Four-Step Healthcare Solution

[Tahoma 2,291]

Hmm.. Funny how writing "I am so proud of your investigative skills" is taken as anything but a concession to your point. No deflection here. A tad bit of comprehension is necessary.

My point completely flew over your head though; Let me be a bit more concrete: Judging the merit of a particular belief by attacking a completely unrelated belief makes you quite pathetic.

Any further reading of Hoppe's views serves to provide context...like his admiration of Adolph Hitler's economic policy.

I'd challenge you to show me one instance where Hoppe (or any Austrian economist, for that matter) shows anything but utter disgust for Hitler's Socialist economic policies.

I applaud your avoidance techniques, Matt. However, you still haven't explained how Hoppe's comment about malingerers and neurotics, etc. is unrelated to point #4 of your original posting.

PS...I just watched your hero's 30-minute-plus video comparing FDR's and Der Fuhrer's economic policies. Google it why don't you.

[mRx 16]

Oh, boy.

Look, I never intended on explaining Hoppe's beliefs--I merely conceded to the fact that he may hold those beliefs. But they're not my own, and I don't need to defend them. I'm avoiding nothing. Your Freshman strawman argument utterly failed, Tahoma.

PS...I just watched your hero's 30-minute-plus video comparing FDR's and Der Fuhrer's economic policies. Google it why don't you.

Ahh, a little backtracking, eh?

Here's what you initially wrote:

Any further reading of Hoppe's views serves to provide context...like his admiration of Adolph Hitler's economic policy.

Drawing parellels between two similiar forms of government economic planning is hardly a show of admiration.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The issue I have with the Austrian school of anarcho-capitalists is that their theories are just that - theories. Much like Marx' theory was just that. There are concepts that can be explored on paper and there they would appear to make a lot of sense. The problem comes about when any of these theories are tried to be implemented because the very premise on which these concepts are based simply does not exist in any real society.

[Tahoma 2,291]

Oh, boy.

Look, I never intended on explaining Hoppe's beliefs--I merely conceded to the fact that he may hold those beliefs. But they're not my own, and I don't need to defend them. I'm avoiding nothing. Your Freshman strawman argument utterly failed, Tahoma.

PS...I just watched your hero's 30-minute-plus video comparing FDR's and Der Fuhrer's economic policies. Google it why don't you.

Ahh, a little backtracking, eh?

Here's what you initially wrote:

Any further reading of Hoppe's views serves to provide context...like his admiration of Adolph Hitler's economic policy.

Drawing parellels between two similiar forms of government economic planning is hardly a show of admiration.

Matt...you once again have declined to explain how Hoppe's views about malingerers, etc. is unrelated to point #4 of your original posting. Why is this? Are you now saying that you don't agree with Hoppe's view in point #4 of your original post?

PS...since you now have obviously watched Hoppe's video, would you care to tell me where he had anything remotely resembling "utter disgust" for Hitler's economic policies?

[mRx 16]

The issue I have with the Austrian school of anarcho-capitalists is that their theories are just that - theories. Much like Marx' theory was just that. There are concepts that can be explored on paper and there they would appear to make a lot of sense. The problem comes about when any of these theories are tried to be implemented because the very premise on which these concepts are based simply does not exist in any real society.

That's the same summation that Pike comes to--That it's some unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

But it's really not. It's deduced from the same economic axiomatic principles that exist today. It's nothing that needs be implemented; And that's the glory of it. Unlike Marx' scattershot attempt at a implemented utilitarian theory, Anarcho-Capitalism rests on the truth that individuals pursue ends, and they make each decision individually, in the belief that they will benefit from an exchange.

Notice every unimpeded decision that you make, Mr. Big Dog. You may notice that in each decision, you are serving your own human satisfaction. Whether it material, monetary, emotional, or psychic.

It's truly remarkable when you think about it.

For example, I've always enjoyed giving to Goodwill. I feel like I'm supporting a great cause, by employing those less-fortunate than I. I used to think this behavior was altruistic. But it's not. Because, I profit emotionally from it. I am better off donating to the Goodwill, than not donating to the Goodwill.

[mRx 16]

Point #4 refers to the moral hazard.

Either way, your intention was to smear him based on his other, more easily attackable, views and I burned that strawman down. You weren't trying to be relevant to the debate--So quit trying to pretend you were. You specifically wrote: take a look at some other ideas of...Hoppe

since you now have obviously watched Hoppe's video, would you care to tell me where he had anything remotely resembling "utter disgust" for Hitler's economic policies?

No, I haven't watched Hoppe's video, nor will I. I merely challenged you to show me his admiration for Hitler's policies. Or did you forget that?

[Tahoma 2,291]

Point #4 refers to the moral hazard.

