Youtube comments of Ōkami-san (@mweibleii).
-
259
-
199
-
113
-
113
-
97
-
88
-
84
-
81
-
59
-
51
-
49
-
46
-
43
-
40
-
38
-
38
-
36
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
As a scientist I can see why most scientists would not be republican, we're almost all atheists. Why would we be democrat? Most pure 'scientists' don't work in the free-market, we work for the State in one way or another, we work at Universities and government research centers. Further, most scientists have never had a job outside of academia and all they've ever known is liberal tripe. Lastly, I do find it interesting nearly 40% are neither. That's where I fall. Into the neither, and I'm a real scientist. Actually, right now, I'm heading over to a $400,000 microscope (which is one of the cheap ones) to take some images - it's wonderful work. I love it.
This video seems to me, to be Appealing to Authority as if what we scientists think about politics matters. It doesn't.
I find most, if not the overwhelming majority of scientists, are ignorant with regards to topics outside of their subdiscipline and probably know less than most of you in terms of what's happening politically. If it's not on the News, they probably couldn't be bothered (unless it's talk of cuts to funding - hence the voting preference toward Democrats). Maybe we're not as bad as the 1 in 5 functionally illiterate Government Schooled American public, but pretty f*cking close.
They/we also tend to bias and normalize to what they/we think they/we deserve. You know, I invested 15 years into my research career, I therefor automatically deserve a decent 6 figure salary - regardless of if what I produce is valued or isn't valued. That sort of attitude is common place. It can take 5 years or so to even start to see some results, and then it may not amount to anything. Or lead to a cure.
I actually think, with sky rocketing tuition, we may start seeing some changes afoot. I certainly know my fellow scientists worry there's change coming - everyone hates change, even scientists.
16
-
Does David also support raising the standards for admission and retention in the USA to that of Germany? Because, if so, about 80-90% of Americans attending Universities - won't be. See, Germany has an entirely different educational system. One that begins to differentiate students much much earlier. Most Americans wouldn't even make it past the testing requirements to enter a German University - that's a big savings. Most Americans who did make it, would fail out quite quickly - again, more savings. Hell, by the time we adopted the German system we'd SAVE money, because most American university students simply wouldn't BE university students.
My guess is, of those Americans that had the aptitude to gain entry into a University with German entry standards, those students of the accepted cohort would largely be Asian and White from the upper classes whose families could afford the good primary education needed to get into a German-styled University (as opposed to most Government schools) as well as family culture of education (most learning is valued because of the parents value of education - see China, Japan, Korea, Germany, Singapore, Finland, not America..... ). This happened in UC Berkeley - the population of Asian students rocketed from 3% to 40% as soon as the UC system stopped using race in their means testing (many so-called Liberals now want race brought back to unfairly discriminate against Asians). Look at what happened in Ann Arbor this year when a few black students were not given a placement because they couldn't compete at the level required to make it into UofM (even though they did quite well at their local Government school).
So, in short, the German system works in Germany but probably wouldn't be accepted by American voters here in the USA (where 1 in 5 Government schooled American is a functional illiterate) - simply because soon after, most Universities would be barren of students (probably within a few years of trying the German approach).
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
Did John just suggest 'conservatives' think humans should be put into cages and raped, whereas "liberals" support rehabilitation?
I'm fiscally conservative, I'm conservative on maintaining civil liberties, I'd love to see the markets deregulated so that the poor can attempt to compete in them, I'd love to see the USA return to sound money, I'd love to see income tax / labor tax repealed.
I'm also an atheist.
I'd also like to see all non-violent crimes that involve drugs, selling sex, against homosexual marriage etc... repealed - which would greatly reduce the numbers of people IN Federal funded rape-cages. I'd love to see the last 2 (to 3) POTUS put in those rape-cages for high-crimes against the American people.
I'd love to see Public School monopolies forced to compete against Charted Schools.
I'm sick and tired of this tired old Left / Right, Democrat/Republican, Liberal/Conservative game being played by MSM, so-called non-MSM, politicians and 90% of the general public.
15
-
15
-
15
-
Hey! I watched the trilogy extended cut and then I listened to a fantastic set of audiobooks of the trilogy (excellent - just perfect). So, now I'm pretty much burned out on LoTR. I have ZERO interest in Lord of the RINGS, RINGS of power (fun fact, no rings in season 1). I hated how Hollyweird destroyed StarWars, StarTrek, Wheel of Time, Foundation, Shannara, etc.... I just hate their narrative and I hate the society they're morphing the USA into. I can't stand NPCs. I'm pretty much done with these woke jerks and would prefer to bifurcate the USA and let them all have NYC and CA. I don't want to come in contract with these losers, posers, and whinny grifting liars. If someone conservative created a modern Mennonite type community id happily convert from Atheism to whatever religion and move there.
15
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
You and I have two very different definitions of the word 'ghetto'. Pick out a ghetto on Google Earth and if I have time I'll visit (assuming it's not far from where I am). I don't disagree with many of your other points, though I'd suggest the Ainu and Ryukyu are not exaclty (in any way shape or form) close to comparison to the ethnic ghettos in the USA and EU. There are no Ainu no-go-zones. But there are plenty of no-go-zones (if you're the wrong color) in the USA or the wrong color and religion in Europe (heck, even in Western Sydeny AU). I don't know if you can generalize about old people - I think many do think about the future, it's just that central banking has deistored the price mechanism and general sense of value along with it. I don't agree with your black hole analogy. There's pretty good evidence that the standard of living in Japan has continued to outpace most of the Western World - and that's given their problems with their economy. The problem is the way things are measured. Anyway, I stand by my assertion, Japan is very safe (I don't think they have a problem with population - there's nothing wrong with depopulation as well - this must happen at some point, the earth can only support so many animals, humans included) and that is a direct result of their monoculture. Also, I'd like to know if there's data on Japanese literacy normalized to IQ level. Think about it like this, the empircal scientific data show African Americans have an average IQ 87. A hundred years ago, an IQ of 85 was concidered mentally retarded. Is it possible for the average person with an IQ of 75 to competently learn to read and write in English - let alone Japanese? A low welfare state and difficult language will prevent immigration (see EU for how this is happening in the oppostie direction).
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
Hopefully Warren can win and become just as much of a loser as Obama - maybe then these brainwashed State-bots (see: Cenk) will finally, maybe, start to see the State can not fix the problems IT CREATED.
In the past there was enough free-market capital to steal by the State and make it appear like the State was fixing problems. Those days are gone. They've sold so much debt on future generations so far into the future there is no more to sell. The State has burned all the furniture to warm the house (that furniture is your children's future labor, and their children, and theirs, it's your grandparents savings - nothing is left, we are out of furniture to burn. Thank you "Progressivism" you tightly regulated our markets where no one can start a business, you gave the State control over our money, which it has ruined, you gave the State progressive income tax, which hammers the savings of the middle class, you allowed the State to liscence everything from flower sellers to medicine [which is a total mess], you allowed the State to regulate our education and now we have functionally illiterate imbeciles for "Citizens".).
