If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   Last free market limited government tax haven destroyed as part of Kenyan scheme to impose government control over entire country   (cbsnews.com) divider line 46
    More: Cool, Shabab, Kenyan, al-Qaeda, Kismayo, Somalia, Mogadishu, Gulf of Aden  
•       •       •

2404 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Sep 2012 at 2:29 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 11:00:46 AM  
This is bad news for at least one African Muslim.
 
2012-09-28 11:48:49 AM  
Well, THAT wasn't what I expected
 
2012-09-28 02:18:01 PM  
Well done, subs.
 
2012-09-28 02:31:38 PM  
Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.
 
2012-09-28 02:31:59 PM  
Curse you Fartguna!
 
2012-09-28 02:33:51 PM  
Bravo Subby!
 
2012-09-28 02:36:05 PM  
Plus One.
Nicely Done.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 02:43:38 PM  

Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.


Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.
 
2012-09-28 02:44:48 PM  
This is good news... for Obama's extended family.
 
2012-09-28 02:49:43 PM  

Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.


I don't think that analogy really scans. "Well" doesn't mean "overly"
 
2012-09-28 03:00:46 PM  

vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.


likewise North Kprea had everything the progressives wanted. A govt that guarantees a job, living wages, equality for all regardless of race. A totally classless society. Plus the govt didn't engage in foreign wars of aggression and rightwing politics were banned.
 
2012-09-28 03:02:23 PM  

Skleenar: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

I don't think that analogy really scans. "Well" doesn't mean "overly"


It does when you're talking about pooping.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 03:10:32 PM  

Mrbogey: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.

likewise North Kprea had everything the progressives wanted. A govt that guarantees a job, living wages, equality for all regardless of race. A totally classless society. Plus the govt didn't engage in foreign wars of aggression and rightwing politics were banned.


No, they don't have any of those things actually. You don't know much about the DPRK do you?

Comparing Somalia to what the right wants isn't an exaggeration. They don't have a different idea on how much government should regulate business, they want "self regulation". They don't want more reasonable gun control; they want none. They don't want limited government, they hate government except for the millitary and many of them don't think that the DoD is part of the government anyway.
.
 
2012-09-28 03:13:36 PM  

Mrbogey: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.

likewise North Kprea had everything the progressives wanted. A govt that guarantees a job, living wages, equality for all regardless of race. A totally classless society. Plus the govt didn't engage in foreign wars of aggression and rightwing politics were banned.


Wow, you managed to be wrong about what progressives actually want AND what things are actually like in the DPRK. Well done!
 
2012-09-28 03:21:08 PM  

Teufelaffe: Mrbogey: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.

likewise North Kprea had everything the progressives wanted. A govt that guarantees a job, living wages, equality for all regardless of race. A totally classless society. Plus the govt didn't engage in foreign wars of aggression and rightwing politics were banned.

Wow, you managed to be wrong about what progressives actually want AND what things are actually like in the DPRK. Well done!


I understand the truth hurts. But if you want to tell rightwingers what they believe youge got tl accept rightwingers spinning your beliefs too.

And don't confuse NK sucking for not living up to yourideals. No country on earth encapsulates the concept of economic equality than NK. Next you'll claim the USSR wasn't economically progressive.
 
2012-09-28 03:33:24 PM  
According to the article the market wasn't free, as al Shabab was levying taxes...
 
2012-09-28 03:35:58 PM  
Good article but How did this get green lit under politics?
 
2012-09-28 03:38:50 PM  

Nurglitch: According to the article the market wasn't free, as al Shabab was levying taxes...


That's debatable on two counts:

1. Taxes aren't necessarily incompatible with "free" markets, especially if the taxes are applied in an equitable manner across all manner of economic activity and are not used as a method or coercive control over said activity.
2. Al Shabab was not an official government, and could therefore be construed as a rational independent economic actor utilizing its unique capabilities in a manner to optimize its economic well being.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 03:46:57 PM  

Mrbogey: Teufelaffe: Mrbogey: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

And don't confuse NK sucking for not living up to yourideals. No country on earth encapsulates the concept of economic equality than NK. Next you'll claim the USSR wasn't economically progressive.


Does anyone claim that the USSR was economically progressive?
 
2012-09-28 03:48:04 PM  

Skleenar: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

I don't think that analogy really scans. "Well" doesn't mean "overly"


If you apply that to the Somalia example, you could easily say that Somalia is "too free", at least in terms of governmental control. It is not however free at all in the economic sense of the word, in that you have no enforceable property rights or contract rights, there are heavy transactional costs (bribes etc) extracted by local warlords and thugs, and there's no freedom of movement, against because of said warlords.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 03:48:38 PM  

speckio: Good article but How did this get green lit under politics?


