When Empire and Renishaw created a
3D-printed titanium bike a few years ago, it was part work of art, part pipe dream, and partly an unaffordable glimpse into the future. Working in conjunction with some of the UK's heaviest hitting engineering firms, Renishaw, HiETA and Altair, Robot Bike Co have fast-forwarded that future to the now. Their website will be taking your orders by the time you are reading this, that is, if you're prepared to splash out £4390, or roughly $6425 USD for a frame set.
Robot R160 Details• 3D printed T6 titanium frame lugs with carbon tubing
• Dave Weagle DWLink6 suspension design
• Custom geometry
• Travel: 160mm
• 27.5" wheels
• Internal cable routing
• 73mm BSA threaded bottom bracket
• 12 x 148mm rear spacing
• Lifetime Guarantee
• Weight
approx: 3.2kgs / 7lbs w/ shock
• Price: £4395 GBP / USD $6437
approx• Available to order, estimated 4 week lead time
•
www.robotbike.co GeometryNote the complete lack of a geometry chart in this section. This is because you can have whatever geometry you want. Every R160 is custom tailored to suit your specific body size, riding style and wishes. This R160 bike is designed around the 'enduro' style of riding - Robot has base numbers to work from, and any other changes can be input online and discussed with the designers.
| It doesn't matter how good a frame is if it doesn't fit the rider, and this is where Robot Bike Co. sees the weakness in the current market offerings. If you are trying to produce the very best frame it makes no sense to then only offer it in a small number of sizes when the people you are selling it to come in all shapes and sizes. Think of Robot Bike Co. as the Savile Row of the bike world." - Ed Haythornwaite, Robot Bike Co |
DW6 SuspensionRobot Bike considered Dave Weagle to be the best suspension designer in the world, so rather than spending years designing their own system they went straight to the source. The DW Link 6 system gains a few extra pivots compared to some of his previous designs. From afar, one could be forgiven for thinking this looks like an Iron Horse MkIII, the smaller brother of the infamous Sunday. The DW6 design uses a simple rocker to drive the shock from above, while the lower link has a very short link and also another pivot very close to the rear wheel's axle. The top rocker link is machined from alloy in the workshop next door to Robot who just happen to make parts for Red Bull's Formula 1 cars. Why not print this too? Because it's one of the few parts that will be the same on each frame.
| The DW6 suspension design represents the latest evolution in modern mountain bike suspension. Essentially, the design takes everything that's great about the 4-bar DW-Link design and adds further tunability to meet the goals of a custom designed experience that RBC aims to provide. The 5th generation DW-Link anti-squat performance is there, along with independently tuneable braking and leverage ratio characteristics. This offers a nearly unlimited level of adjustability from the factory. DW6 is a true design for the future and one that will be constantly adjusted and improved to take advantage of the latest in damper technology and rider preferences.
DW6 is not just about suspension performance, though. Structurally, the design was conceived from the ground up to work in unison with RBC's ti-lugged construction. Stiff and compact links attach via angular contact bearings at critical points for long-term maintenance-free performance in even the harshest conditions. - Dave Weagle |
Details and ConstructionOnce an R160's geometry has been decided, a press of a button followed by a 20-second wait has to be endured. In this time the computer software calibrates the exact shapes and sizes of each titanium lug and arranges each piece on the printing board. After that, it's simply a matter of pressing the big green 'Go' button to start the 50-hour printing process. The parts are cleaned up and heat-treated before leaving the Renishaw premises and heading an hour down the road to Robot Bike Co. Here the tubes are cut to an exact length, again determined by the computer. Every joint has 25mm overlapping, double-shear joints that are bonded internally and externally. All strength testing was done using 10mm overlapping joints and we were told these passed with flying colors.
The carbon tubes are constructed and finished in New Zealand. The finish might not be what you expect a carbon tube to look like, but this is because most carbon products use a finishing layer to make things pretty, but from an engineering standpoint it's useless and only adds weight, so Robot didn't bother with that.
Why do I think this is the most important bike of the decade?Customized - built to order, with a short four week, estimated lead time. New hub standard? Change it with CAD. New headtube standard? Change it with CAD.
Low waste - the printing machine only uses the material necessary to build the frame components.