Thus, I hope Warren is elected and I hope Democrips fill the Senate and the House just to watch as they finally do the inevitable, and burn the only thing left is to burn - the actual house itself. IOWs the State will have to start selling off parts of the USA itself (well, it could start WWIII and burn off the people). Either way, Warren isn't 'fixing' anything.
Asking the State to fix something is akin to asking a child molester to be your babysitter.
9
-
9
-
A first step?
Yes, why stop at $15? How about $20 or $25 an hour? And free medical care - the employer should pay for that too. Oh, and free day-care. And a 2 month vacation (paid) and how about travel expensive?
The fact is the slightly-upper middle class use regulations to stop competition. Thus, there's no business to hire and create competition for labor-hour sellers which would in a free-market gasp may my tongue burn out push up the price per hour of labor. With hardly any business we're stuck with chain stores that can economize to the regulations and therefor not many employers in "free market' America (what a laugh). Also, public schools are pumping out low-skill laborers (not too many, if any, public school public unioned public servant public school teacher can teach free market enterprise). Thus, public schools are pumping out workers and driving down the price. Simple supply and demand. Oh, but the middle class sure does love it's 'free' public school along with all of the idiotic regulations that prevent them from creating business.
Change We Can Believe In.
Hope and Change.
I was in Japan last year, and saw a small little restaurant near a popular tourist attraction that was up a winding set of old stairs and in the back of a woman's house. No f*cking way would that ever be legal in "Free market" America. No way. Never. Not in a million years. Americans love their millions and million of regulations. Americans love their free public education. Americans love their Central Planners. Americans love Hope but they sure as hell do not like Change.
Oh well, we can slowly become a third world nation again. How nice for us.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Of course seniors love ObamaCare. Thanks to rolling over 30 year T-bonds they got greatly subsidized university, thanks to strong unions they bankrupted many of our best companies (my father for instance, retired from GM at age 47 making more than my brothers, 30 year old, make working 60 hours a week trying to get by any job they can get - his comment was, f*ck-em, I worked for my money), thanks to 50 year municipal bonds, they got lots of infrastructure jobs and use of excellent public space, thanks to public unions they got unbelievably great benefits - many get a 13th month bonus each year, full heatlh, lots of vacation time, oh, and the Fed bailed out their retirement plans, gave them cheap loans to buy houses to rent out to their grand-kids, rent-seeking allowed them to block competition and secure markets for themselves - and on and on it goes.
The seniors of today are the richest generation that has ever lived in the history of the human race. They got that rich by taking out a long line of credit on their kids and their grandkids and lived great. Their Millennial generation great grand kids are getting stuck with their health-bills.
Do Seniors love ObamaCare? Yes, I believe they do. That comes as no surprise. Of course, their grandkids will have to go with a lot less, no mom at home taking care of the kids, nope - she'll have to work. No vacations with the kids. 7-11 doesn't have that kind of benefit.
Oh well.... until the Millennials grow a pair and take a stand, their grandparents will continue to take them to the cleaners, and loving every minute of it.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Let's just go ahead and qualify a few of the statements - least this appear to be another case of fake, or misleading, "news".
1. Most Americans do not own stocks in the stock market.
2. Most of the jobs created under Obama were/are part-time or contract (>94%)
3. Thank god the popular vote doesn't count. If anything, we need to restrict the vote to people who are literate and can pass a simple on-screen quiz about how the government works. That alone will do a lot to end the tyranny of Progressive Socialism.
4. George Soros donated 33 million in grants to the racist movement known as Black Lives Matter via his Open Society Foundations. Those are the racist thugs who pushed Sanders off his podium. Notice how quickly that boot-licker caved in and supported Clinton.
Recall, this foundation is pushing for even more immigration - we'll see how that works out for Progressive Socialist Utopia / Europe (which is turning nationalistic - thankfully).
5. 57% of whichever demographic they chose to 'poll'.... hahahahaha.... talk about a low bar.
Look, TRUMP's victory is evidence that Obama's policies were a total failure (see: ObamaCare). As for what Trump can and cannot do? HE shouldn't be doing anything other than making sure CONgress follows the US Constitution. Making America Great Again is not in the job description of POTUS. Nor is fixing the economy. Sadly, people always want a Nanny State in the form of a dictator to take care of them - and that, I believe, is the end of the road for us here in the USA. No, not the next decade, or three - but, probably within our lifetimes. And probably from the far Left. Though, a far Right dictator is equally as likely. And the David's of the world will be cheerleading us all the way - as long as the dictator is on his side, taking from THEM and giving to US, for the "Good of Society".
5
-
5
-
French, Italians, Germans, English - these we all different 'races' in the 1800s. I personally know Japanese, Korean and Chinese each of whom have told me they are different 'races'. It's clear to see that 'race' is a social construct. Does DNA play a role in height? Yes, it does. That's not a race. Does DNA play a role in IQ. Probably. That isn't a race either. Does DNA play a role in eye color, hair color, skin color, eye structure, bone structure? Yes. Those aren't races either.
If you're Asian looking and grow up in the the USA, speak English, dress American and have ZERO cultural connection to the East. You're an "American". I'd argue you more English than Asian as you'd share most of your culture from the English (even if you lived in the USA).
Saying you're an "Asian American" only makes sense IF you are suggesting an Asian "cultural" heritage (maybe you were born in Asia or speak Mandarin, Japanese, Korean, etc....).
It makes as much sense as saying I'm a green eyed American. Or suggesting a green eyed Asian is a different 'race' from brown eyed Asians.
I hope that clears things up a little.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
We waste $50 BILLION each and every year on the Department of Education/Stupidification - and have been paying for this mess since 1979 with NO gain in education when measured on all aptitudes and have actually regressed relative to many other nations.
Why do people think taking money out of the hands of the middle class and giving it to some moron bureaucrat is a good idea?!? We're now paying more tax than what we fought the Revolutionary War over. Income Tax / Labor Tax is an abomination.
Not that it matters.
There's nothing to do now - so I think we should elect as many Socialist Progressives into CONgress as is possible and sink this mess. Some people need to see it to believe it and so that's the only viable solution. Just tax the hell out of the rich, middle class, poor - everyone. Give it all to the State and let them start more phony wars, bribe more people with boondoggles, the full 9 yards and finally sink this mess of a nation. Finally, when the State has total control over all aspects of our lives, then, maybe, when we're starving to death, people like David will think, Oh, now I see why.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I've said this numerous times, thank the Gods Japanese favor the right to remain and preserve their indigenous monoculture. Its simply so much freer in Japan. No police state needed to enforce progressive ideology. Japanese cities are clean, no graffiti, ultra safe. Children and old ladies can walk anywhere in ANY Japanese city. There are no 'bad parts of town' in Japan. This simply doesn't exist. No slums, no ghettos and no cheap labor force. Just Japanese.
