Simple, you point out how the dollar is manipulated in a socialistic way by the federal reserve and how state and suprastate regulatory tendencies hampers markets to cater the needs of those people.

>>339
>Either way there is no use with arguing with this people, that's what helicopters are for.
The Hoppe Theorem:
By arguing with me, you accept that argumentation is how we must resolve our disputes.

The Hoppe Corollary:
If you disagree with the previous, I have a helicopter.

bump

There are many other metrics that show poverty reduction than this world bank statistic.

>>709
Didn't >>339 give you a response?

>>722
Not good enough
Especially not good enough for marxist nitpickers

>>727
Like he said, there is no use arguing. Bring out the helicopters. By rejecting private property norms, communists have estopped themselves from appealing to those norms in their defense. You do not argue with them unless you can publicly humiliate them while doing so--unless you know exactly what you're doing, they will drag you down their rabbithole, where they have more obscure nitpicks than you do. The only productive interactions are ridicule and physical removal. If you can't do either, don't engage.

>>728
This is fucking retarded dude.
We don't have power now and we will never have power unless we actually refute their shitty arguments.
Normies see them winning debates without anyone refuting them so they end up joining them.
Attitudes like yours are why our movement is dying.

>>737
you libertarians don't seem to understand that this is an inherent problem with your platform. If your NAP doesn't include provisions for violently removing communists for advocating communism than a successful implementation of libertarianism will necessarily degenerate into communism

>>728
Fuck off with your "deploy the helicopters" meme shit.

It's right to question the metrics used to measure poverty. It's very funny, however, to listen to a Communist argue about the unreliability of poverty line limits provided by third world countries, many of which are currently or have been in the past operating under Socialist/authoritarian regimes, which, you know, may have something to do with increasing poverty, and many of which have political ruling bodies which very much stand to benefit from maintaining the stream of foreign aid goodies they get from supragovernmental organizations. They criticize metrics provided by supragovernmental organizations, and then fudge the metrics and squint at them until they get blurry enough to say that because poverty might be getting worse when you aggregate together the statistics for literally every country in the entire world, it's capitalism's fault. Then they advocate for a system which--how else--makes decisions (at least nominally) by studying aggregated metrics.

By the way, "minimum nutritional requirements" is a terrible way to estimate poverty. There are plenty of wealthy people out there who have diets that likely don't fit most definitions of "minimum nutritional requirements".

Additionally, a lot of these Communists seem to be using the prices in their own countries (i.e. cushy Western countries) as a reference point for telling us that $1.25 a day isn't enough. Anyone who's traveled to a foreign country knows that in spite of the Fed sucking wealth out of everyone's pockets, a dollar goes a lot farther abroad than it does at home.

>>737
>We don't have power now and we will never have power unless we actually refute their shitty arguments.
You're thinking about it in the wrong terms. Commies don't have arguments, they have a cult. Normies don't care about arguments, they care about who looks strong. You don't argue with commies, you ridicule and humiliate them. This can be done on the debate stage, but not by writing dissertations on how "ACKSHUALLY, MARX CONTRADICTED HIMSELF IF YOU LOOK AT SUBPARAGRAPH 3 OF DAS KAPITAL." The debate stage is only effective when used to create 2-minute quotable sound bites that make commies look retarded. Normies don't have an attention span long enough for anything else.

>our movement
Again with this faggy ideological identitarianism. LARPing as an ideology is the reason the "movement" is failing to get past internet circlejerking. Stop seeing yourself as a warrior for ideology and start seeing liberty as a means to a desired end.

>>738
>If your NAP doesn't include provisions for violently removing communists
It does, it's called estoppel. Communists don't respect private property norms, therefore they are not entitled to appeal to private property in their own defense, and so they get physically removed. This is not a complicated thing to grasp, NiggerSocs don't hold a monopoly on jackboots.

>>739
>Fuck off with your "deploy the helicopters" meme shit.
It's not a meme bud, it's the only way to deal with communists. People who do not adhere to private property norms have no place in a society based on private property norms. The only "peaceful" way communists and us can coexist is if the communists are far away, i.e. physically removed. It's justifiable and necessary self-defense.

>It's right to question the metrics used to measure poverty...
Yes, it's perfectly all right to notice these things and intelligently comment on them. But if you can't describe it in two sentences or less normies aren't going to care.

>>738
Oh, and lose the tripcode you doublenigger.

>>741
>But if you can't describe it in two sentences or less normies aren't going to care.
Hey, at least I answered the question.