Demand - the order comes in and the machine starts turning. Mass produced bikes will always be going out of date from the second they roll out the factory door. Changing standards, model years and fashions mean that bikes are continually being devalued. There will never be a container of unsaleable Robots stuck in a warehouse or shop stock somewhere gathering dust as consumers clamor to buy the latest and greatest.
Ethics - the impossibility of human exploitation, you can't subject a machine to unhealthy working conditions and underpay it.
Environment - a bike that
could be designed from anywhere in the world and emailed to a printer in any country. In the not-too-distant future, bikes could be printed in any continent, country or even town. Maybe, just maybe, in your local bike shop?
Rule Brittania - Another product that re-stamps Britain's faded mark on great engineering and innovation.
That's a ridiculous price for a bike, I could buy seven used Canyons and three YT's for the same price as one frame!This superbike carries a heavy price tag right now, but that price will only fall in the future as machines become faster, more affordable and more popular. At £4395 it's still cheaper than an off-the-shelf Trek Session 9.9 frame that somehow comes in at a whopping £4500. People will say the R160 is too expensive, but last time I checked a Bugatti Veyron wasn't what you would call affordable, and neither was a 26 bedroom mansion overlooking Lake Geneva. I could probably afford one side of a chainstay, but there are a lot of people out there with serious moolah that are desperate to spend it on bikes.
My custom frame is currently appearing in the printing machine, so expect a review of the best handling bike in the world, in my opinion (of course, I chose my geometry) later this year. In the meantime, here is Ieuan Williams putting R160 number 001 through its paces:
It's a neat looking frame, I doubt most will like it. I wouldn't buy it over an even more expensive carbon frame, because I believe they look better.
Regardless it's a great idea, I hope it finds a market.
www.outsideonline.com/2064991/reggie-miller-will-drop-you
.
This is certainly one of those very cool, heart over head sort of products.
I am personally VERY interested in this suspension layout. Custom geo sounds super attractive but for that price, I would also need to fall in love with the looks. Not the case for me. No big deal, I don't have the money anyway!
Wish the robot lots of success
...ethics?... great. robot. another leap in manufacturing technology to put more skilled people out of work...thic.
It is still cool and I wish it was more affordable as I would like to have one, it reminds me of older steel road frames with ornamental lugs.
The industrial aesthetic is perfect, its a thing of beauty with the perfect balance of form/function
Can I have one please?
But having working with Carbon fibre should wear gloves rather than getting hands dirty
Why so personal? You thought that my comment knocks the bike somehow? Not at all. Perhaps you've been scurrying around in the facebook or youtube gutter too long. There was a time when hand built meant HAND-BUILT, as in every single piece. However, my original comment wasn't intended to be as serious as the replies are trying to make it. Those days are mostly gone and we now have wonderful new technology instead, nothing wrong with that, but the same ol' marketing swag is just that. Wonderful technology applies everywhere and can also make "hand-built" a negative. Automated can just as easily be better. As usual, it always depends, mostly on the human element in either case.
If you want it custom, now, and have no concern about cost this might be a good option. We have no long term real-world durability results though so don't get too carried away. All we know today is they have something very new and very expensive for sale. Not trying to knock this product, but in this lifetime I've seen my share of promising products that failed to live up to the initial promotional hype they were sold on. Though most of the excited grasshoppers chirping loudly in this thread likely have no wing$ to fly on.
Technically all Taiwanese built production carbon frames are also handbuilt. Handbuilt has kind of become a term to describe bespoke construction. Or custom if you don't happen to be British.
I honestly cannot think of a single composite bike that is in production that is not hand laid. Tape laying machines don't really scale down to bike frame sized equipment. That and frames are complex enough that for the most part it just isn't possible.
Fwiw, I've been an engineer longer than you have ... if the industry suffers it's over it's own blunders, misrepresentations, and inefficiencies, not because of some meaningless comment on an internet forum. If you want to target-fixate on somebody it might make more sense to go after someone who actually posted negative comments. There are more than a few to choose from.
Otherwise I'm not obligated to be on the cheerleading squad for a frame that 99.5% of the potential market can't afford. Nobody "needs" that imo. I also don't subscribe to the "if you're not with us then you're against us" mentality either. The success will solely be determined by the market economics and real world results. So enough with the exaggerations, excuses, and pettiness already.
On a different subject I can piss 25 metres , beat that!
