Why are there so few poor or working class libertarians?

Why are there so few black Nazis?

> these poor people who themselves say they aren't libertarian, have in fact adopted libertarian ideology thus libertarians are poor checkmate lmao

You're fucking retarded, kys. Stay mad, the only people who go libertarian are those who are rich/self sufficient enough to not want gibs. Pretty much every other political party is a bunch of poor low iq morons clamoring for their specific version of gibs. We reject the idea of gibs on principle.

Anarchism is so different from market libertarianism, they're practically opposites.

Why are there so few anti-zionist jews?

How would they be unfree? They can still do as they please, no one's forcing them to do anything. It's only in collectivist societies where people are truly unfree, when strict laws and high taxes are imposed on regular people under the guise of "the greater good".

OC

Attached: Namnlös.png (902x592, 4K)

This is the best argument for socialism I've come across on this board.

There are also a lot of right-libertarians who are aspies and have dreams of rising above the people who used to bully them. In fact, so many right-libertarians are like this that it is one of the most common stereotypes of right-libertarianism. You'll see a lot of people like this on sites like Wrong Planet unfortunately.

>Why are there so few anti-zionist jews?
There are actually quite a few anti-Zionist Jews because anti-Zionism isn't the same as killing Jews.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Jewish_anti-Zionism

Lots of working class libertarians from my experience. The poor people are usually those who make bad choices, the people who buy scratch off lotto tickets, drink every weekend, and pop out kids when they are in no position to do so. When you're popping kids out of your cunt with some degenerate, you won't be able to create wealth or gather assets.
So basically, no shit stupid people like gibs.

Well, as an basic and pandering example, you cannot be free if you're dead. So if you had cancer, and couldn't afford the treatment and died as a result, you're now the most unfree you'd ever be as a direct result of living as poor person in a Free™ society.

Manufactured consent.
(for the record, I'm a post-zionist Jew)

Nah, you're wrong, I don't have a dream of rising up over anyone. I have a dream of being successful and self sufficient without being taxed on everything for bullshit social programs, and a country where the free market and right to bear arms prevails. I've never really been bullied and even if I were, why would I care about that anymore and why would it affect my views as an adult? Seems like you're doing a whole lot of personal projection pal. Who hurt you

(((free market)))

good goy, keep those healthcare costs high and bring in plenty of cheap labour

Some say libertarianism is popular with young white male americans who come from weathier families, that want to atribute their inhereted wealth to their own doing, and think of themselves as successful.
Essentially trying to protect their (parent's) wealth from taxes and at the same time looking down upon less fortunate masses and telling them they don't need no government help in any shape or form and should fight for their chance to elevate themselves.

That's criticism I've heard, and have to ask you lovely people, burgers and others if this has any merit.
I'm a filthy leftie liberal, and euro, so I don't qualify.

Attached: 1535954705547.png (600x450, 488K)

You're a moron you dumb kike. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Just because you can't afford a service doesn't make you "unfree" goddamn how are you such a jew you can't understand this. Let me put it in simpler terms:

You not being able to force other people to treat you for no cost does not equal freedom.

Pay for your own shit, the free market would correct and make cancer treatment a reasonable price. Also, charities would exist to help those in need VOLUNTARILY not forced like welfare or medicare. The real reason that healthcare costs are so out of control is the government intrusion making price gouging profitable; if it was left as a free market prices would come way down cause hospitals would have to actually compete with each other instead of getting a bunch of "govt covered patients" so the hospital just jacks up prices cause they are squeezing every last bit of money they can out. There's a reason that a fucking ambulance ride costs 5k+, and it isn't the free market that did that.

Attached: 5090F790-8424-4824-B8C8-73F2B293DEBB.gif (300x186, 1007K)

You know nothing about economics moron, healthcare costs are inflated because of government involvement in healthcare. Do some basic research brainlet.