>>741
>Communists ... get physically removed
oh ok, we're good then. I still think you need to be an ethnostate or else you'll never come to wide agreement on what constitutes a violation of the NAP in corner cases. Without shared culture there will constantly be continually-escalating disagreements

>Oh, and lose the tripcode you doublenigger.
I'll get right on that, HHHPinochet

>>745
>I still think you need to be an ethnostate
>Wide agreement
>shared culture
The whole point of covenant communities is so that people can voluntarily segregate into communities that fit them best.

>>746
but when you add property rights into the picture population mobility is reduced and you can't necessarily just up and leave because a nigger moved next door

>>747
Do you know what a covenant community is?

>>747
>you can't necessarily just up and leave because a nigger moved next door
That is absolutely correct, boomer. The ancap government will enforce strict anti-discrimination laws. I will not be able to make the anti-nigger rules for my private neighborhood, and I certainly won't be able to hire private death squads to lynch any n-words that sneak in. Property rights are not hate rights.

>>745
>I still think you need to be an ethnostate
You don't need a NEETSoc government to be an ethnostate, it's really not that hard to keep niggers out of a privatized covenant community. You don't have a monopoly on homogeneity.

>>747
You're retarded and don't understand what a covenant community is. They wouldn't be able to move in in the first place.

...what exactly is being argued here?

>>741
>You don't argue with commies, you ridicule and humiliate them.
Why not both?
They seem to be doing both and they're winning.
>The debate stage is only effective when used to create 2-minute quotable sound bites that make commies look retarded.
We can do that, we just rarely do unfortunately.

>ideological identitarianism bad
lmao why the fuck do you think this?
You're saying we shouldn't work together to defeat the commies?

>LARPing as an ideology
How are we larping? We literally ARE an ideology.

>>755
>You don't need a NEETSoc government to be an ethnostate, it's really not that hard to keep niggers out of a privatized covenant community.
the difficulty is in keeping your privatized covenant community at all

>You're retarded and don't understand what a covenant community is.
I understand what it is and you don't seem to understand this has been tried and it failed. As soon as some kind of industry pops up and people get dependent on it you compromise on the rules of your community and start changing them in ways that fundamentally break libertarianism. At best you'd create a bunch of little fascisms. We tried this shit with a little thing called the United States of America, remember? What happened to the states will inevitably happen to your covenant communities. At most you're just decreasing the size of the community and operating it on an even smaller scale than a state, but there's no practical difference

>banning me for your own retardation

>>764
>lmao why the fuck do you think this?
Because it's very LARPy and cringe. you can't create any sort of genuine identity from civic ideals; who you are is defined primarily by your ethnicity and religion--and within that group, your identity is your family and the community in which you live. Trying to substitute that with political memery isn't going to create anything real. You can work together with other people to achieve certain goals, yes, that doesn't make those goals your identity.

>We literally ARE an ideology.
No, we're not, or at least I'm not. I have no intention of fighting for an ideology. I'm not going to devote scarce time and effort to supporting total strangers to myself in, say, Yemen purely because we have similar ideologies. I am not an ideology, and I don't see myself as part of a movement. I want what's best for my family and my people, due to the biological in-group preference that exists in all men. I see praxeology and the tenets of liberty as the best tools to achieve this end. Using these tools I can see that a society based on the free market natural order will be more preferable for myself and my family to live in than any other.

>>761
OP and confederate-flag are jumping between racialism, some weird pro-socialist theory, anarchism, and identitarianism without any clear points of discussion at all. But then again, OP's first post wasn't all that clear to begin with either.

>>747
Kek this faggot tripfag got banned on /fascist/ today too

>>764
>They seem to be doing both and they're winning.
Leftists are only winning in the sense that they are successfully co-opting every major institution by means of manipulation and deceit, not winning arguments or shit like that. Egalitarians get continuously humiliated on the internet because they can't win people with their ideas, so they have instead subverted all relevant institutions so they can censor all dissent and impose their tranny doctrine on everyone. If you think they are "winning debates" then you're delusional, their success comes exclusively from their usual commie tactics.

You point out that the faggot is being disingenuous himself. He whines about the opposing side changing definitions, but fails to solidify around one himself. Whinging and moaning about "how could someone feed themself on only $1 per day?" without taking into consideration the Consumer Price Index and that while it might cost three dollars for a gallon of milk in the States it isn't the same cost in Bumfuckistan, so it doesn't mean the turdworlder can only buy a third of a gallon of milk per day.

>>785
Wait is he actually ignoring purchasing power of the US dollar in these countries?

Is he actually being this disingenuous?
Commies aren't THAT stupid are they?

>>787
He's measuring poverty increasing on the basis of those currently living on a dollar or less than a dollar per day. His main complaint being they changed the definition from $1.02 from $1.08 which suddenly gets many people above the 'poverty line'. Or changing one from $1.25 to $1.08.

He also cuts out the factor of fertility rates and population increase in those countries.