Once that bike is in my hands it stops be innovative. Now it's just my bike till I buy the next one. Also, I like swoopy tubes
Would I buy? Yes..but. I want single pivot rear end like on my Foes. Otherwise 61 d headangle, low bb, long toptube and long rear end.
Reminds me of my 1990 Reflex - Heavy lugs with carbon tubes glued in with a sort of silicon like substance. This is way better.
www.bike-air.com/Evaluating-quot-vintage-quot-bonded-frames-a-specific-question-regarding-one-LOOK-KG56_10173237.html
Still, the tubes are epoxied to the lugs. Adhesives have gotten better; but this bike is still glued together.
Everything about this manufacturing process is very exciting, though! Can't wait for trickle-down pricing.
However if they presented this idea in road bike form, the weight weenies would crucify it immediately.
Super trick though, awesome job on the 3D printed geometry of the lugs, doing physical maneuvers only possible in an additive fabrication process.
I can imagine a future where additive manufacturing is king.
*Lifetime is the expected life of the product... The warranty duration is not for your personal lifetime.
If you crash and damage a tube section or joint. Can this be a simple reprint and tube replacement. Rather than a new front or rear end?
Other than that it's a stunning looking bike. I do love straight tubes... the fastest way between two points is a straight line.
I was actually pretty surprised at the prices too its pretty economical.
are they implying that CNC machines in the far east are underpaid and have unhealthy working conditions??
The current price sucks of course, but he's right... It's only a matter of time before the machines get cheaper and you'll be able to afford something like this.
My question is can the individual carbon tubes be replaced? I don't see why they wouldnt be... So instead of having to buy a new frame when a tube breaks, you just have it repaired.
Isn't this a "problem" that the bike industry (SRAM, cough) inflicts upon itself? And why should the consumer care?
"Ethics - the impossibility of human exploitation, you can't subject a machine to unhealthy working conditions and underpay it."
I guess you're not exploiting anybody who just lost their job to that latest robot technology.
But it is a nice bike at least (its a DW Llink). And there are enough gazillionaires to make this business model work.
final thought, I think I need a raise.
final, final thought: Whatever happened to healthy working conditions a fair wage? Please excuse my archaic point of view....
Lovely bike and great riding in that vid though - what looks like a proper break through design and manufacturing process...
Another bike made for another dentist...
keep em coming PB.
Also compliments for getting the bonding done right. Everyone notice they bond the tube both on the inside as well as on the outside to avoid delamination to start there. Indeed if you want the lug to be a single piece, you won't have any other option than to use additive manufacturing.
@Luneec, these molds are expensive because they have to be durable. If you want to produce a very limited number of products (or just a single product), you can use less durable materials. These are easier to machine (quicker and less tool wear) hence cheaper. So for a single product you could use a mold out of styrofoam. Machine the coarse shape, then add a thin layer of ceramic paste and let it dry. Then machine the accurate shape. It is obviously going to be more expensive than a mass produced monocoque carbon frame, but it is nowhere close to the numbers you mentioned there.
But i may be giving you guys a call here, having some ideas with this.
Additive manufacturing allow us to extend the aspect ratio of the bond surface considerably versus machining or casting. Furthermore we can use thinner walls and have fine control over the 'ramp' (tapering down the thickness) where the metal parts 'run out' (finish) to bleed out the substrate thickness. All of this contributes to minimising the peeling forces in the bond line for maximum strength and durability.
Our testing has followed aerospace the 'test pyramid' philosophy so we generated lots of coupon level data on the composite materials before performing element level testing on the joints. The testing went very well and the joints exceed our conservative sizing. They were so strong, in fact, that we broke the fixtures on the test rig and before the bond, tube or lug showed any signs of distress.
A question I still have then is whether these complete UD frames are up to out of plane loads. Ideally such straight tubes are subject to tensile and compressive loads. You already mentioned that the loading near the joints (because of moments on the headtube because of forks and handlebar, for instance) are too complex to take proper advantage of fibre reinforced plastics (you'd add so many different layers in different directions that isotropic materials like metals make for a better choice there) so you've got that covered. But a mountainbike, especially with that kind of suspension travel, is going to receive blows from impact and crashes. These could split/delaminate the fibres even if the tubes are round. This is why weaves are being used on the outside. Pulltruded (carbon or fibreglass) tubes therefore also get this braid around the structural (UD) bit. Compare this to a wooden chair. If the seat and backrest are thin (which are also loaded out of plane), typically multiplex is being used. If these would be out of solid wood with the same thickness, it would just split. A few weeks ago we had a friendly conversation on PB with Cesar Rojo from Unno bikes (he also designed bikes for Mondraker) and he claims the weaves are definitely there for protection, not solely for cosmetic purposes. So I'm interested in your views on this. Is it really because the tubes you're using have a round profile which, as you claim in your post above, have much better out of plane impact resistance than the tubes with an angular profile as commonly found on modern day carbon bikes?