We can leave stock out on the street at night with no worry of it being stolen. We have beer, wine, cigarette and even liquor (rarer) vending machines sitting by the roads with no worry of them being pilfered. We have play ground equipment that's actually fun to play on, not the bubble wrap like in the USA. No worries about being sued. We have bars that seat 5 - that's normal, these would be illegal in the USA. We have restaurants out of the back room of someone's house, again, these wouldn't pass the millions of regulations that keep Americans safe from one another.
Thank the Gods the Japanese have preserved their human right to retain their indigenous monoculture.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
accordio13 Firstly, in high concentrations, Hg is poisonous and it's a neurotoxin. Children should not have high exposures of Hg. Or Pb for that matter.
That said, Hg is normally found in low concentrations in: eggs, beef, rain water, soil, chicken, fish, and others.
Here's the preservative molecule that contains an element of Hg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal#mediaviewer/File:Thiomersal-Skeletal-Structure-SVG.svg
Much like eggs or rainwater, there's no good evidence to form a strong cogent argument Hg in the flu vaccine causes autism. It may. I mean, it is possible. It's reasonable to test. It's reasonable to limit exposure. What Thom is doing is a violation of reason. He and other's like him are causing hysteria.
Secondly, I'm certainly more than supportive of ongoing testing and, if the company can make a dose without Hg, simply price the non Hg containing vaccine double and sell that side by side. If you do not want the Hg containing vaccine, then pay more. If you don't care, pay less.
They truth is, no one knows what's causing the increase in autism. It may be an ion, it may be pesticides, it may be long term day care during formative years, it maybe modern society and plastics, or a combination of any or all and others.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
WhiskeyWhiskers
That may be true, but the fact is, ALL jobs are discriminatory, it's referred to as a job interview. Where they size you up, and make a discriminating choice. Sure, it may or may not be the ones we're taught to care about (skin color, gender) but it will be something: accent, mannerism, clothing, etc...
As one of my close mates is an African Australian, he's pulled over all the time - about once a month. I've never been pulled over. He actually leaves early for important meetings or dinner invites because he expects he may be pulled over.
There's just no way to 'stop' discrimination - attractive people are statistically hired more often based on their looks. It's just the way people are. It's why I think we need as much freedom to create businesses as possible - so that there's a large demand and the truly best are paid what they're worth, not what sex they are or how good they look, or who they know.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Nice that David produces zero evidence of anything (along with all the hysteria in the comments section). Firstly, half my family lives in Japan, I spend a good deal of time in Japan, I was just in Japan a few months ago. Secondly, I've worked with radioactive particles (as part of medical research) in the past. Thirdly, the facts:
1. The radiation is so diluted that NO the California coast is NOT being dosed by Fukushima. Nuclear weapons testing conduced by the USA put orders of maginitde MORE radiation into the Earths atmosphere and it didn't raise the radioactive level of the Pacific Ocean (or any other Oceans). We have that data. It's one microsievert. That's 1/10 a single day's normal exposure from the sun. If you walked outside today for an hour - that'd be that much.
2. Thus, no, radioactive particles are not causing dead sea-life in San Francisco and no 'your friend' did not catch mutated Tuna somewhere once while at Band Camp. Dead sea-life is most likely due to the changes caused by increasing CO2 absorption which is shifting bicarbonate into carbonic acid. One more time, the USA put magnitudes MORE radioactive particles into Earth's atmosphere testing nuclear weapons. This WAS DONE. We have the data. If there were to be an effect of radiation on sea life it would have happened at some point from 1940-1980.
3. Yes, you DO have to worry about radioactive particles in the sea life NEAR Fukushima. Yes, it is possible if a radioactive particle got into the food chain and you could injest it. Believe it or not, you do all the time. That's why we talk about dose. So, you do HAVE radioactive particles inside you right now. Thankfully not that many and unless you live on Honshu, or in Fukushima Prefecture this isn't something you have to worry about.
4. Chernobyl was a much larger nuclear catastrophe relative to Fukushima.
5. Radioactive uranium and polonium naturally dissolves in seawater and has for the last 2 billion years. The oceans therefore have a naturally higher background radioactive becquerel count. Yes tuna and other large fish have radioactive particles in them. AND SO DO YOU.
6. Radioactive waters NEAR Fukushima are higher than normal and you should not allow young children to swim in those waters due to possible radioactive cesium exposure.
7. The leaking radioactive water will need to by dealt with - probably through evaporation which it is what the USA did when 3 mile island melt down.
8. Yes, the place is a mess and yes people will have to clean it up. No, homeless people are not forced to work in nuclear fall out zones. Jesus David - Japan has a general welfare program BETTER than that in the USA. Japan also doesn't suffer from the welfare housing slums because Japanese generally feel shamed for taking a handout other people's taxes paid them. Unlike in the USA where collecting a handout is totally disconnected from the middle class being taxed to death.
Japan is in many ways a much freer country in terms of civil liberty. You can gasp drink a large soda in Japan. Bicycle without a helmet. Vending machines sell cigarettes and beer gasp right out there where anyone could buy them. You can open small home businesses without as many regulations found in the USA making it easier for poor people to create work instead of taking general welfare.
Why are there homeless? For the same reason you find homeless all over England and all over Sydney Australia. Some people do not like to live on general welfare and choose to live on the streets. The same is true in Japan.
Thank the GODS we do not have too many David's inside Japan. Japanese people are generally resistant to this sort of propaganda. Oh, and unlike in the USA, Japanese in general don't trust their government. They think it's funny how Americans like David flag wave for Obama and for years (even now) you can find comical shirts that say Yes We Can taking the piss out of your average ignorant American. Yes, you Americans are seen somewhat as naive and a joke EVEN in Japan!
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
cyborganic99
While "God did it" may seem plausible, it's not the real answer. More people thought "God did it" in 1950 then in 2010. In 1910 you needed to know how to read BEFORE being allowed into a Public School. Now many Public School graduates are functionally illiterate.
Stop and ask yourself this: Did I, or you, write anything logical? Or anything rational? Do you know the difference? Can you write a logical sentence? Is that even possible or does logic require a couple sentences. How many forms of logic do you know? Who invented logic? Who are the top 3 most famous Empiricists? Rationalists? What is Descartes famous for in mathematics? How is Science different from Natural Philosophy? What is an ANOVA used for? And etc...
I'm sure "God did it" is not the reason 99.99% of Americans don't understand these basic concepts whereas educated Americans of 100 years ago probably did. The problems with Education are structural and can not BE fixed. Children are not cars, they cannot be stamped off an assembly line, learning doesn't happen like that.
