How do the uninsured fare in America?

The idea of keeping morality separate from legislation is a libertarian dream, because they love being whipped by price gougers and the likes.

Strawman baby, the notion of dictators pouring herd-poison in the proletariat masses is a pretty outdated one. Bernie is pretty benign and actually believes in human rights.

How is that a strawman?

Marxists have done incredible amounts of damage when their economic policies were implemented. Bernie's would assuredly also be devastating.

Speaking of strawmen..:
More shitposting.

It's a strawman because you liken Bernie who is a reformist social democrat to revolutionary socialist and communist dictators (not sure what Lenin did wrong apart from leaving the seat for Stalin). I even posted my reasoning which you didn't even bother to get back at. Oh and Che Guevara was just an ideological idiot.

I don't have an issue with mocking Bernie, but it's gotta have the gist. "Feel the Bern" was ingenious

I admit i was shitposting for lolz, but how can one claim opposition to price gouging while fighting for principles that would allow such actions. Take job contracts as an example. While in theory it's great if the worker and the employer can negotiate a nice deal freely, in practice there are myriad of external factors that allow for employers to screw job applicants and coerce them into making shit contracts. Take a look at sweat shops.

This post was edited by Neptunus on Sep 25 2015 12:05pm

But sweatshops only exist because the markets aren't free enough! If they were completely free, we would have no sweatshops.

Thats not what a strawman is. I never claimed they were the exact same. They do have various dangerous and impoverishing similarities.
Its quite possible to identify and portray a set of dangerous Marxists together even when differences exist without it being inherently fallacious.

I generally support the legality of price gouging. Its a beneficial market function that can save lives. Or would you prefer rampant shortages of badly needed goods in times of emergency and no greater $ incentive to increase the supply?
That doesnt mean I "love being whipped by price gougers" and it doesn't make Duffmans implication that libertarians oppose helping people any less ridiculous.
The current case of a guy jacking up medicine prices to extremely high amounts is not a result of libertarians or the free market. Its a guy taking advantage of a government granted monopoly in a heavily regulated and prohibitively expensive market.

Banning sweatshops would be devastating to the poor in poor countries and aren't typically necessary or existent in first world countries and aren't the end result of economic freedom.
In most cases they are greatly benefiting the lives of the workers, even if you personally don't like the wages when compared to those of 1st world countries.
You should really consider researching these topics before spouting ignorant reactionary nonsense.

pft i said no such thing, i'm sure libertarians would be willing to help people for the right price

also i love how you manage to spin everything as the govts fault




This post was edited by duffman316 on Sep 25 2015 12:49pm

I already pre-empted your false attributions with an explanation.
Do you think the government banning his competition has nothing to do with a guy being able to withhold medicine without competitors undercutting him as they would in a free market?
Is that really a plausible theory in your world?

"This system is quite literally, the opposite of a free market. A government agency is granting exclusivity to politically favored companies, and through this monopoly enacted by force of law, banning the type of market that would yield lower-priced alternatives."

http://rare.us/story/government-protectionism-not-the-free-market-caused-an-insane-increase-in-the-price-of-this-hiv-drug/

yea, yea i get it

the guy's absolved of any responsibility for a situation that was created by his greed, it's entirely the govts fault