Thanks again for taking the time and effort to clarify this on PB!
Please don't overlook my previous post, still have some questions pending. But just wanted to wish you luck on this new adventure!
Regarding lay up there are always competing drivers. Each of our tubes is a specific mix of 0 degree, 90 degree and +/- 45 degrees. The 0 degree carrying axial and bending loads, the 45 degrees carrying torsion and the 90 provide hoop strength and resistance for crush. There are various rules as to where the plies are located in the laminate but for us with our bonded principle all of the outermost plies are at 45 degrees (like a wing skin). The combination makes for a robust lay-up.
To tweak your interpretation of a previous post the round tubes are good for avoiding 'corner unfolding' resulting from square corners when the laminate is in bending. The comment was directed towards static loads but edges are generally speaking more vulnerable to impact so a round tube is indeed beneficial in that regard.
There are pros and cons for having a woven outer ply - but for us the compromise on outright properties on the most highly loaded ply in bending plus the reduce bond performance tips the balance. If the demand is there we can add a woven outer ply but it will add weight.
I was always surprised to see the carbon versions of a frame resemble their aluminium versions so closely, it can't be good. Either one of the two is being compromised. So, great to see your won't fall for that trap.
Only thing I still haven't figured out is how that suspension system works. You've got some extra pivots near the bottom bracket while you already had an FSR type suspension. But now you've added two more links and along with that two excess degrees of freedom (so now having a total of three). Can you link to some information on that system and what it is supposed to do? Thanks!
And sure, take the weekends off. Ed got that right !
A little nervous of "bonded tubes and joints" in years previous this hasnt worked well. But it's possible technology has found a better way and those problems wont arrise.
Good on them for trying old/new/different ways to advance mountain biking!
remember that next time you're on an airplane....
www.pinkbike.com/photo/13540835
14761-presscdn-0-15.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Robot-Bike-R160-Bespoke-Bike-9-810x477.jpg
Overall I would say that you can get similar performance with a traditional VPP layout.
www.robotbike.co
#robotbikeco #engineered #bespoke
3dprintingindustry.com/news/3d-printed-titanium-fatally-flawed-80100
"Even when a design has been optimized specifically for the process, it often takes dozens of tries before a functional part comes out of the printer. And the process of troubleshooting a failed build — even at the most advanced DMLS shops in the world — still involves a lot of trial and error."
pencerw.com/feed/2015/3/15/3d-printing-titanium-and-the-bin-of-broken-dreams
fwiw I work with DLMS parts from time to time.
Boeing has an obscene amount of patents for 3d printed aircraft parts, you should take a look you might be surprised at what they're using the tech for. That quote is correct, DLMS is super fickle and the machines require 24/7 babysitting to produce good parts. Its getting better on a daily basis though. Processing materials is hugely expensive (mostly energy wise) but there's a lot of other stuff coming that will help that. It's also only a matter of time before someone produces a frame using other existing technologies that will be vastly less expensive than this. It's cool none the less.
Source: I work specifically with additive manufacturing technologies.
Spencer's right that residual stress can result in failed builds, especially in titanium, but we've paid a lot of attention to this in developing the support designs, laser modulation and build strategy.
We apply an "infinite life" design approach, where the stress allowable is set to below the fatigue run-out strength, which takes into account the naturally occurring presence of defects which occur in any manufacturing process. With appropriate control over material inputs and process, which is currently being finalised by the SAE (standards.sae.org/wip/ams7003), combined with post-process heat treatment a highly repeatable process is achieved.
The Laser Powder Bed Additive Manufacturing process we use has already been jointly certified with the FAA and EASA for safety critical fuel injector applications by GE and Airframers such as Airbus are currently in the process of qualification using the same titanium composition as us for airframe applications.
