LRC moron watch
as i've explained before, probably the worst ailment of the LRC dummkopf set has always been overcompensation. latest example? the iPhone orgasmatron. no shock that the lunacy's led off by two of the snorflest dullards at LRC — max raskin and anthony gregory. however, it's gregory fucking the goat on this one.sadly, this sort of bullshit "reasoning" infests the overcompensating "liberty" moron set. in their haste to point out the wrongness of statists and similar toads, bullshitters like gregory end up arguing against rational, peaceful human action and, ultimately, liberty. yes, they're too stupid to notice, and that stupidity is aided by a monomaniacal clinging to property rights doctrine. bad news for LRC-style dumbasses: there is liberty beyond property rights — a subject of constant, nauseating disorientation on the part of supposed liberty advocates.Re: iPhones
Posted by Anthony Gregory at September 14, 2007 10:45 AMI think it's great that Apple is giving a rebate. But I can't see how so many people can complain. They paid a price for something they wanted, and got it. If they were satisfied customers then, why not now? How was the iPhone made retroactively worth less to these people to have two months ago than it was two months ago? I mean, sure, they have a right to complain to companies they buy from as a general rule, and I suppose it has worked in this case. But I just don't get it.
In fact, let's say I bought it right when the price dropped. Can I complain, now, too? "Hey! I bought this thinking I was getting it for $200 less than the first people got it. I want a rebate too! You've lessened the value of our deal by reducing the price for others!" Bah.
property rights philosophers cross the line, as in the iPhone rebate subject, when confusing areas where force may rightfully be used with areas of individual preference. it is these subjective ingredients with which liberty is primarily concerned, not property rights. the right of property, based in natural law, gives a nearly pristine framework governing when violent threats or action may be used. it does not dictate whether one should be pissed about the goddamned iPhone pricing, you unfuckingbelieveable cretins.
hard to imagine how much more disingenuous a man of average means could be than to pretend he wouldn't be pissed at apple if they lowered the price of an iPhone $200 a few minutes after he'd just bought one. however, this is the bullshit gregory's asking you to believe, after throwing in some lip service acknowledging that customers haven't violated property rights by complaining:
[...] I mean, sure, they have a right to complain to companies they buy from as a general rule, and I suppose it has worked in this case. But I just don't get it. [...]you don't get it, anthony? what's not to get, dumbass? some people ended up paying $200 more simply because they happened to buy the iPhone the day before the price drop — an effective $200/day rental fee. get real, poser boy. how fucking stupid/dishonest do you have to be to not acknowledge this? the free economy of the world is centered on each party in transactions seeking to get the most for the least, and this asshole preens his way into the position that one should be happy paying $200 more than the next guy. contrary to his sophistic pejorative, this subject has nothing to do with "value" in a vacuum. as with many economics debates, truth is found at the margin.
in a tightly controlled price market such as with apple (where it's almost pointless to shop different stores for a lower price), customers have a reasonable expectation that they'll not be charged $200 more for simply buying an iPhone 12 hours before someone else. this is freedom at work, not evil trollery from anti-market dogs. regardless of rationality, the american marketplace has generally acknowledged this feeling customers get when seeing that they've paid more for an item that later went on sale. conventional buffers generally range 7 to 30 days. that's how the market deals with the margin — allowing comfort for those who've effectively/unknowingly paid a premium for buying earlier than an unknown sale. in a market where unannounced sales happen regularly, this is a perfect mechanism for smoothing the sharp ends. it's peaceful, tailored to those who notice and complain. it encourages markdowns, eases customer hesitance, and lubricates wealthy exchanges. it's probably the reason we can have so many sales. what does asshole gregory see? people who don't "get" property rights. what a dick. ten-to-one the same dipshit sweats single dollar bills when tipping. but wait... it gets better. gregory later quotes somebody quoting the biblical parable of workers getting paid the same wage, regardless of hours worked.
um... anybody have a problem with this? gotta wonder about the overcompensating disease when in defense of property rights lunacy the dipshits at LRC are a micro-notch away from preaching full-on marxism ("Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last."). the earlier workers in the parable have good reason to be pissed; they effectively worked most of the day unnecessarily, on the whim of an irrational employer posing as an altruist ("Are you envious because I am generous?"). dickboy gregory doesn't deal with the correct result of this behavior by the employer, which will be nobody showing up for work on time thereafter. nah, he'd rather just pass on the malarkey without comment, able to blame it on the stupidity of joe cesarone, the guy who sent it to him. however, that parable is nothing but a dipshit employer throwing his financial weight around, however little (none) he violates property rights. the good part is that the market'll make sure it slaps him right back in his arrogant, unthinking ass.
this same denial of human feeling drives most of the anti intellectual "property" doctrine at LRC and LvMI. not a thing wrong with somebody being pissed about his ideas being used without financial or other credit, but all most of the smarmy assholes can do is operate in their foxholes of rigid scarcity bullshit, implying — and sometimes insisting — that you've no cause to complain since you've no clear right to pick up a gun on the matter. if you can't get these two separate actions straight, you shouldn't be writing about liberty. more to life than property rights, blinder boys. learn it. know it. live it.
BTW, if you ever want to hear just how full of shit a rabid, unthinking rothbardian can get, discuss "contract", agreements, and force. objectivism wasn't the only "liberty" cult based on arbitrary baloney.
Labels: derailleur
posted by saltypig @ 02:51
Hardman, you're overreacting. I had a nice little post but I've pared it down; you need to chill the fuck out man.
had a nice little post
shoulda kept it.
I was going to go into the minutiae of the thing, but it's plainly a waste of time. I'm just not going to worry about this sort of stuff anymore. I know what I must do, and I'm going to do it, and that's that. I guess I had to read something like this to see how far I'd moved beyond 'liberty school' as such. I've got a lot of work to do now...
you go, champ.
Hmmm.... You aren't really buying into that "Jesus was a Marxist" argument, are you? ;^)
<< Home