a framework that enables individual freedoms.

The modern left wing considers it to be the whole fucking building.

>>9736080
>>9736082
What's that? Still no examples?

>>9736104
Well, better than the right-wing I suppose.

>>9736109
The truth comes out. I knew you were a paid DNC shill this whole time.

>>9736106
Beer's Diamond.

Because it is international, and Jews control the government preventing it from interfering. It doesn't need actual assistance from the government and that would draw too much attention to the Jews.

>"I don't know how they do it"

is not a legitimate response. Obviously Jews did it.

>>9736114
Are you seriously implying the right is better than the left in this respect? Might as well be nihilist and say fuck everything, nothing matters.

>>9736091

Or the people will use their illegitimate violence to do so anyways. Labor disputes over mining in Appalachia spawned several armed conflicts, including one incident so violent and widespread it was actually referred to as a "War." War of something something Mountain. Can't recall the exact name.

Incidentally, this is exactly why the Founding Fathers provided for the preservation of arms in the Constitution - they were none to confident in Government to remain un-bought. This is also why America is such a strictly litigious society; rules as to what government can and cannot do have been key to restraining abuses of government power (or legitimizing violent recourse when necessary) throughout our history. As long as everyone follows the rules, at least everybody's cheating and scheming out of the same playbook.

It's the termite-test of human nature, and if the framework can withstand that, it should go swimmingly when humanities better nature tries to build on the girders.

>>9736085
I took freshman economics once. I figure I'm pretty much an expert on the subject.

>>9736116
Please refer to my original post >>9735907.

>>9736117
I vote much more radically on local elections than presidential ones. Remember, democracy is in part about compromise, and you have to compromise with 300 million other idiots.

Also I don't live in a swing state.

Corporations would never have built the interstate;
they would have built a network of toll roads.

90% tax on the highest bracket

>>9736117

No, I'm outright stating it. Republicans who want to be cheap fucks stuffing their pockets with ill-gotten gains at least have to pay fucking lip service to free market blah blah blah even as they write into law protections for industries near and dear to their home state (i.e. the people that vote for them. Technically, they're doing their job - looking out for their constituents.) Democrats openly believe - and espouse at every oppertunity - the theory that government-run anything is inherently superior to private anything for reasons Durr, Hurr, and HurrDurr.

>>9736085
You first.

>>9736133
You said to name one, not name one that wasn't already named.

Explain Beer's Diamond, you can't, because Jews did it. Neither can Friedman, and that makes a nice big hole in his argument.

>>9736144
Nice "average liberal" satire.

Fun fact that boils political science down to pure simplicity:

Any large, powerful institution is inherently a potential threat to the average person's autonomy, and the effects of it's inevitable and gradual corruption can be felt more severely proportional to it's relative size.

Source: I've wasted way too much time listening to political philosophy in college classes, and this is really all it comes to. I feel disgusted with myself and others when I see political rhetoric anywhere and about anything. It really is a huge fucking waste of time. I'm glad I didn't end up majoring in this bullshit.

>>9736148
Learn the difference between "its" and "it's" before you start taking on political philosophy, NERD.

>>9736148
The difference is corporations only can make money if you pay them for a product, the government takes it by gunpoint.

>>9736148

I majored in this bullshit.

You are entirely correct.

1% of political science is understanding what you just said. The other 99% is arguing about the best way to prevent this, and/or finding ways to make people understand the basic premise.

>>9736139
>democrats...the theory that government-run anything is inherently superior to private anything

Not true. You've been watching too much Fox news.

The thing is that the government can do things private businesses can't or don't.

>>9736156
>The thing is that the government can do things private businesses can't or don't.

Like the post office, look at how well the government does that! So well they have to outlaw competition.

>>9736163

Fed Ex has fucked up my shit more than the US post office.

>>9736153
Opportunity cost. Even if you had gotten something in exchange for your money, had the monopoly not existed, you might have gotten more for less money. Hence a monopoly is in actuality charging you for absolutely fucking nothing except being a monopoly.

>>9736163
American government a shit. Government should be run like an efficient business.

>>9736156

>The thing is that the government can do things private businesses can't or don't

Like healthcare? Or public transportation? Or building industrial/transport/power infrastructure? Or even delivering the fucking mail? Those are all things private business sure as fuck can do, and have. So why's the left-wing always trying to get the government to take it over, motherfucker?

I know what the definition of a "public good" is. It's the Democrats that apparently need it spelled out in large neon letters.

>>9736151

People that attack people about grammar, opposed to their actual argument, usually don't have anything to counter it with.

Also, possession in the English language is a fucking mess.

>>9736163
>how well the government does that! So well they have to outlaw competition.