Via the collaboration with our industrial engineering partners Renishaw PLC, HiETA Technologies and Altair Engineering we are confident in our product and the longevity of our company.
s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/87/7d/42/877d42cd01e307a77a83d4d37db3ff71.jpg
Maybe a version with the bearings swapped into Igus polymer bushings would make it even more futuristic and long lasting.
Do you forsee a market at some point providing users the ability to submit complete part designs for printing? (I.E. could a customer design a complete frame and have you guys print it?)
Proud of British engineering once more congrats robot, its bootifull (UK oldies will get this).
Shouldn't it be the other way around, to take andvantage of these 2 materials?
Progressive thinking, but it seems like you give a little and then have to take a little for that custom geometry.
Also, I have cracks in the gel coat (for want of a better description) around the lower pivot of my Nomad. Its been like that for over two years and its never progressed - purely cosmetic.
The bottom bracket is an alloy insert set in the carbon, as are all the pivot points. Look online you find plenty of pics of alloy inserts / joints in these apparent full carbon bikes.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raleigh_Chopper
Printed Titanium on road bikes maybe. Mountain bikes?
Shame it's not as pretty as mine: www.starlingcycles.com
Let's arrange UK custom built bike test!
robotbike.co/technology
full carbon is just fine - but lugs+carbon tubes is just asking for disaster - no matter how well those two are joined
Employees having anywhere near equal power in their relationship with employers is a complete fantasy born of trying to prop up laissez faire capitalism.
To all who argue that the employer has an unfair advantage or power over the employees you also must defend your position which actually does give power to the government to hold a gun to peoples heads and tell them what to do. So much for things such as "emotions and empathy". A little studying of history shows that governments don't behave well with power.
Rather then getting all high and mighty over others why don't we all just chose to respect each other as individuals and allow people to voluntarily act with each other? No, it won't usher in some utopia, but it's a lot better then having others over you with the power to seriously screw up your life.
I've got zero power over anyone in a business structure. ever. Unless there are laws against them pursuing profit at the cost of their workforce, but that puts power in hand of government, which is apparently like having a gun held to your head in some way that holding your next paycheck is not(at least from what I can tell of your post. I disagree, in that I at least have a vote over government. I don't have anything over a business.)
Furthermore, you're completely ignoring history. We HAD laissez faire capitalism. For essentially the entire 19th century. The laws we have now were written during the early 20th century in response to robber barons & others using laissez faire capitalism in order to enrich themselves completely at the cost of others, for example, using child labor(& worse conscripting orphans for it.)
If a 3rd party comes in and can provide an above market wage, then the demand for that position will go up and demand for other positions will go down. Unless you can increase the supply of that artificially high position, then there will be a shortage. Potential candidates will spend money in some way or another to "bid" for the too few open positions, up to the value of the increased wage. In the long run the net benefit will be lost. This also greatly distorts market prices. What if a lower-paying wage position is better in the long run because it gives you a skillset that will enable you to have a higher wage later in life (like an internship)?
What if the lower wage position (that is being forgone for the artificially higher wage) helps expand the industry that its in and it raises wages in the long run?
Who gets to pick and choose what roles in an economy should be artificially propped up, and what kind of accountability is there is the picker chooses wrong? What kind of incentive does this create? If there was some sort of ecnomy Czar who could pick which industries would have artificially high wages, how many corrupt people would try and get this position?
It is not empathetic to try and plan other peoples lives. The economic outcomes of planned economies is a mere shadow of what happens when there is a free market. Economics is neither moral nor immoral, it is the science of measuring outcomes.
On the other hand, if you don't like what Microsoft does you can buy an Apple product. If you don't like what GM does you can buy Ford. You can vote with your wallet. If you don't like how the US government, through civil forfeiture, stole more money from people without a trial than was stolen by burglars in 2014 you're out of luck. If you don't like how Obama (and Bush before him) bombs people with drones that kill 90% innocent civilians then too bad, you're paying for it anyways. If you don't like how government bails out millionaires who own billion dollar failing banks, then too bad you're paying for that as well.
The 19th century, when we had the most Laissez faire capitalism in our history, saw the greatest growth in the standard of living for the common man in our history as well. To quote the Nobel Prize winning economist, Milton Friedman,
"the record of history is absolutely crystal clear. That there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Savar_building_collapse
Holy fk... you can talk incredible self-righteous crap sometimes. Exploitation is a fact and it is done by major corporations, especially in clothing industry. Have it ever crossed your mind that private interest can bribe politicians and create regulations favorable to them?