Anyway, I stand by my statement, we need to elect as many Social Progressives as we can into CONgress. Including the couple jerk-offs with the ad hominems here in this thread. Just keep electing Social Progressives into office. That's the solution.
The good thing is, this IS going to happen. While Millennials overwhelmingly don't trust Government, they also overwhelmingly support greatly expanding it. So, Public School does do one thing correct.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Debt taken out in the name of another person is immoral. Using force against this person in order to force them to pay back your loan - is immoral. Forcing someone to labor for your benefit is commonly referred to as slavery. Saying slavery is okay, because it's 'good for "The Nation", "The Gods", "Gods", "Murica", etc....doesn't change this immorality.
Dear Millennials,
Don't play the Right vs Left paradigm. Your Grandparents, The Babys, don't understand that they're destroying you and your life. They enjoyed the fruits of their parents savings (who ironically also leave a lot of debt for you to pay), Baby's admittedly worked hard - but no where nearly enough to satisfy their ambitions (like retiring at 47 [my father] or 55 [his friend]) so they (A) used regulations to rig the markets [this is called regulatory capture and rent seeking and is why you can't find a job] (B) took out HUGE loans to pay for their parents healthcare (your great grand parents) so they wouldn't have to (C) own >80% of equities (you just bailed out) and (D) are taking you to the cleaners with ObamaCare/BoomerCare. They also used unions to ensure that, as they aged and got fat and lazy, they'd keep their good job - which is why Public Unioned School teachers can make 6 figures while at the same time graduating functional illiterates at a rate of 1 in 5 (20%).
I've seen this (and see it) in Japan - so it's not just an American thing.
The Baby's are NOT going to leave you anything. It's not like, as they die, suddenly all these jobs open up. They don't. Most of their jobs are useless make work that they made with their unions (government and private) and those jobs vanish with them.
Yours Truly,
Gen X
PS: Yes, it was hard living under them. But, not as hard as you have it. There was still a little crumbs left here and there. Some of us became moderately successful. But, make no mistake - the Baby Generation is taking you to the cleaners. I see it every day - I work with them. They live in 'me me me me me me me me' world. Ever see those seagulls in Nimo? THOSE are your grandparents.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Herve Boisde
Limiting money in politics isn't going to prevent people from legally taking jobs in the private sectors they once regulated while in government. It happens ALL the time.
I work with Public Servants who can blow through $50 million and not even think twice about it. The LAST, very very very LAST thing they think about is 'Public Service" I can promise you that much. Just like anywhere, they work for their own personal ambitions. Only, unlike a private company, they can reliy on you being taxed to pay them. Oh, and they couldn't care less who's in government so long as the tax money keep rolling in.
You can't legally stop a person from working - unless you want to live in some communist shithole where the State dictates what jobs you can and can not do for life.
People will always be bought off, and those not bought off, don't care about you anyway.
Why would they?
You'll pay regardless. Or go to jail.
Not that any of this matters. The government is not going to be limited. Exactly the opposite actually. We will continue to lose civil liberties, we will be less free, we will lose our personal privacy and the State will grow. People like you are in the majority and you will ensure we have more Government and less freedom.
So, you're in luck, we get UN-LIMITED Government, less prosperity and normalize to a lower standard of living.
A story as old as time.
Absolutely nothing new.
Thank the Gods I can legally move and live elsewhere.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
For the most part, companies do regulate themselves. This is the fact. When the State regulators used to stop by our restaurant, which was maybe once in 6 months, they'd ring up 2 weeks ahead of time. Again, companies ARE regulating themselves - anyone who think's the Government is regulated companies, or that companies only prepare quality product because they're worried about the regulators who never show up, is only fooling themselves.
If the government didn't crowd out the regulation market with it's unfare anit-competition advantages of being the State (and pretend to regulate) then this would open up market space for private regulatory companies to form (and would create tax paying jobs instead of taking jobs and costing tax money).
Go try and compete against the government - try to offer a business solution to better regulation. You'll go broke trying to compete against the State. It's Fascism. Thus, very few people do.
Organic WAS privately regulated - and the people who did the certification really DO care about high quality organics. But, they're slowly being put out of business by the State.
As an example take California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF) which is a private certifier. If people care, then they'll buy CCOF certified food. This gives CCOF an incentive to do a good job, or they'll go bust. But, guess what? The USDA is now moving into the organic certification business - and that's exactly what these "Government Agencies" really are. They're tax-payer funded businesses. They do a SHIT quality job and they use TAX money to put real business out of business. But, make no mistake, they ARE a business. It's just most of you have no idea how the Government really works. They so-called "Agencies" are forms of Fascism. They work hard to drive Private companies out of business and invade those markets ruling them with monopoly privilege because they are funded by tax payers. They have NO incentive (just like any other monopoly) do provide quality for money - which is why they don't. The "Public Servants" who run these so-called "Agencies" (which are actually businesses) are overly paid and do a shit job. With no market to tell them to go bust, they can do as lazy a job as they like - and we MUST pay for them.
It's called FASCISM Cent, look it up.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
SuxorAoeBj
Germany (I've only visited once) reminds me of Japan (where I've lived in the past) - only Germans are even more 'by the book' than the Japanese. And then the Swiss seem to take this to an all new level of OCD. Which is fine - for them. It works because it's part of the culture.
Our problem in the USA is we have an apathetic public, the largest government in human history. Our large government is the largest polluter in human history (yet is charged with cleaning the environment), consumes the most energy in human history (yet is charged with managing out energy), holds more non-violent 'criminals' than the USSR or Communist Chinese could dream of (yet is charged with protecting our freedoms), lies us into never ending war after never ending war at a cost of trillions. We have a central banking cartel that put us trillions in debt to bail out the rich - and this same bank CAUSED the GFC. We live under a sea of millions and millions of rent-seeking regulations (like needed a licence to cut hair, or arrange flowers, or fix a computer) all to prevent competition through regulatory capture. And on and on it goes.
What worked in the USA was a limited government, freedom of association, law and sound money. Such a system is the most efficient, the most moral (outside of Anarchy, according to Kantian Ethics) and does deliver the prosperity that everyone hopes for. Is it stable? No. Is it possible to fall through the cracks? Yes. But, it delivers the most prosperity to the most people.
There's already thousands of PhDs in the USA without jobs. The problem isn't access to education - the problem is a severe lack of freedom. This in turn has changed the USA from being a producer (like Germany) to a consumer-only Walmart for China.
Anyway, I may move back to Japan. I feel freer in Japan in many ways. It's more peaceful in Japan too. Children can walk through any area of any city carefree. Most USA cities have areas where the police don't even go to. I'm beginning to think the problems in the USA are unfixable. Probably, sometime in the next 100 years, some of the States will secede. MI as an example, is about the same size as Germany. I see no reason why such a state couldn't better function as a country. CA has the world's 7th largest economy - again, they could make their own country (or two, or three). Smaller countries have governments that are more representative of their people who live in them.
