â„–2702529[Quote]
This is never happening doe?
â„–2702532[Quote]
>>2702478 (OP)solar is renewable, water is renewable, crops are renewable, animal breeding is renewable, roads are renewable, rocks are renewable… idk what you mean
â„–2702540[Quote]
thats low key based tho
â„–2702554[Quote]
>>2702478 (OP)Anti-rapism will never work. Imagine a scenario in which everybody starts raping. Anti-rapism debunked.
â„–2702558[Quote]
Evendoe asteroid mining, but you are a commiecuck and you dont see any other vision than just leeching off the middle class and the rich to feed lazy ass niggas.
â„–2702567[Quote]
Where's your alunya picrel soldier?
â„–2702568[Quote]
>itt: indian man discovers the concept of monopolies
â„–2702571[Quote]
Asteroid mining won't happen (any time soon) btw. Maybe lunar mining.
â„–2702688[Quote]
>>2702529how?
>>2702532ok, not all resources are…
>>2702554this analogy doesn't work here
>>2702558what about until we can reliably start asteroid mining? we need regulation until then to prevent monopolies. lolbertarianism deboonked
â„–2702696[Quote]
>>2702688Do you think pepol are willing to sell their mines for no reason?
â„–2702711[Quote]
>>2702704cuz people wont sell their mines if there is no reason to
â„–2702715[Quote]
>>2702688ACKtually it does, you can't just say "imagine incredibly unlikely and nonsensical scenario" as an arguement. Why would someone sell their iron mine when they're in a duopoly/triopoly and they have a huge incentive to just rake in the cash of being one of the few competitors of the megacorp? Or alternativley, why doesn't someone just invest in iron mines en mass, knowing that the megacorp will scramble to buy them, and then up-charge the iron mines and drain the megacorps resources? Incentives.
â„–2702718[Quote]
>>2702711the reason is a lot of money
â„–2702734[Quote]
>>2702715The monopoly would be able to sell their shit a lot cheaper or even operate at a net negative to drown out the remaining competition, forcing them to close down
â„–2702743[Quote]
>>2702718If someone has a good share of the market, why sell when you can make allot of money from little competition?
â„–2702757[Quote]
>>2702734And while the megacorp is undercutting their competitors by selling iron at prices below production value, why doesn't the small competitor just buy up their iron stocks while the price is low and then flip them for profit when they try and increase the price? Or, they could just simply stop operations (which they would be able to do without cost as taxes wouldn't be eating up the profits) and wait to reopen when they upsell again?
â„–2702799[Quote]
>>2702773Not to mention every river has black sand you can just use magnets and collect the iron out.
â„–2702852[Quote]
monopoly only works with producing consumer goods and services (because ordinary people are le heckin stupid and will just buy everything at the lowest price possible), on such level other companies that rely on iron ore will just keep the company that owns the last iron mine afloat no matter the cost to prevent such monopoly
â„–2702873[Quote]
>>2702757Eh, you win
>>2702773>>2702799its a hypothetical nuswas, it could have been iron or it could have been something else
â„–2702881[Quote]
>>2702852Why would companies that rely on iron want the monopoly maintained? They'd prefer that their iron be cheap, and monopolies tend to charge a lot. They'd have more vested interests in the monopoly being forced to compete with higher quality services/lower prices.
â„–2702903[Quote]
>>2702757What if the monopoly ends up with the ownership of their last company by mechanisms other than the market though? I don't know, like inheritance or something. I know it's very unlikely but it could still happen and at that point libertarianism has nothing in place to prevent the monopoly from happening
This is not really an actual argument btw im just curious now
â„–2702905[Quote]
>>2702881thats exactly what i said, theyre gonna prevent the monopoly by funding the concurents of potential monopoly
â„–2702907[Quote]
>>2702903Competition, regulation just makes monopolies
â„–2702912[Quote]
>>2702873the fact that people are divided by ideologies of various degrees prevents everyone from cooperating, which would prevent a single entity from managing to "buy up" a single resource around the entire world…
as for a real world example of hoarding happening… that's china and rare earths, which is why the US wants greenland. USA right now has one rare earth mine, but greenland has more deposits, maybe even canada too. If USA starts mining, prices of electronics will decrease. Processing rare earths isn't even super science.
this is an older report…
but even with China's hold on majority of rare earths, USA can still leverage trade war to make them open up and force them to sell more minerals than china wanted to sell, a few months ago.
â„–2702914[Quote]
>>2702907nigga ur dumb as fuck just let the american talk
â„–2702935[Quote]
>>2702912What you're describing isn't libertarianism though, as there are other forces other than the market arbitrarily preventing free trade
OP takes place in a hypothetically 100% libertarian world in which there are no regulations and no tariffs
â„–2702937[Quote]
>>2702903Then, in this scenario, someone will invest into an iron company because of the potential profit margins. And any of the possibilities i outlined previously will repeat until 1. The megacorp goes bankrupt from selling super low, 2. It'll go bankrupt buying up random iron companies that emerge solely to be boughten up, or 3. They start using honest business practice. Competition is a constant force in the free market, you can't just stop it unless you lobby politicians to regulate said competition.
â„–2702972[Quote]
>>2702937But, what if the megacorp ends up owning every single iron source? At that point there is simply no other way to extract iron other than the monopoly and so no other companies to invest into. Unless new sources of iron spring up which is not guaranteed.
