You are again grossly misrepresenting what was posted("This article takes the most basic factor, cost in dollars, and ignores everything else. " no thats not what it did at all. It explicitly went over a number of things, including opportunity costs), not qualifying your prominent accusations of dishonesty you screamed at first sight of the article, and recoiling in horror at anything "libertarian".

Also I did not laugh at the assertion that not everything can be measured in dollars.
I merely touched on the fact that you saying it as a feel-good response does not refute what was posted.
Saying not all things can be measured in dollars does nothing to disprove the factual negative effects I cited.
You simultaneously yell its all lies and damn lies, while also admitting it was obviously uneconomic and rehashing some of their very same arguments as merits of alternative policy.

You say not everything can be measured in dollars, yet you make mocking a small point about how things look worse the focus of your response and grounds to stop reading.

You first responded just 4 minutes after I posted the article, admittedly didn't even read the full article, and yet were more than eager to pretend you understood it and knew it was dishonest and wrong without substantiating or even specifically targeting your claims.
The reality is you just don't like libertarians and are eager to lie and mock them at any opportunity to try to make them look bad.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Feb 12 2016 09:48pm

The only things in the article that weren't about money (opportunity cost is about money, genius) is the development of alternate technologies and eminent domain. Eminent domain is arguably also about money though. Either way these were two minor points in a long list that otherwise exclusively focused on money. There was no mention of other possible benefits of the actions, and no possible mention of increased economic activity that could offset the negatives listed.

You dismissed the idea that there were benefits outside of that which was measured in dollars. These need to be addressed to have an informed opinion on the topic. You obviously haven't touched these.

Believe it or not there are many people on this board smarter than you. Most of them actually. It's nothing to read through the average article you post in a few minutes and understand because there is never any depth to it. You continually post high school level material and expect everybody to be blown away. You're right, I don't generally like libertarians. Like Master_Zappy though, he seems like a cool dude. I like to mock people who are completely unable to understand anything outside of their own ideology. This includes creationists, who are on about the same intellectual level as libertarians and approach the topic with the same fervor and zeal.

Anyway like I said, I'm open to the idea that rural electrification shouldn't have happened through government means, but posting a libertarian circle-jerk isn't going to convince anybody. Especially one as piss poor as this.

Your assertion was: "This article takes the most basic factor, cost in dollars, and ignores everything else."
Opportunity cost and misallocations of resources and the numerous other concepts touched on in the article are not merely "the most basic factor, cost in dollars", genius.
In fact dollar values are mentioned nowhere in the article.
You are conflating money and dollars with costs and consequences.

Bad economic policies mean reduced human welfare. Its not just an abstract or superficial dollar sign.

You've shifted from calling it dishonest to calling it "basic". Noted.


False again.


I asserted that there were many negative consequences of the policies skinned was bragging about.
You posted a response and I ripped it to shreds for the vacuous dishonest nonsense that it was.
Now you complain that I haven't talked about uneconomic benefits..

I don't deny that some people benefit from forced transfers of wealth, even when those policies are a massive net negative for the society.



When you have no argument and your post was torn to shreds just ignore all that was said and assert that libertarians aren't as smart as you and most others. Trashy and completely unfounded.
I'm sure it makes you feel better tho.

The 'high school level material' you complain about is far more substantive than what most others post on this forum, miles beyond what you bring to the table, yet even that you cannot respond to honestly.
You just throw around insults and mockery in place of actual points. Childish.
You ramble about it being basic and juvenile and dishonest, yet you have completely failed to successfully refute what was said.

I don't expect you to be blown away. I would normally expect it to be read and acknowledged on its merits and criticized honestly if someone takes issue with something there, but I would only expect that on occasions where you are not the respondent, as you have repeatedly shown you have no interest in honest or substantive discussion with libertarians.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Feb 12 2016 11:02pm

Shitty shitty post bro.. Feels like you think because you're a rand chemist people are supposed to take you seriously, while you're simply taking cheap shots at people you disagree with.

This post was edited by Cover3 on Feb 13 2016 03:24am

Shows what you know. I was an arrogant asshole way before I went to college I've actually toned down quite a bit.

The voter suppression lobby in a graph.

You're going to be the biggest proponent of voter suppression if Trump wins....

Yup

Nope because we aren't the you. Our ethics are much stronger than yours. You've made whores of your souls when you rejected the American values of multiculturalism.

McCarthyism is still shit.

This post was edited by Skinned on Feb 13 2016 03:52pm

I support voter suppression