it's your money

No it isn't. I want you to pull a dollar bill out of your wallet and tell me what's printed on the very top. It says, "Federal Reserve Note, United States of America." It doesn't have your name on it. It's not your money, you didn't create it, you're just using it. Using it to exchange for goods and services. The utility you derive from the goods and the services you consume are yours, and the assets you acquire with that money are yours, but even that "ownership" is somewhat tenuous, because your ownership rights are meaningless without a means of enforcement. Now, you could try and enforce your ownership rights yourself, by building your own fortress and getting a bunch of guns and maybe even your own personal army to defend it, but you'd need quite the fortress to rival the power of the state. The very same state that issues and controls that money you're talking about.

the gravy train they've built on your backs

Who's "they?"

Consistently dumb enough to not realize billionaires have our money and if they keep it we're all fucked.

If we were starting on day 1 with equal footing their policy would make some sort of sense

But we aren't, so it doesn't.

Leaving them as either ignorant fools being taken advantage of, or rich idiots who think people are going to fall for it. Admittedly a few do.

If I work 8 hours, I have traded a piece of my finite life for that value, that is my toil and trouble. When we're talking about money, it doesn't have to be always fiat money provided from the State, money is historically a market-chosen commodity (gold, silver, or even cryptocurrency) that exists independently of the State but it's just a matter of the people what kind of money they choose and how do they spend them.

I agree we aren't starting on day 1. The current wealth of billionaires is the result of State enforced monopolies on land, credit, and intellectual property.

Then you understand that:

Fiscally it's your money

Isn't a valid position right now, and the people arguing that are not on failing to solve the problem, they're actively making it worse?

Logically, every libertarian should be voting progressive to level the playing field, then pushing libertarianism to maintain an equal field after progressives have obtained all their main goals.

Like, that's honestly everyone's big problem with libertarianism. If they joined with progressives now, the vast amount of progressives would go on to become libertarians.

We could all win.

Libertarians most certainly aren't "liberators" they are the most "bootstraps" people out there.

I used to believe that. I joined with progressives after Bush 2. All we've gotten is further into the pit and more of our rights stripped away, with the progressives cheering as long as their side does it, just like the goddamned magas

with the progressives cheering as long as their side does it, just like the goddamned magas

Wut?!

I just can't square that statement with reality, unless your standard for "progressive" is so low that it includes Joe Biden...

Which frankly is something so ridiculous you only hear trump supporters saying it.

But I can't think of anything else you could have meant, can you clarify?

Make up your mind are we stupid and evil for voting for Biden or for NOT voting for Biden? Im getting mixed messages and I think you just want someone to be mad at.

are we stupid and evil for voting for Biden or for NOT voting for Biden?

When have I said either?

Are you sure I'm the person you meant to reply to?

You brought up Biden and Trump.

I think you're just trying to fuck with people.

You said:

joined with progressives after Bush 2. All we’ve gotten is further into the pit and more of our rights stripped away, with the progressives cheering as long as their side does it, just like the goddamned magas

Which doesn't make any sense.

1. Who are these elected progressives who have been stripping our rights?

2. Who are the progressive voters cheering for it?

I think you’re just trying to fuck with people

I promise I'm not, I'm genuinely trying to understand.

This happens a lot for me... To over 85% of people I talk to actually, but if you keep asking questions and stop making assumptions we can both learn something here.

It'll click eventually, it's just the 30 point gap and it's hard to tell at first how much I need to explicitly explain and how much can get by on implication.

But if you don't want to give it a shot, by all means just stop replying.

But I've always been absolutely fascinated by libertarian's logic and genuinely am really curious what you think "progressive" means in the context you're using.

If you're just fucking with me, not replying so I don't have a chance to figure it out is your best bet tho.

30 point gap? Is that some kind of "stupid libertarian" joke?

Thats the kind of shit I'm used to from "progressives".

I want to be understood and seen as a person but I'm really questioning whether its worth trying anymore.