Well, the joke is that it sounds like something a right winger would post about Obama, so it's kind of about politics.
 
2012-09-28 03:49:10 PM  
Free markets are terrible business plans. There's no profit in them.
 
2012-09-28 03:55:30 PM  
fantastic headline
 
2012-09-28 03:57:17 PM  

vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.


On these threads there's always some reliable moonbat Koolaid-drinkers who try to frame a desire for smaller, less intrusive government as a demand for anarchy,and here's the latest example.
 
2012-09-28 04:03:55 PM  

jjorsett: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.

On these threads there's always some reliable moonbat Koolaid-drinkers who try to frame a desire for smaller, less intrusive government as a demand for anarchy,and here's the latest example.


You're right. Most of the people who publicly claim to want a "smaller, less intrusive government" tend to want either a Corporatocracy (Libertarians) or a Theocracy (Republicans), not anarchy.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 04:05:21 PM  

Arkanaut: Skleenar: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

I don't think that analogy really scans. "Well" doesn't mean "overly"

If you apply that to the Somalia example, you could easily say that Somalia is "too free", at least in terms of governmental control. It is not however free at all in the economic sense of the word, in that you have no enforceable property rights or contract rights, there are heavy transactional costs (bribes etc) extracted by local warlords and thugs, and there's no freedom of movement, against because of said warlords.


You mean police and roads and courts? I was told that those are all socialist government things that individuals built all by themselves.

That Government is best which governs least, right?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 04:15:50 PM  

jjorsett: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.

On these threads there's always some reliable moonbat Koolaid-drinkers who try to frame a desire for smaller, less intrusive government as a demand for anarchy,and here's the latest example.


No, it's simply the truth. Have you ever listened to Grover Norquist? He wants to reduce public spending to 8% of GDP. There is no way to run a modern country and maintain infrastructure on 8% GDP.

People on the right may not comprehend that shrinking an already small government has consequences or that the rules and regulations that they think are "intrusive" actually serve a purpose, but that's the point. People take for granted all the things that make us different from Somalia.
 
2012-09-28 04:32:18 PM  

vpb: Comparing Somalia to what the right wants isn't an exaggeration. They don't have a different idea on how much government should regulate business, they want "self regulation". They don't want more reasonable gun control; they want none. They don't want limited government, they hate government except for the millitary and many of them don't think that the DoD is part of the government anyway.
.


Why don't you actually talk to a libertarian once in your life? You might find that one of the key underpinnings is a strong belief in the rule of law, protection of property rights and, yes, an active and robust government and court system to enforce those things.
 
2012-09-28 04:36:21 PM  

vpb: jjorsett: vpb: Mrbogey: Somalia is to the free market as North Korea is to a well regulated market.

Well, it is now I guess. But it used to be the libertarian heaven. No government, no taxes, no separation of church and state no gun control.

It was everything the right wanted for the USA. Not all the black Muslim people, but other than that it was GOP paradise.

On these threads there's always some reliable moonbat Koolaid-drinkers who try to frame a desire for smaller, less intrusive government as a demand for anarchy,and here's the latest example.

No, it's simply the truth. Have you ever listened to Grover Norquist? He wants to reduce public spending to 8% of GDP. There is no way to run a modern country and maintain infrastructure on 8% GDP.

People on the right may not comprehend that shrinking an already small government has consequences or that the rules and regulations that they think are "intrusive" actually serve a purpose, but that's the point. People take for granted all the things that make us different from Somalia.


They think that a laissez-faire economy wouldn't descend into either aristocracy or anarchy because we're not like "those" people.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 04:40:40 PM  

Super Chronic: vpb: Comparing Somalia to what the right wants isn't an exaggeration. They don't have a different idea on how much government should regulate business, they want "self regulation". They don't want more reasonable gun control; they want none. They don't want limited government, they hate government except for the millitary and many of them don't think that the DoD is part of the government anyway.
.

Why don't you actually talk to a libertarian once in your life? You might find that one of the key underpinnings is a strong belief in the rule of law, protection of property rights and, yes, an active and robust government and court system to enforce those things.


Why don't you? You might think that you represent the libertarians view but you identify as a libertarian, but if you actually speak to some you will find that they are very often basically anarchists.
 