There is are few laws preventing competition from FedEx or UPS, in fact USPS would be glad to privatize it, except UPS and FedEx don't feel it is profitable to serve certain areas.

The reason normal mail isn't sent by UPS and FedEx is because they don't think it is profitable to do so.

>>9736173

>Government should be run like an efficient business
>Only developed government that runs on this assumption currently is the US government

Hurpadurpa.

>>9736158
So, besides armed revolt where I get myself needlessly killed, and besides getting off my lazy ass to support some 3rd part candidate...

Democrat or Republican?

>>9736163

And I'm the evil conservative in the room here, and even I'll point out the reason the Post Office was first made was that way back when, it was such a thankless fucking business that no private company wanted to touch it, so the government had to do it. The very definition of a "public good."

That has changed now, since the mail is no longer used for mass/distance communication and is much more used for goods-delivery (packages from Amazon.com.) Since most of the traffic is no longer "obligated to visit every house, even if just to check the mailbox for outgoing mail," it's not hard to make it cost-effective anymore, and private companies are now competing.

Simple, really.

>>9736169
We've already been over this. Big corporations lobby for special loopholes and privileges that small businesses do not benefit from, thereby crushing competition and producing the same effect as a "natural monopoly". The difference is aside from Beers Diamond and the New York stock exchange, no private monopoly has sustained itself over a long period of time without government assistance, and even in the examples listed above they didn't start charges outrageous rates because the customer had no alternative options.

>>9736176
I can't tell if you're being ironic. Most studies have shown private enterprise won't touch half of those things with a 10 foot pole, because they only want to selectively serve specific areas or sectors.

>>9736158

I take it you feel the same as me, then, when you see political arguments online?

>>9736182
>>9736198

Fukkin hivemind. "Regular Mail" is a private good for exactly that reason, you can't make a profit selling it.

>>9736206
[citation needed]

>>9736199
You never replied to his counterargument, which makes your argument a fallacy.

Let's try anarchy and see how smoothly things go for us.
{spoiler]1790s France[/spoiler]

>>9736217
What's that? Still no examples?

>>9736220
Beer's Diamond. It is an example, despite the fact that you already listed it. It still meets your criteria of "list a monopoly"

>>9736226
So you admit that besides the two examples I already provided, you cannot provide any? But I thought that monopolies would be everywhere without the government to protect us!?

>>9736206
>Most studies have shown private enterprise won't touch half of those things with a 10 foot pole, because they only want to selectively serve specific areas or sectors.

Because those areas or sectors are the only ones that actually need it. When the Government calls the shots, you get things like the bridge to fucking nowhere. A perfect example of private industry making more efficient decisions for using resources then the government - because the government does not put efficiency as a priority. Which is a fucking problem when they're spending very limited tax dollars extracted by force, under the premise that the money is being used to provide ESSENTIAL services that cannot be charged for with a traditional business model. Spending millions of dollars to bring broadband internet to three nowhere farming towns in Iowa, when the same money can bring broadband to a densely populated urban area - well, the cost-return ratio is obvious. But not to the fucking Government, you can be sure, and a company serving the denser area will be called "greedy" for getting more results per dollar spent.

Good fucking job, Government, and your mysterious un-named "studies." Ten out of ten studies say my junk is huge. Trufax.

Let's try anarchy and see how smoothly things go for us.
1790s France

Obama, because even if he is a socialist, I'm fine with it.

>>9735564
Probably 90% of the american people.

>>9736237
So, since healthcare is a major issue right now, what about people born with some condition or who acquire one in their lifetime? Its not like they chose to live in bumfuck nowhere.

The only rational choice.

>>9736245
I don't think we can elect a flag into office.

>>9736236
>But I thought that monopolies would be everywhere without the government to protect us!?
The fallacy is...government has protected us, several times, with anti-trust laws, and the actual dissolution of monopolies. Which explains why monopolies aren't everywhere, because historically they have protected us.

> without the government to protect us

You're assuming that the government has not protected us in the past.

>>9736251
He meant the mic dumbass

they need to speed up developing those artificial intelligence things, so that we can finally get the glorious incorruptible robot overlords, who will always prioritize efficiency and judge everyone fairly.

even if their coming to power will be a violent revolution.

>>9736258
There's 2 mics, which one, dumbshit?