Ive had this conversation enough times I know how it goes.

I'll point out how Obama and Biden both expanded executive power, setting precedent for Trump to exploit.

You'll either flatly deny it or try to make me prove it then bad faith nitpick until I go away.

I'll point out how pressuring Facebook and using OSHA to push the covid vaccine was a massive federal overreach and You'll accuse me of being anti-science.

You might point out that Trump is just as bad like its a gotcha but I fucking hate him too so it doesn't work.

I'll complain about progressives being against freedom of speech and you'll smirk and say "What speech?" Because obviously the only reason someone would be concerned about the government dictating what you can and cant say is that they want to yell slurs at their neighbor.

Around this point you'll call me either racist, sexist or homophobic. Or maybe class traitor. Thats always a fun one.

Or you'll figure out I'm not straight and im only white when progressives don't like what I have to say and you'll decide im a race traitor too.

So yea I dont have a lot of patience with having this discussion anymore.

I’ll point out how Obama and Biden

Thanks!

The problem is you think Biden and Obama were progressive.

I genuinely appreciate that, and couldn't have found that info from anywhere besides you, since it's your opinion.

My eyes just rolled out of my head.

They're "not real progressives" I guess. Kinda like how its "not real communism" when shit doesn't work out. Go home.

If I work 8 hours, I have traded a piece of my finite life for that value, that is my toil and trouble.

Yes, and that value is very real, and it is represented by the currency. But the currency wasn't created for you, nor was it created through your labor. The currency was created by the Federal Reserve and distributed to the economy through the banks to be used by us all. It's constantly changing hands as goods and services are exchanged by market participants. You can choose to accumulate, or hoard, that currency, but if you do, that leaves less for everyone else to use for purposes of exchange. The Federal government has the legal right to take that money from you via taxation. The Federal government also has the exclusive right to make more currency.

When we're talking about money, it doesn't have to be always fiat money provided from the State, money is historically a market-chosen commodity (gold, silver, or even cryptocurrency) that exists independently of the State but it's just a matter of the people what kind of money they choose and how do they spend them.

Yeah, currency has often been some kind of metal coinage, or currency that is directly converted into metal. But those currencies don't work great.

Let's say we decided to use gold as our currency. Because there's only so much gold that exists in the world, if some folks decided to accumulate (hoard) that gold, the more they accumulated the less there would be available for everyone else to exchange for goods and services. That would cause deflation. That is, there would be more goods and services out there than there is gold available to be exchanged for those goods and services, so the gold would become more valuable relative to the goods and services. That sounds great, right? It would take less gold to buy the same amount of goods and services. Yeah, that's great for people who already have a lot of gold, but it sucks for everyone else. In a deflationary environment, prices go down meaning business revenue goes down meaning wages go down.

I think we're just starting from fundamentally different axioms. I lean toward a KISS approach to economics, whereas you're prioritizing state-managed velocity. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Well said! Libertarians aren't Republican-light or Democrat-light. They are a 3rd lane voters can take distinct from the other 2 main options.

There can be no free society unless we limit and control the ambitions of the powerful. We keep learning this again and again as the centuries go by, but so many people just insist on learning it once more...

To be clear: no, libertarianism does not lead to freedom, it does not even lead to libertarianism.

What about we have more people like you, like me, like us that get away from big shitty corpo like Reddit and move to Fedi in mass? That's how a real free market works: if you don't like it, you leave/boycott.

The same principle applies to any aspect of society based on the market. The real 'ambition of the powerful' is usually fueled by State granted monopolies and regulatory capture where big corps use the law to kill small competitors.

Limiting their power shouldn't mean giving the State more control (which they eventually buy anyway), but rather decentralizing our choices. If we have the freedom to exit and build alternatives, their 'power' evaporates because it lacks our voluntary consent.

• Explains how the government makes sure true ownership doesn't exist in current american society;

• Asks who is being referred to as the ones taking away your rights;

You were so close to getting it my guy.