2012-09-28 04:43:04 PM  

Arkanaut: If you apply that to the Somalia example, you could easily say that Somalia is "too free", at least in terms of governmental control. It is not however free at all in the economic sense of the word, in that you have no enforceable property rights or contract rights, there are heavy transactional costs (bribes etc) extracted by local warlords and thugs, and there's no freedom of movement, against because of said warlords.


Well, yes, but that's the cost of a government you can drown in a bathtub.

So, free markets require a strong government. I can see that. Makes sense.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 04:44:09 PM  

vpb: Super Chronic: vpb: Comparing Somalia to what the right wants isn't an exaggeration. They don't have a different idea on how much government should regulate business, they want "self regulation". They don't want more reasonable gun control; they want none. They don't want limited government, they hate government except for the millitary and many of them don't think that the DoD is part of the government anyway.
.

Why don't you actually talk to a libertarian once in your life? You might find that one of the key underpinnings is a strong belief in the rule of law, protection of property rights and, yes, an active and robust government and court system to enforce those things.

Why don't you? You might think that you represent the libertarians view BECAUSE you identify as a libertarian, but if you actually speak to some you will find that they are very often basically anarchists.


Make that BECAUSE you identify as a libertrarian.
 
2012-09-28 04:50:04 PM  

Skleenar: Arkanaut: If you apply that to the Somalia example, you could easily say that Somalia is "too free", at least in terms of governmental control. It is not however free at all in the economic sense of the word, in that you have no enforceable property rights or contract rights, there are heavy transactional costs (bribes etc) extracted by local warlords and thugs, and there's no freedom of movement, against because of said warlords.

Well, yes, but that's the cost of a government you can drown in a bathtub.

So, free markets require a strong government. I can see that. Makes sense.


Congratulations! You are smarter than a Republican.
 
2012-09-28 04:53:49 PM  

Super Chronic: You might find that one of the key underpinnings is a strong belief in the rule of law, protection of property rights and, yes, an active and robust government and court system to enforce those things.


I would rank protection of human rights higher than "property" rights, but, sure, OK. That sounds really reasonable at first blush.

However, what I find to be problematic in most self-professed libertarians is the blind spot towards public goods (and costs). The typical example is the "my right to throw a punch ends at your nose" test. If the repercussions of all human actions were confined to their perpetrator unless intended otherwise, this might be a useful test. But a simple consideration of something as prominent as carbon emissions and their effect on the climate proves that life isn't this simple. Many, if not most laws that are railed at as being oppressive of individual liberty are actually intended to try to address these sorts of societal issues. In many cases "libertarianism" is merely a convenient mask used to dress up an individual's (or group's) profit motive with something approaching a laudable philosophical underpinning.
 
2012-09-28 05:14:30 PM  

Super Chronic: vpb: Comparing Somalia to what the right wants isn't an exaggeration. They don't have a different idea on how much government should regulate business, they want "self regulation". They don't want more reasonable gun control; they want none. They don't want limited government, they hate government except for the millitary and many of them don't think that the DoD is part of the government anyway.
.

Why don't you actually talk to a libertarian once in your life? You might find that one of the key underpinnings is a strong belief in the rule of law, protection of property rights and, yes, an active and robust government and court system to enforce those things.


I've talked to a number of libertarians, as I am now related to a number of them. So, I've talked to the step-family, and their libertarian friends, and not a single one of them wants an "active and robust government." Down to a man/woman, they want "the got-dammed gubmint to just leave people the *$&)*#@ alone." They want de-regulation of EVERYTHING, the complete and total elimination of all forms of gun control, the complete and total elimination of any form of government aid to anyone for any reason, and the return to the gold standard.
 
2012-09-28 05:19:11 PM  

Skleenar: Super Chronic: You might find that one of the key underpinnings is a strong belief in the rule of law, protection of property rights and, yes, an active and robust government and court system to enforce those things.

I would rank protection of human rights higher than "property" rights, but, sure, OK. That sounds really reasonable at first blush.

However, what I find to be problematic in most self-professed libertarians is the blind spot towards public goods (and costs). The typical example is the "my right to throw a punch ends at your nose" test. If the repercussions of all human actions were confined to their perpetrator unless intended otherwise, this might be a useful test. But a simple consideration of something as prominent as carbon emissions and their effect on the climate proves that life isn't this simple. Many, if not most laws that are railed at as being oppressive of individual liberty are actually intended to try to address these sorts of societal issues. In many cases "libertarianism" is merely a convenient mask used to dress up an individual's (or group's) profit motive with something approaching a laudable philosophical underpinning.


