im a libertarian.

and you dont think those devices would exist with market forces.

i implore you, take an economics class

They would exist, on different terms.

the only thing that came close at the time was the GSM/CDMA technology. Why is SMS still being used? Because telcos dictate that market, and up to 30 cents for a small message reap higher profits than competing technologies offering close to free data.

Why is alternate technology NOT being pursued by big telco? Because they can rape us well enough with existing technology.

I implore you, use a bit of logic. Big telco does not like investing in change, due to the fact that rate of return would be diminished as soon as competitors follow suit. They prefer to stick with 'tried and true'. Thus, we have a stagnation of technology.

Are you one of those same people who say not to believe the teachers, since they brainwash with massive liberal propaganda? Tell me, how would economics teachers be any different?

because its a class were you literally cant be liberal in.

In other words, it's a very one-sided approach.

Thanks for clarifying my suspicions.

If I wanted the human race to go extinct...

If I wanted the human race to go extinct, I would tell them to only think of their own interests, and not wonder about their own values and priorities.

I would tell them that markets are a deterministic thing that will lift all boats, be able to effectively manage everything so externalities don't exist, and we will be fine.

I would worship markets and reduce all values to that of monetary and make people believe there is a perfect correlation between wealth and one's own morality, so that people who are poor are seen as wicked and lazy. I would make it so that compassion is seen as weakness, and make it so viewing helping the disadvantaged is punishing the successful. And, I would worship those who have lots of money to, and make everyone think they can be part of the 1% if they just try hard enough.

I would have them not think it is possible for human beings to ever be a force and put everyone at risk.

I would have the economy tank, costing a lot of jobs, then use jobs as a trinket to hold out to ramrod any sort of thing that can cause a race to the bottom to happen, in the name of maximizing profits.

I would make people believe that those who question the current configuration don't understand the concept of progress and believe exponential growth is possible indefinitely, and also believe at the same time there are winners and losers and life, and there isn't enough resources to help anyone.

I would have people believe that government has no business doing welfare, and to leave it up to private charities, and then equate helping the poor as not a moral obligation, but something on par with stamp collecting, something nice to do if you want to.

I would have people believe the ability to get cheap electronic is more than enough justification for people lacking health coverage or children suffering from malnutrition.

I would have people believe their own suffering is the utmost importance, but suffering around the world is merely an annoyance, and mass starvation is nothing but Debbie Downer news.

I would not be my brother's keeper.

I would believe that the only answer is to shrink the government to the size of a bathtub so it could be drown.

I would support deficits in the name of preemptive wars based on false pretenses, but say that we must practice austerity when it ends up causing the disadvantaged to suffer.

In other words, I would do nothing except mind my own business and allow the B.S to continue to roll, as it is now.

I believe Paul Krugman, who has a Nobel Prize in economics, would say you are full of it.  Also, you better dang well go look up what liberal means before you spout about this.  If you want to also say economics is a place you can't be conservative in, then you may be onto something.  Otherwise, you are just being full of it, out of pure spin, blinding by your own partisan arrogance, that leaves you at risk of being blindsided by a thing called reality.  When this happens, you likely will get very upset and fume over things.

A certain amount of government regulation is needed to prevent banks from collapsing and triggering an economic meltdown. The recent global recession was caused by greed and corruption of banks lending out money to people who could not pay back their loans. Bank deregulation and a lack of financial controls contributed significantly towards the global recession.

Well, once those green energies can be used to fly a jet carrying 100 people for over 4 hrs straight (hell a car for that matter) and the personal vehicles with those types of technology can be sold for $15,000-$20,000 without huge subsidies from the government, you let me know.  Until then, I'll just continue to use that "evil" oil. 

BTW, say we do switch to electric cars AND we were able to get our electrical grid to support that much power usage, where do you think that power comes from?  It comes from power plants with massive generators.  Do you know what powers those generators?  In the US, 50% alone are run by burning coal.  Others use nuclear.  While others burn oil.  Now, Democrats don't want us to build more nuclear plants, haven't built one here since '77.  So that means a crap load more coal and oil will be burnt to meet the energy needs of electric cars.  So you're basically taking away the oil that would go to run cars and just pushing it into a power plant, so no real reduction of usage.  And if we were to switch to using only wind and solar energy for electricity, do you even realize how much land we would have to use for the windmills and solar panels (with today's tech) to have enough to power for the entire country?  We would have to stop mulitplying because there would be no more land to live on.

Edit: Forgot to mention that the land used to build those panels and windmills would disrupt a great many animal habitats.

That video and its regressive propaganda made me angry. I've always wondered what goes on in the heads of anti-environmentalists, now I know.

I'll leave it at that for now.

Also, what was up with his line on Europe?