3
-
3
-
3
-
This ia what I hate about Cenk.
1. There is no such thing as a 'Conservative' - this is just an idiotic label. It an Atheist (me) who believe in COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS over that of more tax and waste a 'Conservative'? Oh, and my family isn't so-called 'White'.
2. Cenk then goes on to build a strawman when he says so-called Conservatives don't 'give a damn' about other races. NO Cenk, even us 'other races' don't believe more money is the answer - in fact, more money often makes the problem worse.
3. Next, Cenk then perpetuates the MYTH that 'Race' exists. Sorry Cenk, but RACE does NOT exist. There's more more genetic diversity between two 'Blacks' then between a 'White' and a 'Black;.
4. EVIDENCE. I have a clue, why not look up some evidence. There are numerous examples of more money being spent AND outcomes going DOWN. While at the same time, there's many examples of voucher-schools TURNING DOWN MONEY and doing TWICE AS GOOD in terms of educational outcomes. This suggests the REAL problem is competition and reward for REAL outcomes.
5. Lastly, Public Schooling is not structurally sound as far as 'learning' is concerned. Firstly, children should be assigned by competence not by age. Secondly, girls do better in a public school structured environment relative to boys who need breaks about every 20 min. The skills learned are for factory work, not working in the new economy based mainly on service. Public Schools would be better off acting more as a part time testing and sports are while real learning is done in small tailored groups per topic for a few months in stead of shifting like a cog from topic to topic.
The FACT is most students graduate HATING schooling (not all, but many) and you can see this by the fact the immediately quite trying to study as soon as they graduate from school. They don't want to learn anything anymore. School ground the love of learning out of them.
In short, this piece is an excellent example of demagoguery and propaganda. No facts and all appeal to emotion.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It's not possible to apply the Scientific Method to the problem of the economy (Progressivism is the ideas we use "Science" to solve problems). Some information problems can not be solved by science. IN terms of the economy - this is why we NEED sound money and GASP capital and profit. An example would be my coffee cup, "I" have a 'value' for it, you OTOH have a different 'value' for it. With sound money, we both can express our individual value at the point of purchasing the cup. The problem with today's economy is it is NOT capitalism, it's a problem of fascist.
Also, Cenk is mistaken about Communism, it's not a problem of 'human nature' (see above example) its a problem of information and value is subjective, the SM is applied to measure objective reality - NOT subjective experiences. Cenk is also mistaken about Capitalism. This idea about 'ripping someone's neck out' completely came out of nowhere and is totally meaningless and have nothing at all to do with capital (savings). Our problem is we no longer have sound money - thus we no longer have a sound economy. We also have too much regulation (which is why the poor can't compete as they can't hop through the million hoops to start offering goods and services). And we have an out of control military industrial complex wasting all of our capital.
The list goes on, but the point is Cenk has an opportunity to make a valid point and completely shows his total ignorance of even basic economics. It'd be like pretending to be an interpreter and not knowing the structure of the language and giving advice in how to speak it by muttering a few words you heard used in it. This is Cenk when he talks about the economy.
Cenk - look up profit, capital, savings, value, subjective, objective and learn how these are applied in free markets (oh, and look up what that means as well).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Rathelm MC
You say my explanation is overly simplistic and then ask me another question that will be extremely simple.
The short answer: My father's labor was worth what he could demand from the free-market. The slightly more complex answer: America has no free-markets (you can skip to the last two sentences for the answer if you'd prefer).
Yes, through the use of the UAW, he and his fellow workers were able to 'negotiate' unimaginably high salaries with wonderful benefits and retirement packages. Of which, they are enjoying right now. As I stated, my father retired at 47, and he makes more per week from GM (which went bankrupt and was 'bailed out') than most workers in the USA do working.
Certainly much more than his children, my two brothers. They're lucky to do 'lawn care' for the retired babyboomers of GM.
I do not have a problem with private unions - IN a free-market. We don't have a free-market. Actually, we Americans despise freedom with a passion.
As a side note: I also worked at GM, while at University (chemical engineer). While I was not part of the Union, I could say I was paid what the free-market valued my labor-hours worth in USD. Which was quite a bit. But, this would be a white-lie, because we don't have free-markets. We live as Citizens of a hyper-regulated State that uses fiat currency. Which is a good thing - for my father. Because when GM went bankrupt, political levers of power could be pulled and the rest of America's children now pay his very high priced retirement. How nice, for him. Some of that 18 trillion is paying for his nice beer in his 3000 square foot house on acreage. I'm sure he'd say thank you, if he even understood how future debt is paying for his present livelihood even after a lifetime of UAW ensured high salaries.
So, in summary, the complex answer to your question of "Was he worth the price per labor-hour and retirement package he got?" Well, because we don't have free-markets and we don't use sound money - we will never know the answer that question.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
We can apply David's Regressive Socialistic thinking to all sorts of things.
- Why not make eating meat illegal? It causes all sorts of health problems. Think about the children. They can eat State regulated tofu and supplements.
- Why not make beer and alcohol illegal? It causes all sorts of health problems. Think about the children.
- Why not make snowballs illegal? Children might get hurt, or have their feelings hurt or learn the wrong behaviors. Just ban it, for the good of society.
- Of course fishing has to be illegal. That involves meat, which is now, in the Progressive/Regressive Socialist's society, illegal.
- Old people - ban them. They've passed their productive usefulness for the good of the State.... errrr "Society" and so they can be turned into Soylent Green.
Essentially, the Regressive Socialist will ban any and every adult activity they deem 'bad' for society. What's good or bad is just made up in their head on the spot - exactly like a Theocracy.
Banning smoking is no different than banning any other activity adults enjoy and would like to freely engage in. These Progressive's are sociopaths. Literally, they're worse than the Theocrats. Oh, and I do not smoke. And when in Japan - I simply choose not to go to restaurants that have open smoking. The good thing about Japan, is unlike the USA, it's pretty easy to open a business. So people are not stuck working at (no one is 'forced' to work at) a smoking establishment as they can easily open up a shop of their own. Most of these would be illegal in the USA for various health and safety violation. See, in Japan, adults are still treated as adults.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Peahces was supportive of Mario which was nice and she wasn't too OP-ed (but, a little). I'd prefer if Mario saved her though. At least once, even accidentally. And the Bowser song was AWESOME 👍👍👍
Peaches, Peaches,
Peaches, Peaches, Peaches,
Peaches, Peaches,
Peaches, Peaches, Peaches,
Oh,
I love you,
yeah!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I'll give one example and you tell me where the money comes from: This is a case not long ago (in Australia) an unemployed man came into my colleague's office. He's never worked. He could, but why do that when he can live on the dole? Anyway, he's had two heart attacks. The 'Free" Australian healthcare paid ~ $97,000 for his first surgery and $133,000 for his second. He was advised to 'diet' and stop drinking and smoking. He told my friend to 'F*CK OFF' and "fix me heart". So, across his useless life he is expected to cost the tax payer (the ones that GASP make enough of a GASP profit to pay tax) around $1.2 million before he finally dies.