>They can still do as they please, no one's forcing them to do anything.
In practice, unregulated economies tend to result in low wages for most people, as the land (which is a limited resource) tends to be owned by a small class of people. If you want to know why most people aren't right-libertarians, read about how England was during the Industrial Revolution. Huge advances were being made in science and technology, but only a small minority of the population could afford these new developments. The threat of starvation created a situation in which people were living paycheck to paycheck, and didn't even make enough money to save up money. Communism was developed in response to this cruelty. The modern mixed economy was later developed as a sort of compromise between the two extremes.

>when strict laws and high taxes are imposed on regular people under the guise of "the greater good".
That's funny, because right-libertarians seem to get mad when high taxes and strict laws are imposed on ANYONE, regardless of economic or social status.

Nearly everyone agrees that high taxes and strict laws should not be imposed on regular people. What about the business titans who effectively control the economy and the means of production?

what is a loaded question, nice try shlomo.

Attached: 1509596117731.png (500x522, 67K)

Nice minimalism.

But it'll be lost in this thread.
And I guess my only positive criticism is I think that little noodle of a snake should be upright, just a bit more menacing. Just an opinion

Form what I've seen, the working class libertarians are generally people who don't know the difference between an income tax and an estate tax. To them, all tax is the same.

I am poor and i am a classic libertatian, what does one have to do with the other?

It's both funny and sad seeing how happy Amerimutts are to lick the boots of their corporate masters.
Literally no other developed country on earth has the sort of braindead healthcare system the USA has. Pretty much all of them (and many, many countries that are quite a bit poorer than the USA) have some form or another of socialized healthcare, and they all get better results for lower costs.

But whatever.
You asked a question, I gave you an answer. You chose to deny that answer because your brain is rotted from consuming corn syrup your entire life.

>healthcare costs are inflated because of government involvement in healthcare. Do some basic research brainlet.

You my good sir should watch this short vid, Adam ruins everything, hospital bill edition.
It's short and give you everything for understanding why the american health system is the most expensive, and shitty.
youtu.be/CeDOQpfaUc8

If you have sources of your own that contradict, (realiable that is), please share.

>Seems like you're doing a whole lot of personal projection pal.
If you spend enough time on the internet, you will see the sort of people that I'm talking about. They're actually quite common.

Maybe you're some sort of tough guy, but not all libertarians are like that. A good portion of them are aspie sci-fi geeks with delusions of grandeur.

Basically because libertarians are people who are fed up of people stealing their productivity for themselves and to give to others to piss away. Those people who don't really have any value are better served through a strategy of stealing from others via the proxy of the state.

>That's criticism I've heard, and have to ask you lovely people, burgers and others if this has any merit.
For some libertarians, yes it is.

Gun firing in a vacuum lol

>I don't have a dream of rising up over anyone. I have a dream of being successful and self sufficient

Attached: 1410291876239.jpg (145x130, 4K)

Because they haven't been subverted by college promoted (((libertarianism))) or (((marxism)))

Look up Molymeme (or Molyneux, his actual name), a self-made business owner that inherited nothing from his abusive mother. Basically the most important eceleb libtertarian

Ammunution contain its own oxidizer, guns can fire in space

Libertarians are kinda down here in Israel, but of the three-ish I've met:
One is the son of a CEO and (I think) a lawyer.
One is the son of a self-made doctor and a corporate executive.
One is kinda middle-class-ish, but clearly not wanting for anything, since he got to study in a college (colleges are more expensive than universities) without working for the first 3 years of his degree.

>muh healthcare
Doctors used to bloodlet and amputate without anesthesia. They start washing their hands and invent penicillin and suddenly everything they do or invent should be free for everyone.

There will always be someone who's too poor to afford something. While costs will go down in a free market (think health sharing and cash-only practices), there is no such thing as a "reasonable price" to these people.

That's mostly because of our patent system and FDA regulations creating monopolies.

Attached: snek.jpg (750x490, 42K)

Other countries have patent law and regulations too. Oftentimes much more regulations than the shitty American system.
And it's still cheaper.

>there is no such thing as a "reasonable price" to these people
well yes
Healthcare is a right.

Our FDA regulations are stupid. Think back to Epipen. The FDA secured their monopoly by not allowing pharmacists to sell a generic if their doctor specifically prescribed them "Epipen".