Either way, your intention was to smear him based on his other, more easily attackable, views and I burned that strawman down. You weren't trying to be relevant to the debate--So quit trying to pretend you were. You specifically wrote: take a look at some other ideas of...Hoppe

since you now have obviously watched Hoppe's video, would you care to tell me where he had anything remotely resembling "utter disgust" for Hitler's economic policies?

No, I haven't watched Hoppe's video, nor will I. I merely challenged you to show me his admiration for Hitler's policies. Or did you forget that?

Wow...you finally acknowledged that there was a point #4 in your original post! Talk about pulling teeth being easier!

The next step for you is to acknowledge that Hoppe's comment on malingerers, etc. is related to point #4, as you know it is.

After that, it's simple...just tell me whether you support his view or not.

PS...of course you won't watch Hoppe's video. We both know why.

[mRx 16]

Point #4 refers to the moral hazard.

Either way, your intention was to smear him based on his other, more easily attackable, views and I burned that strawman down. You weren't trying to be relevant to the debate--So quit trying to pretend you were. You specifically wrote: take a look at some other ideas of...Hoppe

since you now have obviously watched Hoppe's video, would you care to tell me where he had anything remotely resembling "utter disgust" for Hitler's economic policies?

No, I haven't watched Hoppe's video, nor will I. I merely challenged you to show me his admiration for Hitler's policies. Or did you forget that?

Wow...you finally acknowledged that there was a point #4 in your original post! Talk about pulling teeth being easier!

The next step for you is to acknowledge that Hoppe's comment on malingerers, etc. is related to point #4, as you know it is.

After that, it's simple...just tell me whether you support his view or not.

PS...of course you won't watch Hoppe's video. We both know why.

Again, I told you that Hoppe's other views are his own, not mine, and your point was not to tie in with the OP, but to slander it based on other topics.

Did you happen to read past the first sentence? I can repeat it...

[mRx 16]

Hi everyone...

I thought you might want to take a look at some other ideas from Matt's hero, anarcho-libertarian Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The issue I have with the Austrian school of anarcho-capitalists is that their theories are just that - theories. Much like Marx' theory was just that. There are concepts that can be explored on paper and there they would appear to make a lot of sense. The problem comes about when any of these theories are tried to be implemented because the very premise on which these concepts are based simply does not exist in any real society.

That's the same summation that Pike comes to--That it's some unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

But it's really not.

No? It isn't? What country has successfully implemented and functions on this anarcho-capitalist theory? If it's really practical and beneficial, then you should have no problem to name just one country that employs a truly anarcho-capitalist approach on it's economy in the 21st century. Just one.

[mRx 16]

The issue I have with the Austrian school of anarcho-capitalists is that their theories are just that - theories. Much like Marx' theory was just that. There are concepts that can be explored on paper and there they would appear to make a lot of sense. The problem comes about when any of these theories are tried to be implemented because the very premise on which these concepts are based simply does not exist in any real society.

That's the same summation that Pike comes to--That it's some unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

But it's really not.

No? It isn't? What country has successfully implemented and functions on this anarcho-capitalist theory? If it's really practical and beneficial, then you should have no problem to name just one country that employs a truly anarcho-capitalist approach on it's economy in the 21st century. Just one.

Free capitalism is the antithesis of government--so don't expect ruling powers to enthusiastically adopt a system in which they cannot directly control; Cannot determine the winners and losers.

As I said, freedom is not implemented; But it is merely the absense of coercion.

In the question of freedom vs. control, if our condition today is any indicator, we know which way we should be heading.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The issue I have with the Austrian school of anarcho-capitalists is that their theories are just that - theories. Much like Marx' theory was just that. There are concepts that can be explored on paper and there they would appear to make a lot of sense. The problem comes about when any of these theories are tried to be implemented because the very premise on which these concepts are based simply does not exist in any real society.

That's the same summation that Pike comes to--That it's some unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

But it's really not.

No? It isn't? What country has successfully implemented and functions on this anarcho-capitalist theory? If it's really practical and beneficial, then you should have no problem to name just one country that employs a truly anarcho-capitalist approach on it's economy in the 21st century. Just one.

Free capitalism is the antithesis of government--so don't expect ruling powers to enthusiastically adopt a system in which they cannot directly control; Cannot determine the winners and losers.

As I said, freedom is not implemented; But it is merely the absense of coercion.

In the question of freedom vs. control, if our condition today is any indicator, we know which way we should be heading.

So, none, then. Thanks for confirming that it really is nothing but an unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Mr. Big Dog

[Tahoma 2,291]

Point #4 refers to the moral hazard.

Either way, your intention was to smear him based on his other, more easily attackable, views and I burned that strawman down. You weren't trying to be relevant to the debate--So quit trying to pretend you were. You specifically wrote: take a look at some other ideas of...Hoppe

since you now have obviously watched Hoppe's video, would you care to tell me where he had anything remotely resembling "utter disgust" for Hitler's economic policies?