My question to you is: Where does the money come from?
Well, I'll tell you where: It comes from the shit-quality higher education Australians have become normalized to. It comes from the age of retirement being raised into the 60s (and eventually 70s and 80s). It comes from BOTH mom and dad working their arses off and having little time with their kids - who are usually placed into daycare. It comes from those who are working, working weekends - at a lower pay, with higher tax (and a lot of inflation tax). It comes from selling houses and land to immigrants so that there is no 'Australia' per say, not the one I moved to 15 years ago, that place has been sold off little by little. It no longer exists - but the debts do. So, the ultimate cost is society itself. You may think you're getting something for free, or that the State-run healthcare is better, you're not and it's not. Have you worked in a public hospital? I can promise you, the very very VERY LAST thing anyone considers is the healthcare outcome of the people who end up there. "The People" are the very LAST of the LAST to think about. This is a simple fact - and if you worked in a public hospital you'd know this. Just like everywhere, everyone is trying to make more money, doing as little as possible, while hoping to retire early. Unlike in the Free-Market (which we do not have), there's no market-incentive through competition to keep costs down and quality high. So instead costs are 'regulated' and quality is low. VERY LOW. And, funny enough, Australia is totally dependent on other free-market healthcare systems to deliver the medicines they need. If there was no free-market / USA, then AU simply would not have the technology NOR the medicines. Medicines don't just fall out of the sky. fMRI don't just pop into the world from out of the void. They are built by the free-market (well, it's not really free, but should be - and is as close as we have). So, ponder these before wishing for free healthcare in the USA. Because it will bankrupt what's left of the public system. AND to be honest, I'd LOVE for Bernie's $15 for 15 (nonsensical) as well as "Free" public healthcare - because this would finally bring the State to its knees in bankruptcy. Think Cuba or Venezuela. This "Reality" is exactly the kind of 'Medicine' American Leftists need to eat.
3
-
Did you ask Neanderthals if you could move to THEIR Land? Anyway, what actually makes a 'society' worth living in - is peacefully interacting with one another without the threat of violence against morally innocent humans who, through no fault of their own, happened to be born in one Nation State or another here on this Earth. Yes, nothing is free - and we invented something called health care insurance where 'We all pay into together - VOLUNTARILY". Who are YOU to decide what I should or should not buy? What, I happen to be born your neighbor and so I have to pay for your healthcare? You're what? Going to send the police over to my house and arrest me if I refuse - for what "The Good of the Society"? THAT'S what you think is what makes a 'country' worth living in. Again, no. While it is probably hard for you to see, the use of the State to provide healthcare, university, and etc... will, in the end, destroy Denmark as a society. At least in my opinion. I know it's hard to see, but Socialism (even in a mixed economy like Denmark) will usher in the end of Western society. Or so I think. Yes, Denmark has a relatively high general IQ, around 100. That's a great help. But that will not always be the case. As the Danish become multicultural (like the USA) the IQ will drop - and with it the ability to run your Welfare State. At the same time, thanks to social, Danish are no longer having enough children to pay for the welfare state - as is, let alone in the future. Stop and think of it like this: Denmark only has so many goods and services. Money is used to distribute these. What do you think produces MORE of these: A regulated market, or a free-market (which is to say, free people able to trade under common law). Of course the later - this has been shown empirically time and time again. The second thing to consider: IF there are only so many goods and services (and there are a finite amount), AND it is possible to redistribute these WITHOUT the threat of violence (the State) - then this should be done IF you want society to be moral. NOT to do this, is to allow immorality to sink into society - and it will, and it has. Look, Japan has a higher IQ, has a homogenous society, and we are suffering many of the same problems. Some caused by the Welfare State - and others just a natural consequence of the economic cycle. Though, the central bank has a large part of the blame too. Luckily, we're 99.8% homogenous. Japan is richer than Denmark, but get this, we only accept 14 refugees, and we only pay around $150 a week in 'Welfare". While this may seem harsh - I promise you, it's for the best. Just things to concider.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
Heads Tails You're going to cherry pick ONE data point? Jesus, you call THAT a reasoned argument? Can you tell me how many Teacher Unions there were in 1940? How about Blacks voting? How many Blacks could vote in 1940? How about Welfare? How much generational welfare was their in 1940? Or a LONG list of a million other things - not to mention WWII! Secondly, tax doesn't create goods and services you dolt. The USA has NO PROBLEM raising capital, it raises over a trillion dollars a year. That money can redistribute WHO gets what, but it doesn't create goods or services. Those require productive investment and production. Which, according to YOUR logic, should be taxed at a higher rate - thereby limiting goods and reducing services, which will raise their price due to the reduced supply. Tax is a means to an end, not the end. Someone has to produce the good or service you want to consume. It doesn't just POOF in out of the ether because someone prints off some zeros on the end of a dollar, or prints more dollars, or collects more tax, or sells more bonds. Starting to see how it works? There's a reason WHY the tax rate was dramatically lowered and if you think people were living high on the hog during the War or immediate thereafter, you are smoking crack. Life was god damn tough on people in 1940 and they often went without and sometimes went hungry. So, my advice is you pick up a book and read first next time.
2
-
Midas Snap Just who made your PC? An American? How about your smart phone? How about your modem? Your TV? Americans choose what they want to buy and consistently choose lower quality that is cheap over higher quality that is more expensive. Don't blame companies for meeting the market demand. I've known company owners who WANTED to keep their company in the USA but couldn't because Americans refuse to buy a higher quality product at a higher price - even when they'd save money in the long run as the lower quality made in China will often need replaced in a year whereas made in the USA may last a lifetime. Blame the consumer, do NOT blame the person who is providing the goods and services you want. Further, if you have high level skills (medical, coding, engineering, biotech, ...) there is PLENTY of jobs in the USA. If you don't, then go retrain because low skilled are never ever going to pay much money. This is a fact of life, and has been for 5000 years.
That aside, let's take YOUR argument. Soon we will have 3D Printers that will eliminate ALL mass production. There will BE NO factories. Or not many. Right now NEC has a PC that is 100% made by automation, it costs a little more than a normal PC but has a much lower default rate. So, when that day comes, and 3D printing becomes the norm, will Americans be LESS prosperous or MORE prosperous? Because, according to your logic, it's not the goods and services that is important, but the jobs. According to your logic, if we went back to digging holes by hand, we'd all be so much richer because MY GOD think of all the jobs.