I will say this: every organism seeks possibility for expansion. Nature is brutal, we can't save everyone in the world, at least at this point. Cruelty and not giving a fk are natural, just like submission. But don't tell me some fairy tales about good intentions of free market and greater good, because everything is relative. And most of those sweat shops makes stuff we don't need, the idea of making people feel great about buying stupid sht they don't need like mountain bikes is a fact. I love my carbon bike. I just don't want a medal for owning it, because I gave someone a job he wouldn't have otherwise.
Yes, sweatshops exist. However, most people who work in them are rationally making that choice. Working in most sweatshops is BETTER than the alternative which is usually sustenance agriculture. Sweatshops are a critical part of an economy transitioning from poor to rich. We in the West did it a hundred years ago.You can't jump from an illiterate farmer who's never been in a real building in his life, who can't count higher than 20 to someone who is capable of working in a modern office environment. Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, and there is no good choice. It is not exploitation to provide someone with a job that pays better than what they were doing before, even if it is low by our western standards. If you were to pay an artificially high wage, then you couldn't provide as many positions and it would distort market prices as I said above.
Workplace safety is a relative thing. No matter how much money an employer spends, you cannot make underwater welding as safe as graphic design. However, making a workplace safer costs money. Some people prefer to work in a more dangerous environment if they can get higher pay (this is called the Hedonic Wage Model). A firm can only pay an employee up to the productivity rate of that employee to stay in business. If it makes a workplace safer it must lower wages. How can a 3rd party (government) make that choice for someone? What if I disagree and would prefer a higher wage, even at the cost of more risk?
Yes, some people are exploited as slave labor. No denying that. There is a role for government to make sure people are not being coerced into action they do no consent to. This is not interfering in a market, this is protecting people from violence. HOWEVER, as with any action, there are unforeseen consequences. In my university studies we read about a sweatshop in Bangladesh that had enslaved orphans to make Nike t-shirts or something. We all agree that that is evil and wrong. Pressure from the West got that sweatshop shut down, and a group of economists studied what happened to the freed orphans. Immediately 1/3 of them died from malnutrition. Most of the rest ended up at worse jobs like child prostitution or cleaning out sewer pipes that only children could fit into. Very few ended up in school or permanent families since most were from the Untouchables caste.
I agree, there are evils and problems in the world. It is my position that history and evidence has clearly demonstrated that government action typically makes these problems worse.
I can vote with my wallet? bullshit. because MS or Apple or who the f*ck ever can spend a shit ton on whitewashing their image in advertising, & gain 100 customers for every one who "votes with their wallet."
Let me address something completely idiotic you said: you want to explain to me how Comcast is a government created monopoly when the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 made it completely illegal for local government to sign exclusivity deals with cable providers? They are ABSO-FRICKIN-LUTELY allowed to compete, but they ABSO-FRICKIN-LUTELY won't. & our consumer protections in this country have so little teeth at this point that they aren't even afraid to publically say it: arstechnica.com/business/2016/05/charter-wont-compete-against-cable-firms-because-it-might-buy-them-later
So you want to say that collusion never lasts? You provided one of the best possible examples of how wrong you are, as cable companies have had unwritten agreements to not compete with each other for, at the very least, the last 24 years. & the result is anything but a vibrant market: we pay twice as much for 1/10th the speed as other developed nations.
"I'll defend the position that government is better trusted with that power: simply put, regardless of how crappy our democracy may get, I still have a vote over who gets elected." Let me know when you make a vote and it actually counts. In the meantime, you don't have to spend a dollar with a company that you don't like, unless it happens to be some of the areas where the government forces you to buy something (health insurance???).
"I've got zero power over anyone in a business structure. ever. Unless there are laws against them pursuing profit at the cost of their workforce, but that puts power in hand of government, which is apparently like having a gun held to your head in some way that holding your next paycheck is not(at least from what I can tell of your post. I disagree, in that I at least have a vote over government. I don't have anything over a business.)"
You shouldn't have power over someone else's business. It's not yours.
"Furthermore, you're completely ignoring history. We HAD laissez faire capitalism. For essentially the entire 19th century. The laws we have now were written during the early 20th century in response to robber barons & others using laissez faire capitalism in order to enrich themselves completely at the cost of others, for example, using child labor(& worse conscripting orphans for it.)"