No, I haven't watched Hoppe's video, nor will I. I merely challenged you to show me his admiration for Hitler's policies. Or did you forget that?

Wow...you finally acknowledged that there was a point #4 in your original post! Talk about pulling teeth being easier!

The next step for you is to acknowledge that Hoppe's comment on malingerers, etc. is related to point #4, as you know it is.

After that, it's simple...just tell me whether you support his view or not.

PS...of course you won't watch Hoppe's video. We both know why.

Again, I told you that Hoppe's other views are his own, not mine, and your point was not to tie in with the OP, but to slander it based on other topics.

Did you happen to read past the first sentence? I can repeat it...

By your silence on the subject, it appears that you have begrudgingly accepted the fact that Hoppe's quote about malingerers, neurotics, the careless, alcoholics, drug addicts, and the Aids-infected is directly related to point #4 in your original post. Since the Hoppe quote is directly related to point #4, and since you are the one who posted point #4, are you now saying, by your continued silence, that you agree with his quote about malingerers, etc.?

Hoppe is saying the same thing in point #4 as he is in the quote. If you don't agree with Hoppe in regard to the quote and point #4, why don't you just say so? Your silence is deafening.

PS...I suggest that you look up the difference between "slander" and "libel."

[Tahoma 2,291]

The issue I have with the Austrian school of anarcho-capitalists is that their theories are just that - theories. Much like Marx' theory was just that. There are concepts that can be explored on paper and there they would appear to make a lot of sense. The problem comes about when any of these theories are tried to be implemented because the very premise on which these concepts are based simply does not exist in any real society.

That's the same summation that Pike comes to--That it's some unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

But it's really not.

No? It isn't? What country has successfully implemented and functions on this anarcho-capitalist theory? If it's really practical and beneficial, then you should have no problem to name just one country that employs a truly anarcho-capitalist approach on it's economy in the 21st century. Just one.

Free capitalism is the antithesis of government--so don't expect ruling powers to enthusiastically adopt a system in which they cannot directly control; Cannot determine the winners and losers.

As I said, freedom is not implemented; But it is merely the absense of coercion.

In the question of freedom vs. control, if our condition today is any indicator, we know which way we should be heading.

So, none, then. Thanks for confirming that it really is nothing but an unproven pie-in-the-sky theory.

But...but...isn't that simply another pesky detail?!

[mRx 16]

Point #4 refers to the moral hazard.

Either way, your intention was to smear him based on his other, more easily attackable, views and I burned that strawman down. You weren't trying to be relevant to the debate--So quit trying to pretend you were. You specifically wrote: take a look at some other ideas of...Hoppe

since you now have obviously watched Hoppe's video, would you care to tell me where he had anything remotely resembling "utter disgust" for Hitler's economic policies?

No, I haven't watched Hoppe's video, nor will I. I merely challenged you to show me his admiration for Hitler's policies. Or did you forget that?

Wow...you finally acknowledged that there was a point #4 in your original post! Talk about pulling teeth being easier!

The next step for you is to acknowledge that Hoppe's comment on malingerers, etc. is related to point #4, as you know it is.

After that, it's simple...just tell me whether you support his view or not.

PS...of course you won't watch Hoppe's video. We both know why.

Again, I told you that Hoppe's other views are his own, not mine, and your point was not to tie in with the OP, but to slander it based on other topics.

Did you happen to read past the first sentence? I can repeat it...

By your silence on the subject, it appears that you have begrudgingly accepted the fact that Hoppe's quote about malingerers, neurotics, the careless, alcoholics, drug addicts, and the Aids-infected is directly related to point #4 in your original post. Since the Hoppe quote is directly related to point #4, and since you are the one who posted point #4, are you now saying, by your continued silence, that you agree with his quote about malingerers, etc.?

Hoppe is saying the same thing in point #4 as he is in the quote. If you don't agree with Hoppe in regard to the quote and point #4, why don't you just say so? Your silence is deafening.

PS...I suggest that you look up the difference between "slander" and "libel."

Right, my deafening silence to your pathetic strawman attempts. You can try to spin it up any which way you want. But the facts remain:

-You tried refuting an intellegent and air-tight OP by attacking other material of the author. And it was weak. I called you on your nonsense, and now you want to be relevant, by harping on point #4. Classic. Too bad your vacuous attacks of "Natural Order, State, and Looting" and "Democracy: The God That Failed" don't fit into point#1, 2, 3, or 4. Or were you trying to be relevant with those attacks too?

-You failed to show me an example of any Austrian economist's admiration for Hitler's economic policies.

His moral hazard analysis in point #4 is spot on. If you can refute the fact that subsidizing unhealthiness creates disincentives and excessive risk-taking (i.e. moral hazard), then feel free to. Put up or shut up time.