The fact is, Americans live more prosperous now than any previous generation in history. The main things that effect Americans is their use of drugs and bad eating habits. Americans don't die of starvation, they die of boredom overeating while watching Netflicks. As for how to create more jobs, see the list at the top of the thread.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Has Comcast or any other network provider charged $0.10 cents a post, listened in on your Skype conversation (outside of NSA forced recordings), or ANY of these other "possibilities"? No. They haven't. Because people will go to a different provider.
Now that the FCC has control over the internet, expect a Government issued logon ID. This is exactly what our Progressive Socialists want. To be your Internet Nanny.
Oh, and the FCC isn't cheap. We have to pay for more bloated bureaucrat salaries. Expect your monthly Internet tax to fit in nicely with your logon ID and NSA monitored usage fees.
And to ensure your not using up more than your "fair share" of the internet / The Commons, no more video game streaming, etc... no more torrent sites, no more anything Progressive Nanny doesn't like. You'll see. This'll turn out just like everything else the State F#@%$ up: public schools, financial regulations, FDA pink slime, police speed traps, etc....
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** Machines can flip burgers and make coffee. That's not the point, the point is Government interference in the markets are driving jobs overseas and even driving capital into making worker replacement. Thus, there will be even fewer jobs for those without highly technical skills. This isn't my opinion - it's an objective fact. Obama, and his ilk, do not create jobs - they tax and redistribute as well as interfere in the markets. Sure, it's great for the person who happens to get a raise, not so great for the person who loses their job. Not to mention, the markets don't stand still, they begin replacing workers immediately and developing technology that will eventually replace workers. Instead of having a lower wage, and cheaper food, you have a higher wage and more expensive food and soon - zero wage, but expensive food.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
fliteshare Well, the solution is quite simple, we'll use free-markets, sound money and law to ensure you pay your way, and I pay my way. No need to sell debts on the future labor of unborn children. Not only is that economically nonviable, but it's also immoral. You can do this a number of ways, borrow money and charge a toll. You could use money issued by the State without debt and, if people think this currency is so great - they'll use it. There's a number of ways to fairly fund large projects.
As for me, I spend most of my time doing medical research. It's not a paid 'by the hour' sort of job. In my free time, which is very little, I'm writing a chidlren's book - primarily for Japanese children.
If society doesn't find your skill set worth much money, you really only have yourself to blame. All information is freely accessible on the internet. And, there are a lot of highly specialized well paid jobs (particularly in maths, physics, engineering, software coding...).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Phoenix540 Trump is in violation of the US Constitution is he? Care to provide some evidence? If you are correct, well, if you're a citizen - sue him. YOU are citizen. HE is now YOUR public servant. Or... or, are you just making up stuff? As for guns, look at Obama's gun free Chicago to see what a mess strict gun laws have made of that city. It's literally a war zone there. Lastly, handing the word over to Putin... lol, hyperbole much? Firstly, the USA does not own or control 'The World'. Secondly, the POTUS is a relatively weak position in the US Government. But, you were saying? Exactly how is our political servant going to hand the world over to Putin? And, more importantly, who'd want most of it. The place in this world that I like living the most, is Japan. How is POTUS going to 'hand Japan' over to Putin? What? The Japanese are too stupid to control their own affairs? I mean, seriously.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Rick's Channel Yes, that's correct. Let me phrase your question a different way: Do you think less regulatory-capture and less rent-seeking on the part of the current market participants and an increase in competition would bring in value and provide better healthcare goods and services? Or do you think using regulatory capture to limit healthcare goods and services to rent-seek and monopolize the healthcare market, with no need to provide fair price or value is going to provide better goods and services?
Further, suppose this: You can still obtain all of the current 'regulated' goods and services BUT allow for unregulated market participants to, within common law and contract law, also offer goods and services under the strict legal signage stating clearly "Unregulated". Then you can let people choose which they would like.
Do you currently have an fMRI scan done yearly? Probably not, as time on a machine is expensive. I know MDs who have scans once every 6 months (for free) because they simply say, make room for me. Would you like that option? Would you like an fMRI scan by an unlicensed unregulated professionally trained fMRI tech who could tell you if there were any abnormalities on your scan? Say you pay out of pocket $100.
Or, would you rather just take your chances with no scan. Will you give those of us who would, the opportunity to do so? I mean, it has nothing to do with you.
The fact is, regulations are there to ensure lion's share of the profit go to the current market participants. It has nothing at all to do with making things safer. It's actually making medicine less safe. I'm sure you would be quite shocked to learn how poor the quality currently is in terms of training. It's really low. I mean, shockingly low. I expect we'll see healthcare deaths due to negligence increase to a million a year by 2025. The only thing I see, that may change this, is some high level of technology that puts healthcare into hands of the tech companies. Other than that, expect quality to go down and price to go up. All thanks to over-regulation and rent-seeking through licencing.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Typical Lib
Are you seriously gonna try to make a case for progressive fascism?
The ingredients for a prosperous (time + civil liberty) is property rights, law, free markets and sound money. Any attempt to use the government to provide any additional goods and services will ultimately result in the mess of an economy we are currently living through. As an example, anyone born before 1949 are expected to receive an (~) additional $350,000 worth of services from government relative to the amount they paid in taxes. Who paid for it? Well, their grandchildren are expected to receive NEGATIVE $430,000. This is the inevitable outcome of allowing government to provide anything other than national security and ensure the law.
Not that it matters, life in the USA will continue to be less prosperous for the foreseeable future. I've lived in 5 countries. I can quite clearly tell you, when I return home, to the USA, I feel I am walking into a police state. I'm shocked at police presence.
The richest 1% will continue to steal from the bottom 80% and that's just the way it'll be. Maybe another fake war like the one against Iraq and it's missing WMD will be drummed up to remove the cannon fodder and onward we'll progress. Or not. I've lived in Japan. I've watched their society deteriorate. I expect it'll be at least 1000xs worse in the USA.
Well, see.
One thing you don't have to worry about any time too soon is an unregulated lassez faire economy with sound money. Just keep voting - if it makes you feel better. Like you're doing something productive. You know, for Hilary of whomever.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
TentaclePentacle
Yes, I want private organization to hand out stickers - you know, just LIKE the USDA does. Yes, it is a private organization of people who care about organic food, enough to produce and certify theirs and others. It's quite simple, if you want a certified food, then buy the one that's certified. If YOU want USDA to certify YOUR food - then YOU pay them. I'll OTOH pay a group of people who actually care about organic foods. I want my money to support non-USDA certifications, but unlike you, I won't be given that choice. Because the USDA is a mafia.
You seem to think that because it's "The Government" certifying your food, somehow you're getting quality information about your food. You're not. They do a shit job. Not to mention, many people leave government and go work for the HFCS producers that produce the low quality "food" certified as 'edible' by the State.
Like BPA plastics and can linings that the USDA certified 'safe' to eat as it leaches into our food. Or the food coloring's USDA certified safe. But certified not safe in the EU and Japan - because they cause cancer.
