I have not claimed our previous exchanges constitute a reasoned debate- quite the opposite.

I recall them being exactly the same evasion of the issues and serial name calling that you are repeating again here.

That is why I called you out on your claim- and you have failed to link to any case where you have provided a logical and fact based response. Its not my job to prove your baseless claims- in a contest of ideas if you make an assertion you are bound to provide fact based reasoned support for it- or concede that you cannot...which you have done via serial default.

Get it yet?

Critical debate and contest of ideas is actual proof of work - work you cannot perform.

'I won't reply again, unless you do what I've asked in the prior comments first.'

Oh the petulance! You sound like a civil servant on a power trip! Asking someone to go and read your dogma is not a contest of ideas.

You may be convinced of the dogma but you are unable to elucidate it convincingly when challenged.

All you have done is demonstrated that when invited to engage in a critical analysis, contest of ideas and debate over a very inclusive range of Libertarian-Austrian theory, you simply cannot or will not.