We've had a mixed economy from the beginning. There have been tariffs, central banks, and tons of government intervention in the economy in the 19th century. Read up on the rail roads during that time; most were heavily subsidized by the government and involved a lot of corruption. The 20th century has given us lots of your consumer protection acts and we're worse off for it. Read up on the wholesome meat act and research how the meat you eat is processed. Look at corn. Government subsidizes it and protects evil companies like Monsanto and see the havoc that's reading on our health. The big companies and government work together, against you and me. Giving the government more power to regulate those companies is the same thing as giving more power to the very companies you thinking are abusing others. Who do you think benefits from some costly new accounting regulation, kroger or your local trying to be green grocer? Kroger does, and it hurts the little companies. And if you're going to say things like private companies conscripting orphans then lets get into all the evil things governments have done (dropping atomic bombs, countless acts of genocide, non-stop wars...). It's not even a close comparison on who has committed more abuses.
No, my arguments can't be summed down to that, at all. but when you ignore any points I make so you can turn my arguments into that strawman, it's really easy to argue against, in't it?
Your other argument is that we're worse off without child labor, being fired for being injured on the job & receiving no medical help, or really any kind of workers rights. those are the things you're saying are better than the "wholesome meat act".
& oh look, an anti-GMO screed, (here, I'll give you a chance to educate yourself. go find an anti-gmo study. Now look & see if it was conducted by some guy who makes a shit ton of cash writing books about "GMO IS TEH DEBIL" you won't be able to find one.)
lets see, after that, you somehow tie more regulation into a large corporation having more power. That's some interesting metal gymnastics.
& then, somehow, you're going tie labor & consumer protections into people waging war, like somehow if there were no governments, then nobody would kill each other.
Truly, yours is a staggering intellect.
"I love how every Libertarian tells everyone else that their arguments are just "YOU WANT TEH GOBMINT TO BE IN CHARGE WHAT ARE U A COMMIE?!" "
I didn't call you a commie and now you're implying I don't know how to enunciate correctly. Strong argument.
"No, my arguments can't be summed down to that, at all. but when you ignore any points I make so you can turn my arguments into that strawman, it's really easy to argue against, in't it?"
I addressed some of your points. You pointed out that private businesses conscript children into labor, and ignore governments who've done the same thing and governments who conscript adults to fight unnecessary wars with other governments. You also pointed to the communications act that apparently hasn't satisfied your desires for regulation. I'd suggest reading more about those acts; specifically who pushed for them and who benefited from them. You need to find some alternative sources; not your standard school textbook.
"Your other argument is that we're worse off without child labor, being fired for being injured on the job & receiving no medical help, or really any kind of workers rights. those are the things you're saying are better than the "wholesome meat act"."
I didn't say we are worse off without child labor. I pointed out that you cherry picked this one thing and attributed it to private business while ignoring the fact that governments are the ones who "conscript" people. Governments also kill people. Check out this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE
""& oh look, an anti-GMO screed, (here, I'll give you a chance to educate yourself. go find an anti-gmo study. Now look & see if it was conducted by some guy who makes a shit ton of cash writing books about "GMO IS TEH DEBIL" you won't be able to find one.)""
If you want to eat GMO, factory farmed meat, heavily processed food then be my guest. Just don't force me to please.
"lets see, after that, you somehow tie more regulation into a large corporation having more power. That's some interesting metal gymnastics."
It's true! Do some research. See who donates to the people in government. Watch the revolving door between the regulators and industry. The people at the SEC, CDC, FDA, etc. usually held a high post in their respective industry or receive one after their time in office. You don't think there's some back scratching /quid pro quo going on there?
"& then, somehow, you're going tie labor & consumer protections into people waging war, like somehow if there were no governments, then nobody would kill each other."
I said voluntary exchange would not usher in some utopia. There are bad people/things in the world. Governments just take it to a whole new level. I'd be happy if we could just stick to the constitution in the US. It's not perfect, but it'd be a better place if our government actually obeyed it.
"Truly, yours is a staggering intellect."
I used to say some similar things to what you're saying. It wasn't until after college that I started reading books they didn't assign me in school. It took a number of years, but the stuff I read outside of school made a whole lot more sense, and was more factual, then the stuff I read in school.