I would say you have a perfectly valid point. Libertarians tend to suffer from elevating their assumptions into perceived immutable truths (perfect information, minimal transaction costs, rational self-interested actors) and winding up with solutions like "the Coase Theorem solves all public goods problems." I was addressing those who think that the "Somalia is a libertarian paradise" trope passes for serious analysis. They're what gives the Fark politics tab a bad name. Libertarians -- I am not one but I know many (several of my college friends found their way to the Cato Institute, and I still talk to them regularly) -- will tell you that the difference is not quantitative (the difference between small government and even smaller government) but qualitative (the difference between a government that exists and one that does not exist).
 
2012-09-28 05:30:19 PM  
Good. Practicing a Mogadishu accent for Talk Like A Pirate Day was a little too taxing.
 
2012-09-28 05:33:34 PM  

Super Chronic: I would say you have a perfectly valid point. Libertarians tend to suffer from elevating their assumptions into perceived immutable truths (perfect information, minimal transaction costs, rational self-interested actors) and winding up with solutions like "the Coase Theorem solves all public goods problems." I was addressing those who think that the "Somalia is a libertarian paradise" trope passes for serious analysis. They're what gives the Fark politics tab a bad name. Libertarians -- I am not one but I know many (several of my college friends found their way to the Cato Institute, and I still talk to them regularly) -- will tell you that the difference is not quantitative (the difference between small government and even smaller government) but qualitative (the difference between a government that exists and one that does not exist).


The fark "Somalia=Libertarian Paradise" is more intended to mock "Fark Libertarians" and not so much Libertarians.

There is a small difference between a Fark Libertarian and a Fark Independent. Both usually turn out to have voted reliably for Republicans.

Sure, some "real" libertarians tend to stumble into those threads and get all huffy, but I think that if there is confusion as to what Libertarianism stands for, it is in large part due to the many people who claim the mantle and are passionate defenders of what they imagine Libertarianism to be.
 
2012-09-28 05:47:42 PM  

Skleenar: it is in large part due to the many people who claim the mantle and are passionate defenders of what they imagine Libertarianism to be.


Indeed. Like the step-family cited by Teufelaffe, and I'm sure they're out there.

On a more somber note, apropos of TFA, I'm supposed to go to Nairobi in a month or so, but I wonder what the safety situation is going to be like if their conflict with their neighbor stays at this level. I might find a way to wuss out of it.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 07:20:13 PM  

Skleenar: Super

Sure, some "real" libertarians tend to stumble into those threads and get all huffy, but I think that if there is confusion as to what Libertarianism stands for, it is in large part due to the many people who claim the mantle and are passionate defenders of what they imagine Libertarianism to be.


If you look up Libertarianism on Wikipedia you will see that there are many types. If you pay attention to American politics you will see that Libertarian Anarchy is the type that is most common in the USA.
 
2012-09-28 07:36:52 PM  

vpb: . If you pay attention to American politics you will see that Libertarian Anarchy is the type that is most common in the USA.


Because that is the brand that is easiest to reconcile with Groverism.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-28 07:42:46 PM  

Skleenar: vpb: . If you pay attention to American politics you will see that Libertarian Anarchy is the type that is most common in the USA.

Because that is the brand that is easiest to reconcile with Groverism.


That may be but it is my experience.
 
2012-09-28 08:59:33 PM  
Impressive subby most impressive.
 
2012-09-29 02:45:03 AM  
The Somalian "government" is a foreign puppet.
 
2012-09-29 11:09:56 AM  
Super Chronic:

On a more somber note, apropos of TFA, I'm supposed to go to Nairobi in a month or so, but I wonder what the safety situation is going to be like if their conflict with their neighbor stays at this level. I might find a way to wuss out of it.

Might as well. That prince wasn't actually going to give you any money anyway.
 
2012-09-29 05:21:43 PM  

jjorsett: On these threadsIn America there's always some reliable moonbatmillions of Koolaid-drinkers who try to frame a desire for smaller, less intrusive governmentraising taxes on the rich back to Reagan/Clinton levels, or regulation of an industry with unsustainable runaway costs, or of the industry that caused the Great Recession, as a demand for anarchysocialism,and here'sjust look at current Republicans for the latest example.


Show me a good example, aside from Somalia, of a country less "burdened" by government than the US.

Meanwhile, here are some hellholes well above us on the "socialism" spectrum: Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Australia, and Sweden. Yes, there's also Cuba and North Korea, but also every other country worth a damn.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report