Sam Seder: An Open Challenge to Libertarians

It will be interesting to see if any of the Misesians rise to Seder's challenge. Of course, we can easily predict what their arguments in favor of libertarianism will consist of:

1.) Stressing the alleged moral superiority of 'self-ownership' and the 'non-aggression principle'—both of which are economically meaningless without being conjoined with Locke's indefensible theory of property acquisition.

2.) Conveniently omitting the innumerable examples of market failures, while attempting to explain how laissez-faire markets allocate resources more efficiently and justly than any conceivable alternative.

3.) Repeating the ridiculous Austrian business cycle theory ad nauseum.

4.) Claiming (without any credible evidence) that philanthropy and charity will provide needed social services where government programs formerly did.

5.) Accusing the Left of "authoritarianism"—while they (the libertarians) are nevertheless entirely devoted to the perpetuation of capitalist firms, which are inherently hierarchical and authoritarian.

Et cetera.

Sam Seder is actually among my favorite of the current progressive pundits. His willingness to thoroughly debate these imbeciles is admirable, though I happen to believe that only a socialist can refute the libertarian position consistently.

A notch above the previous simpletons, but an embarrassment nonetheless.

I'll save ya's the trouble and post the newest one. Very funny.



LMAO at the end. "They don't understand us!"

Reminds me of them emos!

Seder's argument is obviously limited by his mainstream welfare economics (although his facts may be accurate), and Schiff is correct insofar as describing how the short-term interests of capital will react to suppress such policies of extending coverage. With that out of the way, Peter Schiff is despicable. Reactionary libertarians are such repulsive creatures.

"If it is so important to them, they can find another job." "A few years from now, we will see more unwanted pregnancies because people are going to be too irresponsible with the pill. For the people who don't have it now, it's not because they can't afford it, it's because they are too irresponsible to buy it." "What we need is a rollback of the FDA: that is what drives up the cost of these products." Gems.

This is the sort of seemingly contradictory nonsense the self-ownership and non-aggression principles result in.

What an utter moron this one turned out to be. Another embarrassing representative of the propertarian cause.

It is amusing to watch these propertarian asses lose their temper during debate. Walter Block does not disappoint with his passive-aggressive, puerile whining.