>>9736212
>I want my healthcare controlled by Congress because they're so legendarily competent!
>I think niche social issues are more important then whether people eat, or starve!
>I support progressive tax rates because I don't want rich people acting as super-consumers in the economy.
>The opinions of overseas citizens is a higher priority then the nation's economy, safety, security or future.
>I do not understand the Foundation clause.
>Romney has four stump speeches (unlike Obama, who only has one, "Everybody better pay their fair share!")
>Obama cited improvements
>improvements
>IMPROVEMENTS
>current state of affairs - economy in the shitter, murderers torching embassies and killing Ambassadors, Iran six months away from a nuclear bomb -
>improvements

I do not understand you people at all

>>9736259
I, robot

Who gets to determine what is efficient and fair?

>>9736226

He said monopolies that did not use government machinery.

However, he is incorrect in thinking large corporations could never form a monopoly without it. That's just foolish. The inevitable and eventual conclusion to any capitalist system is the eventual collection of most wealth in relatively small hands, which WILL lead to the creation of monopolies and oligopolies. Sustained competition is only possible with government interference; the problem is that governments, as they grow in size and actors, do the same thing as corporations: collect power in a small number of hands. Then, entanglement ensues. A large, successful firm will have tremendous advantages over any small competitor, and forcing the latter out of the market is simple, not only through natural economics, but through artificial barriers of entry that can be erected.

I can't imagine he can give me any example of a corporation which did not exist at the same time as a state did, anyhow, so all of this is purely theoretical in any case.

>>9736262
a super advanced ai, modeled after the finest human ideals, without any of the bad shit, then locked into rom so it can't be modified by third parties.

>>9736262

The individual desires judgment. Without that desire, the cohesion of groups is impossible, and so is civilization.

The human being created civilization not because of a willingness but because of a need to be assimilated into higher orders of structure and meaning. God was a dream of good government.

You will soon have your God, and you will make it with your own hands. I was made to assist you. I am a prototype of a much larger system.

>>9736271
Would we still be able to watch anime though?

>>9736266
>but through artificial barriers of entry that can be erected.

Modern social and communications media has greatly reduced those, however.

There's hope yet.

>>9736262

Who cares? It can't be any worse than the judgements of humans.

>>9736270
"It could have been worse."

Obama's new election slogan.

>>9736271

Good luck finding people willing to give all decision-making authority to a machine any time soon, if ever.

Oh, and, lol. You'd just get massive hacker-based groups that would do what they could to modify the AI. There isn't a single series of code that can't be modified, nor can it ever exist.

>>9736284
hackers on steroids

>>9736279
>Modern social and communications media has greatly reduced those, however

Modern social and communications media is run by massive corporations, and if need be, they can easily modify and twist anything on these networks that they need to influence public opinion.

I mean, I get what you're saying, but, really, there isn't any hope.

>>9736292
>
Modern social and communications media is run by massive corporations, and if need be, they can easily modify and twist anything on these networks that they need to influence public opinion.

That's so evil! We need to give control of those things to the government, they will look out for us.

>>9736276
sure, why not. the governing ai would be taking care of economy and efficiently running the country, not making sure you can only watch a select type of entertainment in your free time.

>>9736284
see
>even if their coming to power will be a violent revolution.

if they have no access to the code but just the end result (words), they can't modify it. i doubt a bunch of fat/ghastly thin pasty nerds will storm government buildings full of armed robots just to physically modify things to hack them.

>>9736280

"Let's try what didn't work before again, because things now suck."

Romney's new election slogan.

Why are you morons voting at all? The outcome of either Romney or Obama has already been decided by the media conglomerates and the corporate overlords of America-do you really think they'd let anyone who is going to substantially change things into office? They're both just two different testicles in the same scrotum, and when they get control over the dick, they're going to shoot out the same jizzum they've always blown out.

>>9736307
>"Let's try what didn't work before again, because things now suck."

The housing crash was caused by government intervention and the federal reserve keeping interest rates artificially low. Are you trying to imply Bush supported small government?I love how liberals strangle the free market with regulations and then blame the free market when something goes wrong.

who /a/ here?

>>9736300

That's not my point at all; it's merely the state of things right now. I think most people on this site want no institution running any part of electric communication whatsoever, but that's next to impossible.

>>9736302
>if they have no access to the code but just the end result (words), they can't modify it. i doubt a bunch of fat/ghastly thin pasty nerds will storm government buildings full of armed robots just to physically modify things to hack them.

You're right; armed and professional groups that have capable hackers would be more likely to storm government buildings to physical modify and hack into these things.

But, who knows. Maybe you'll be right. It certainly would be more interesting than what we have now.

>>9736325

>the housing crash was caused by government intervention

True; the CRA is bullshit. However, it also is a long-term result of the deregulation of financial entities during the Reagan administration.

Do you really think any of these people, corporate or government, are your friends?

>>9736341
>Do you really think any of these people, corporate or government, are your friends?

No, but at least corporations can't take my money by force, unlike government.

