SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Boy, that power grind in TX they refused to connect to the national grid because they didn't like all those regulations and that is wholly owned by a private corporation is operating swimmingly this week!
Good thing those those nanny state experts didn't force them to adequately maintain that grid! And it's definitely great that they're unable to import power from, say, Florida right now!
Texas grid fails to weatherize, repeats mistake feds cited 10 years ago
Libertarian paradise!
“No one owes you [or] your family anything,” Tim Boyd, previously mayor of Colorado City, Texas wrote Tuesday in a Facebook post. “I’m sick and tired of people looking for a damn handout!”
Yeah, fuck you and your family! Bootstraps motherfucker, have you heard of them!?!?!?!
The Texas power grid failed mostly due to natural gas. Republicans are blaming wind turbines.
Pass that buck like a true Patriot!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 17 2021, @09:40PM (4 children)
Ok fair enough on my assumptions of your personal opinions, but part of my point was much broader.
There is no free market because without any government regulation the "free" markets consolidate into monopolies over time. Ever head of a war chest? Owners would save up money so they could slash their prices to undercut their competitors long enough to drive them out of business. Super awesome free market efficiency at work amirite?
So strangely enough the "free market" can only exist when the government enforces antitrust laws.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday February 18 2021, @12:05AM (2 children)
Ironic, isn't it? :) But point that out to the pants-shitting "libertarians" and they throw an absolute tantrum, because the idee fixe they've got ground into their brains is "fewer rules = more freedom, always, no exceptions."
This is why I don't think "libertarians" are arguing in good faith: taken to their real-world applications and conclusions, their ideas result in LESS freedom and MORE suffering. And they don't care, no matter how often it happens and they're shown. "Libertarian" is a fancy word for "selfish, willfully-ignorant sociopath who only cares about their own freedom to shit all over other people."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 18 2021, @07:57PM (1 child)
Right, because libertarians are all hyperventilating anarchists.
I think if you beat that straw man harder, candy will come out.
Besides a few randians and anarcho-capitalists, libertarians take strong stances in favour of banning things like fraud, and supporting contract law, tort law and so on.
You could have found this out for yourself if you'd bothered to do a modicum of research.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 19 2021, @12:52AM
Their presidential candidate this past election cycle is also an anti-vaxxer. [reason.com] Just so you know.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 18 2021, @07:47AM
I'm genuinely curious about one thing. How can you make statements like this, while still being able to see what you can see with your own eyes? What I mean is that in the past, with relatively minimal regulations, there was a healthy and functioning market. Some companies, and individuals like the Carnegies, managed to create immense monopolistic empires but they were the exception rather than the rule. And today? We're rapidly converging on there being nothing but one mega-corporation that owns everything in places like America.
I agree your analysis is correct, in so much as that in the free market companies can engage in dubious behavior to drive competitors out of business. So what are you missing? I think two things.
#1) What happens next in the regulation-free system? The large company can't keep their prices artificially low indefinitely. They need to bring them back up, at which point other companies can come right back. In general the price of bad behavior is expensive and the gains liminal. There will always be bad actors, but the invisible hand does create a strong incentive for simply offering a better product instead of trying to be the scummiest.
#2) In our system these hoops and hurdles provide an effective barrier to entry for big business, which ironically not only enables and protects but overtly incentivizes bad behavior. You have never tried to start or run a business. How do I know? Because you still think all these regulations are a good idea. There are a million and one hoops and hurdles you need to jump through to run a business. And the vast majority of them have little to nothing to do with actual safety. And these rules are constantly changing. Regulatory compliance has become so complex that it imposes a tremendous burden on any company with low to moderate revenue. But big multinational corporations? They have entire legal teams on standby for a fraction of a percent of their entire revenue. They can comply, fight, or change regulations as they deem fit - not only through legal means but also by simply buying congressmen who come surprisingly cheaply relative to the revenues involved. And I haven't even hit on regulatory capture - over time you gradually end up having these very corporations often end up running the regulatory schemes.
In our system have you ever noticed it's often the biggest [cnn.com], scummiest [reuters.com], corporations (and banks [bitcoin.com])calling for more regulation? It's because it's weaponized.
Regulations, in a perfect world, are obviously a good thing. But we live in a world where everything gets corrupted. So the question is, does a corrupted free market offer better outcomes? Or does a corrupted free market with corrupted regulation offer better outcomes? And in my opinion, I think clearly evidenced by reality, is that the former offers the better outcomes.