Healthcare is not a right

>You're a moron you dumb kike. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Just because you can't afford a service doesn't make you "unfree" goddamn how are you such a jew you can't understand this. Let me put it in simpler terms:
>You not being able to force other people to treat you for no cost does not equal freedom.
At this point, you are just repeating common mantras whilst disregarding historical facts. Do you know why US president Theodore Roosevelt was so popular? He broke up John D. Rockefeller's petroleum monopoly ... and now the "libertarians" want to undo all of that.

>Pay for your own shit, the free market would correct and make cancer treatment a reasonable price.
I'm still waiting.

>Also, charities would exist to help those in need VOLUNTARILY not forced like welfare or medicare.
There were a ton of voluntary charities in Industrial Era England. They were like band-aids on a gaping wound. It wasn't enough.

>The real reason that healthcare costs are so out of control is the government intrusion making price gouging profitable; if it was left as a free market prices would come way down cause hospitals would have to actually compete with each other instead of getting a bunch of "govt covered patients" so the hospital just jacks up prices cause they are squeezing every last bit of money they can out. There's a reason that a fucking ambulance ride costs 5k+, and it isn't the free market that did that.
Again, history is against this perspective.

If it is it, healthcare SHOULD be a right, then.

>The executive of the modern state is nothing but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie. ... The bourgeoisie control the economy, therefore they control the state. The state, in this theory, is an instrument of class rule.

Those corporations exist by getting representatives that they put into office with their funds to make laws that support the corporations themselves. The only reason they are so massive is because they have cheated the free market and regularly and openly use the government to support their bullshit.

Go ahead and look at pretty much any "big bad scary corporation" that you cuck collectivists cry about; you'll see that throughout history they have consistently used government forces to skirt the free market and give them an unfair advantage.

Where in that greentext was a refutation? Or are you just outing yourself as a communist shill?

>You know nothing about economics moron, healthcare costs are inflated because of government involvement in healthcare. Do some basic research brainlet.

"It's not my job to educate you!"
- Every SJW Ever

How about providing some historical facts and comparing the US healthcare system to countries that have other amounts of government intervention?

1) Rockefeller's monopoly only existed on the scale it did because of his control and use of the government to support his business ventures
2) the reason you're still waiting is because the free market isn't free at all, with socialist programs, heavy taxation, and regulations abounding. So you're waiting on a regulated market which is why you'll wait forever until a genuinely free market comes around

Well yes, it's what leftists always say, isn't it? The state in a capitalist society is nothing more than a tool of Capital.

>Those corporations exist by ....
You're more right than you realize. Corporations essentially exist by state power. Corporate law defines and gives rights (in America: actual personhood) to corporations.
These are not natural outcrops of a voluntary society. The limited liability corporation is an artificial state-derived entity.

I think it's kinda funny how American libertarians keep sounding like communists themselves.

why are so few people libertarians in general?

Attached: 1510241134285.png (592x993, 446K)

>where's muh healthcare
>muh right to life
Let me explain something to you, kike. Your "right to life" simply means that even though I would really like to, I can't go out and put a knife through your stupid fucking face. It does NOT mean that you are entitled to medical treatment at the expense of others to treat your fibromyalgia.

So jews get to post without meme flags these days?
What happened Jow Forums

So it isn't really a "right to life" then, is it? It's just a "right to not get stabbed". Which is a good right, I like having it. But I also think people have a real right to life.

... except that "libertarians" generally believe that any sort of market regulation is a "handout".

For example, libertarians usually make no distinction between minimum wage and welfare. Apparently forcing businesses to pay their workers a living wage is the same as welfare via taxation.

I actually agree that welfare can be a cancerous thing. After all, people on welfare often won't seek a job because welfare payments are often higher than job payments. I just think that businesses (particularly Amazon and Wal-Mart) should be forced to pay their employees more ... but the "fiscal conservatives" see no difference between this proposal and welfare.

You still didn't refute the point that the FDA allowed the monopoly to continue. Are you trying to say that the problems caused by government intervention should be solved by even more government intervention?

