Skeptic Project

Need some ammo to punch holes in this claim, plz.

Because wingnut teens are persistent assholes.

@ Matt.

Typo. Corrected. Meant to say wingnut.

@ JimJesus

No shit. But that by itself doesn't sound convincing. NEED MOAR PLZ.

The NAP?

mkay.

This thread isn't getting anywhere close to helping Omni, so I have to say to Jim:

Get a basic book on economics and look up externalities and public goods. Externalities inflict damage, i.e., costs, to parties who are not directly involved in the decision causing them. Basic examples are factories polluting an entire city or a chemical plant poisoning the water supply with its waste. In order for market principles to work here, you have to charge the company or individual with the cost of those negative externalities as experienced by the public. The standard Randian response is "fuck your city, rich people matter more than the poor anyway".

The second one, public goods, involves goods and services accessible for the entire public, such as basic infrastructure, education, and so on. In order to avoid "free riders", i.e., someone who is not contributing to the good or service (via donation) but still hoping for it to get funded, you have to make an agreement for everybody interested in the good or service to equally contribute in some way, the most popular is taxation. Randians seem unable to understand that it might not be the most moral decision to let sick kids of poor parents die, because they can't afford private health care, but who are we to say that they're full of shit? (hint: they are)

There's more to it, but that's a start. Should not be too hard to explain how abusing these effects usually leads to anything but moral behavior.

Capitalism is not a moral system, its a structure for exchange and the regulation of human material interactions. Capitalism, in its diluted forms, exists in various moral structures globally and it is entirely incorrect to assume it prescribes any moralist perspective. What it does do, however, is rely on a behavioral model in which people act in a self-interested (and as Philip Miorwksi argues, selfish) way such that predictive mathematical functions can be applied. This underlying assumption is a place to question.

It sounds like you're arguing with someone who just read their first Ayn Rand book Omni.

He has a long road of shunning ahead of him.

I wouldn't worry too much about it Omni. Its not like anyone really pays any serious attention to libertardians and anarchists.