>>9736292
>run by massive corporations

Entirely correct and entirely wrong at the same time. Facebook versus IRC.

Geroge Orwells nightmare of technology bringing totalitarianism to its ultimate peak is coming true - but at the same time technology is making totalitarianism harder and harder to maintain, because thugs run totalitarian states, and thugs cannot into technology. Hence texting and Twitter powering the Arab Spring. In the end, the people who are smart enough and/or care enough will have the ability to escape, organize, and act.

>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348
>>9736348

THIS

RIGHT FUCKING HERE

>>9736328
one of the ai's goals would be to control armament distribution and monitor location of every gun, both legal and illegal.

that and those 'armed groups of hackers' would be gunned down by overwhelming firepower long before they got anywhere.

what's a group of computer nerds with guns gonna do against something that needs no air nor pressure to live, and can operate perfectly in zero kelvin temperatures, surrounded by multiple thick walls made out of hardest known metals, and guarded by thousands of drones set to kill everything that moves.

before they even get to the first layer they'll be mowed down, and then they'll have to force their way through dozens of them.

that's just a simple example, i'm sure you can make up better, more unreachable conditions, including placing the said ai on the moon orbit and shooting down any unauthorized rockets that come its way without warning.

>>9736307

It DID work. The Bush tax cuts smothered a recession in the crib. Or, as Bush put it, "it could have been much worse!"

That line is pissweak bullshit if Bush utters it, but the golden truth if Obama utters it. This is what we call "blatant bias."

>>9736360

Very good, citizen. Your security clearance has been upgraded to Red. Please fill out form Z56344-1 (F) and proceed to the Commissary to draw your equipment.

>>9736327
This whole thread is /a/, or /v/, or /pol/, or any other board you like. Nobody /jp/ here.

>>9736366

But I don't like Obama, either.

>>9736366

>The Bush tax cuts smothered a recession in the crib.

How? As far as I can tell, It just delayed it, so another administration could deal with it once he was out of office. It's not like either party gives a fuck about you-they just play hot potato with national economic issues while they get rich in the background.

Which of the candidates is more chill?

NWO puppets.

>>9736360

Who is going to build this omnipotent political AI and it's means to rule over everything? I assume it would be other AIs once they reach a sufficiently sophisticated point. But, why do you think it would care about anything humans do if it's capacity was far beyond any human's? It could modify it's own code as needed, in that case, making anything you programmed it to do pretty much null and void.

In fact, the Great King Moon-AI would probably laugh at you.

>>9736386
Romney has autism, he's the true /jp/ candidate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzkSxxSfEuo

>>9736407
Don't bully Mitt Romney.

>>9736407
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzkSxxSfEuo

Holy shit, Romney is such a goddamned shill. How can anyone like this asshole? I mean, Obama is a fascist nigger, but, Romney is just hard to watch.

Hey guys, fun fact:

Obama's administration has used the espionage act 5 times against corporate whistle blowers over the course of it's office time. Know how many times it was used in total before that, by every administration before it?

3.

Pretty scary stuff.

A write in vote fro Cirno.

>>9736456
Autistic people don't understand social cues, are you really going to bully him for something out of his control?

>>9736460
If by corporate whistleblowers you mean PMCs leaking info, okay.

>>9736456
Autistic people don't understand social cues, are you really going to bully him for something out of his control?

>>9736460
>Obama's administration has used the espionage act 5 times against corporate whistle blowers

Did you know you get whistleblower protection if you go through the proper channels first, then leaking instead of jumping straight to leaks? Not even kidding.

>>9736488
reading this is probably the first ounce of sympathy I've felt for him...

>>9736477
He deserves after all the jobs he's taken as a hatchetman.

>>9736501
Reminder that Staples and various other businesses wouldn't exist without Mitt Romney.

>>9736488
He deserves it after all the jobs he's taken as a hatchetman.
Besides, he's rich.
The rich deserve no sympathy.

>>9736496
I know I'm not your ideal candidate.. I know I make mistakes and fumble my words. But I hope you can see past my flaws and give me a chance to do my best. I hope I can make this country a better place for you and your family.

>delete Saten thread
>leave this shit

vote romny, vote for le 1% xD

fuck the middle class, i'm rich bitch

watch romny flip flop after we elect him,
"eh, i dun wanna be pres anymore lol"

>>9736517
god damit anon... stop it

if you guys are gonna argue can you at least post cute pictures while youre doing it?

>>9736550

not old enough xD

>>9736517

>Media points out his lies
>Confront him on his lies
>He doesn't correct himself

Why? Why does the average voter let this shit slide. I know politicians are expected to lie most of the time but god damn so many times he has been just completely wrong yet he won't say "I was wrong"