We are nothing like you, you commie shill. My point is that all of these healthcare and monopoly problems are not a result of the free market, they are a result of the government being abused to skirt and cheat the free market. So my solution is to severely limit the scope and power of the government as much as possible so that the free market can do its thing. It's very obvious that you want to put MORE power into the governments hands, to which I say fuck right off

Why would poor people support an ideology that basically says that rich people can do whatever the fuck they want?

It is a right to not have others infringe upon your "right to life."
Rights are not things that others must give to you, rights are things that cannot be taken away from you by others. The fact that you literally don't understand what a right is frightens me.

Working class lolbertarian here.

I think it more has to do with a lack of libertarians across all economic classes. The DNC and GOP get so much funding for their propaganda that we get dramatically overshadowed.

So ... you're saying that I would need to become a cult leader like Molyneux in order to rise up through the system.

In other words, the system encourages narcissism, sociopathy, and other traits common among cult leaders.

The "free market" is a spook. It cannot exist without the government.

even so-called libertarians are against personal freedom when they are whipped into a fearful frenzy....or at least all of the ones I know...they all want mandatory vaccination and spread the fear propaganda

There are more of us than that pic indicates, a lot of us just don't bother voting in the election cause we know it's fruitless either way. I'm essentially choosing what flavor of zionist I like between R and D. and the libertarian party is far too small to be consequentual. Several of my friends also don't bother voting (we are busy studying and working). It doesn't mean we don't exist.

Exactly. Just leave the commie kike alone, his brain can't comprehend the idea that he is responsible for taking care of himself without stealing shekels

I have some good infographs questioning libertarianism want me to dump?

Attached: 51aK47dksCL.jpg (500x500, 34K)

Why are there any libertarians at all? It's retarded as fuck.

I'd rather you post text. Text is easier to deal with, since individual parts can be copied and pasted.

Attached: 1542477720886.jpg (640x427, 32K)

Collectivists are incapable of this. They're basically dumb children, and the idea that they have to support and be responsible entirely for themselves frightens them so much they'll start claiming that it's their "right" for doctors to treat them without paying lmao. They want YOUR wealth to pay for THEIR shit!

C'mon Tyrone, I already gave you your gibs for this month, stop posting here.

Why do you assume I want to "refute" that point? For all I know about your shitty Amerimutt oligarchical system, you're probably right.

>Are you trying to say that the problems caused by government intervention should be solved by even more government intervention?
That's the smoothbrained way of looking at the world ("big-government/small-government"). The simple answer that a close look at the problem would reveal that it's caused not just by "government intervention", but by a combination of different socio-political mechanisms.

So to put it in simply: WHY did the government intervene to do what it did?
The right-libertarian answer would probably be "incompetence" at best, and "just 'cause" at worst.
The REDpill response would actually look more like this: Politicians want to be elected and stay in power, while corporations want to make profit. Politicians and corporations then make a tacit (or not-so-tacit) pact, where politicians pass laws that safeguard the corporations' profits, and corporations provide the material support needed to keep the politicians in power. It's a beast with two heads: You cannot slay just the "government" side of power, both because its impossible, and because the basic mechanism that gave rise to the corruption in the first place (the rent-seeking instinct) is still there.

a picture is worth a thousand words

Attached: Monopolies.png (879x2364, 253K)

People have a right to a good life.
Boo!

Exactly. And the perfect government is a government that throws people like you out of helicopters.

Mm all of those corporations are using government entities and essentially bribery to cheat the free market. So no libertarians don't support that cause under a free market that would never happen.

You can get my guns and my money when you come and take em, pussy

Didn't you hear, that libertarian paradise is coming your way soon.

Attached: Capture.png (1224x1225, 1.23M)

>Rights are not things that others must give to you, rights are things that cannot be taken away...
Why do people still not understand this?

Attached: 1549389294045.jpg (575x1024, 90K)

Because the poor and working class are not politically intelligent. They are fundamentally niggers no matter their race.