Once again, this is a very unlikely scenario but it could happen theoretically
â„–2702978[Quote]
>>2702935i was writing an essay for 5 minutes but ill just say this instead
it all comes down to who you want to live next to and how much you agree with each others beliefs. the more agreement, the more peace. same thing economically
â„–2703030[Quote]
>>2702972At what point do consumers and businesses that want the iron just stop buying iron and look for some other resource which does what iron does well enough? If there's this omnipresent corporation which somehow owns literally every source of iron ever, chances are their services are extremely inefficient, bureaucratic, costly. Their services probably suck and they'd likely charge everyone way too much. People would probably switch to copper or gold or whatever metal would work. And if they end up somehow buying literally every alternative to iron, it'd be even more inefficient. It'd be more unstable than a socialist government. I think it's entirely unfeasible for a monopoly this big to even function.
â„–2703060[Quote]
>>2702935libertarian world prevents megacorps because everything is localized, that is, who the fuck is going to enforce their mining claim 2,000 miles away and locals just confiscate it from you after you build the mines and set up the drills.
a government could step in… but not a libertarian company because all those would end up being smaller than medium…
in fact it would probably be more agrarian around the world
â„–2703068[Quote]
>>2703030Yeah, you're right
This thread has been an eye-opener, not going to lie
â„–2703074[Quote]
>>2703068also, if a resource is highjacked my a mega corp that then raises prices 400%, there is a lot of incentive for people to seek alternatives then instead of paying hefty fees…
for example, i don't buy many modern games, if i do, only ones with huge discounts, and companies have to give discounts and sales if their product isn't moving, and high prices prevent that
â„–2703091[Quote]
>>2703068This is one of the only times i have had a honest and respectful debate on the 'arty which doesn't devolve into calling the opponent a nigger. Huge W.
â„–2703137[Quote]
>>2703060on earth this is actually not so enforceable because of tyrants, and tyrants want other peoples lands and stuff, and groups then band together for defensive purposes or for offensive pushes…
the US used to be colonies, but they banded together for mutual defense, the states are all for one and one for all, with an agreement on federal practices…
in my opinion, the fed has got too big, and had practiced too many unconstitutional things int he past.
even though i dislike strong gov, the world atm is full of other nations whose spies and terrorists and saboteurs are inside USA, so USA has cause to have high defensive motives, which involve offensive moves.
I do like Trump, not for every thing I disagree on, but the things I do agree on and I think he's doing a lot of good…
But I think the situation being this complicated abroad prevents shrinkage of government beyond a certain point and this is actually the US being at war with the world right now because the whole world is an unstable mess.
The larger the US grows and the more countries it begins to made deals with, the more sensitive and intertwined it becomes with all of their local problems… Even though this is considered by many to be a peaceful time, i see it as a time of wars and rumors of wars, as well as a time to make quick and harsh judgements, not because one wants to, but because sometimes one has to… I would prefer more actual peace and just closing of borders, but inner protests of left run states prevent that, so other work-arounds are used.
â„–2703154[Quote]
>>2703137AIPAC isn't the only thing trying to alter America's opinions.
There are other groups…
â„–2703183[Quote]
>>2702478 (OP)After a while the ore exported by the company will be resold by other people
â„–2703201[Quote]
>>2703183They would have to buy the ore at the price set by the monopoly as they would be the only providers and then sell it at an inferior price for anyone to buy it off them rather than the monopoly which would result in a net negative for the reseller
â„–2703212[Quote]
>>2703201no
it is unrealistic for a company to hold the ore and wait for people to become willing enough to buy it at a high price that they set, this ignores psychological factors that trigger people to be willing to buy at that price, as price rises, demand falls.
â„–2703228[Quote]
>>2703212Well, there would be no other way to obtain iron other than the monopoly, so people that absolutely need it would be forced to either accept the monopolies' price or be forced to find an alternative material, if that is even possible
â„–2703231[Quote]
>>2703228if this is what your hypothetical comes back around to, then it's a bad hypothetical that is not realistic
â„–2703233[Quote]
>The fuggen jerdee sez, lyke, if ther's only so much stuff on erf, lyke duh, thet craps on dum libertarians. Say some corp buys ALL the iron-all of it, ya hear me? Then evryone gotta pay ther stupud prices, no way out. Cant argue with that, ya know?
â„–2703234[Quote]
lolberts would probably say this is unrealistic but in ancap society this could happen with some much rarer resource o algo
â„–2703243[Quote]
>>2703233ancap brapzilian in the big 2026🥀🥀🥀
how did you slip out of the retirement home blud
â„–2703279[Quote]
Your politics need to be in favor of objective good, which includes basing decisions on what is happening now, while having the ability to be flexible over time by adapting to new circumstances.
Too many people aren't realistic or are just selfish. Evil usually thinks it's good or disguises itself as good.
â„–2703285[Quote]
>>2703234The previous arguments i made apply to all resources. Howevereventhoughalbeitgranted scarcer resources will necessarily always have less competition as there are less of the resources to go around. Regardless, they will still have to compete.
â„–2703292[Quote]
>>2703233Ancap and brazilian in the small 26 :patchedheart:
Keep on doing what your doing
â„–2703296[Quote]
>>2703292you're too new to even know who that is
â„–2703361[Quote]
>>2703233That's not an argument against the hypothetical, chuddy.