>Exactly. Just leave the commie kike alone, his brain can't comprehend the idea that he is responsible for taking care of himself without stealing shekels
His goals are more insidious. Libertarians are the only group that actually attack the FED and monetary system itself. This is part of a repeated attack on libertarianism on Jow Forums so if the right ever does rise up it'll always be ineffective. I haven't seen a libertarian/ancap thread that wasn't just constant dogpiling in months.

Attached: 1537083304596.jpg (2193x4351, 3.08M)

Yeah coca-cola is going to enslave us harder than North Korea ever could with their citizens.

without a government that has some semblance of accountability to the citizenship, those businesses would have only grown to take power faster, except with their own brute squads and without any democratic process.

Which would take us back to literal Feudalism.

Because economic class obviously?

Self-interest never lies; people who are liberal/libertarian/neo-liberal/An-claps are only so because they think they'll benefit economically or because they have actually deluded themselves into believing that the ideology actually helps most people and not just the tiny sliver of the population that is already rich.

You're a moron. Yes it's a two headed beast, but the thing is, government officials are held to a MORAL STANDARD and corporations ARE NOT. Businesses are not doing anything other than what you'd expect them to do, which is make profit. However politicians are taking bribes and writing laws to satisfy donors, that is absolutely not what they are supposed to be doing. Businesses are not to blame, political are cause only one of them is held to a moral standard by its constituents.

Speak for yourself. I am a welder/fabricator and I consider myself a hybrid between NatSoc and traditional Libertarian.

Attached: 2018-11-30 17.01.02.jpg (3264x1836, 2.01M)

Your ideology is basically just right-wing communism. You always engage in the theoretical and don't engage in actual politics.
>But that's not real capitalism
>But that's not real socialism
Same thing. Larping retards who have no interest in doing anything with the government, which is fundamental to existence of any society are a laughing stock and will be ignored or shamed.

>The right-libertarian answer would probably be "incompetence" at best, and "just 'cause" at worst.
It's that capitalism with democracy is unsustainable.

Here, let me quote on of Nathan Robinson's amazing essays on just this matter:
currentaffairs.org/2019/02/what-a-right-to-health-care-actually-means

>To try to be as sympathetic to the critique as possible, I think conservatives who get so mad about a “right to healthcare” have a particular conception of the word “right” in mind. They think that the correct place of rights is the enforced protection of negative liberties, e.g., the right not to have the government snoop around your underwear drawer or shut down your magazine. A right that is a “claim” on the government to perform a duty seems different, and troubling, to them. They fear “positive” liberties, that go beyond restraining governments from action and instead require governments to create particular conditions, because they think this results in authoritarianism. If your rights are simply a list of the things government can’t do to you, that’s fine. But if your rights are things you must be given, then the liberty of others will be trampled on in order to make sure you have those things.

>The right to an education does not mean I have the right to “demand that others educate me or I shoot them.” It means that members of the government consider it their job to find ways to make sure everyone gets a good education. The right might not ever be fulfilled to the extent that we want it to be. It’s always going to be somewhat aspirational. But it’s a statement of what we think the obligations a state has toward its citizens are, and of what it ought to be doing. If you think the word “rights” should be reserved for “protections against infringements of liberty,” I am fine with that, so long as we come up with some other term for “the government needs to build good schools that everyone can go to for free.”

singling out coca-cola as the source of enslavement is like singling out North Korea's garbage collection service the head of tyranny.

Meanwhile you ignore Nestle's actual enslavement and starvation of families in third world countries that don't have a government to regulate the mismanagement of natural resources.

>government officials are held to a MORAL STANDARD and corporations ARE NOT
I wonder why.

Rights can easily be taken away from you. Just look at your own country recently passing more gun control in the House of Representatives - even with the Trump Administration this was allowed to happen. It probably won't make it past Congress, but with the amount of votes the Bill had, I wouldn't be surprised if it resulted in even stricter gun control and less rights overall.

Now don't get me wrong - I fully support the 2NA and would gladly join the fight to protect it along with the rest of the US Constitution, but there are so few people in your country that are prepared to do anything to keep their rights that it makes me question if any of you deserve them in the first place.

so he's just redefining words and calling himself brilliant

worthy of being a rabbi