The fact the CCOF is forced by the USDA to gain their crappy accreditation shows you how much of a mafia the USDA/State is. Why should CCOF get some shit accreditation by the shit USDA? They shouldn't. But, like any business under the auspices of a Mafia are coerced into doing so. Which is just another money maker for the people who run the USDA.
You really have no clue as to how the real world works. Oh well, you're in good company.
If all of that isn't bad enough, the USDA is destroying the potential for people to create businesses and good paying jobs. Again, oh well, that's what you people want - to be "regulated" instead of developing your own ways of dealing with and improving food safety. Oh, the food in the USA is some of the worse I've eaten anywhere in the world. McDonald's had to lower their sugar in AU just to be designated as a non-candy product. But, not in the USSA. Nope, it's as good as the type II diabetes it's giving you, along with all the other HFCS laced foods.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
William Mickelson
The best way to pay people more is to reduce the number or workers and increase the number of businesses competing for workers. To do that we need to deregulate the millions of laws to open a small business, making it easier for the poor to open small businesses, end Government Schooling, which creates an oversupply of worker cogs and finally - stop taxing laborer.
Have you ever opened a business? If you think it's as easy as 'pay people more' - go open a business of your own and see how not easy it is to make ends meet. The fact is, most businesses go bust in short order. I know many small business owners who only hire their own family because of wage laws and other regulations, as if they actually had to hire someone they'd go bankrupt.
It should also be noted that the costs are passed on to the customer, so the person who is 'paid more' ends up paying more in inflation OR the jobs are sent to China. But, what of the people who didn't get a job or who's job was sent to China? They still get stuck with the increased prices.
Lastly, when wages are increased the winners are chain restaurants like McDonald's or chain-stores like Wallmart. They LOVE raised minimum wages as it just puts more of their competition out of business - thanks to 60 years of hyper-regulations, 100 years of labor tax, Government Schooling and debased fiat currency, 6 members of the Walton family now own as much as the bottom 46% of America.
But don't worry, I'm sure there's plenty of GOP/DEM who'll happily pas minimum wage laws, more regulations and continue to debase our currency - as well as raising taxes. And we will be poorer for it. It's been 6 years since the so-called Great Recession and all that's happened is the rich have used the State to bail themselves out, at our expense. They now own and rent most of the houses bought in 2013.
Expect to lose more civil liberties, be spied on, probably sent to war and above all - to live poorer.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Eltrio2 I'm pretty sure it's impossible to grow up in the USA and not have access to the internet.
You do know that Government schools graduate functional illiterates at a rate (according to the DoED itself) of 1 in 5? Thus, if you have the means to PRIVATE educate - you would do your children a favor and do so. If you do not have the means, but have the intellect, then homeschooling is the next best option.
Interestingly, a study out of England found having a mother at home reading to her child each day was academically equivalent to a $25,000 a year private school. Thus, homeschooling is probably the better option. This makes sense give the total 100% attention of a parent versus a school teacher divided among 30 students and a lot of paperwork.
Note: Yes, I agree, a decent (read: average) public education might be better then learning in a home where they believe in magic thinking, like God. The thing is, most public schools do not challenge this meme and most people become atheist by Internet or maybe at University.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This is F*cking ridiculous. Yes, when you stop taking on debt you have a period where you 'feel' less prosperous and in the case of the State of WI there MAY BE a decrease in employment.
However, this is a problem caused BY DEBT. Taking on more debt isn't going to solve a problem caused by debt.
Secondly, something David neglects to mention: WHO has to PAY BACK that debt. Children do - because most of that debt is taken in long-term bonds (example 30 yr T bills). What a f*cked up democracy we have were one generation can legally vote themselves largest at their own grandchildren's expense. It's disgusting. If you are in your 20-30s and want to know what you can't find a job, why things were so much better for your parents and grandparents - it's because THEY borrowed and YOU pay. They could have lived a normal and decent life, but hey, why not just go into debt and stick the grandkids with the god damn bill?
Lastly, Walker tried to just cut back a teeny bit on Public "Servants" entitlements - those are payments you 20 year olds will be FORCED TO PAY FOR through your Local, State and Federal taxes (including income tax) and you want to know what happened? All this f*cked in the head so-called Progressives started threatening the murder his god damn children! His children! This is how sick you are. You're like sociopaths. Instead of paying your own way, you steal from the next generation for your progressive crap that no one wants to pay for which is why you have to turn to the State and then when someone is voted in who says enough is enough, you do hit piece after hit piece on him and culminating in actually photos and death-threats of the mans children.
There is no fixing America. I say give total control over to the sociopath progressives and let them run this f*cker straight into an ice burg, the soon USSA Good Ship Lolipop sinks the sooner we can begin building a new one and much different one - one where it's not possible to steal from your grandkids and give to yourselves.
Oh, and it's good to see Oblahma lived up to all his expectations cutting benefits while maintaining military spending and continuing the two wars we're losing (Now we're not leaving Afghanistan in 2014, but 2024) , drone kill assassination of a 16 year old American so-called "FREE" Citizen because his father was a douche with nothing but cheerleading from the so-called "Progressive Left", continued bailing out of the top 1% to a tune of 17 trillion dollars, ObamaCare that's a total mess, and NSA survalance right out of 1984. Good Job Progressives! Arseholes.....
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
LOl
Bernie Sanders and Thom are clueless. Yes, EVERYONE wants to ensure no one goes without good affordable healthcare. Turing our crony low quality high cost DiseaseCare into a Public scheme is NOT going to do that. I've live in multiple countries, some with 'free' public healthcare.
I can safely say this much: Most (not all) aspects of 'free' healthcare is crap and you would never want to be treated in those public hospitals. Most people, who can afford to, either go to Private or go overseas for treatment. This is particularly true in Western countries were the public hospitals are staffed with the bottom of the barrel surgeons who weren't successful enough to open a private practice or the ones being trained on the 'free' patients. In some rare instances Public was better than Private. Particular when providing some forms of care for the elderly and children. In general, no, it's horrible care. In Japan, Public healthcare is pretty decent. But, this is due to the Japanese system of shaming people who suck.
Since most of you lap up the Demagoguery, have zero experience with any aspect of healthcare (other than you want it for free), I'll leave you to mull these ideas over with your magic thought of Progressive Paradise:
1. If you have some money, you ARE FREE to leave your tax farm and go overseas. We actually did this (went to Japan 4 years ago, great treatment in a Japanese PRIVATE hospital, cheap too). Why don't we allow for this freedom INSIDE the USA? Why not allow so called 'free' Americans the 'freedom' to buy and sell medical care without the need of the AMA licences? Americans can go to Mexico for unlicensed care, most don't. Most don't need a Nanny to tell them not to.
2. Medical care is blowing out the budgets of many Western nations (ours included). What happens, in the real world, is less money is spent on other social services like Universities and K-12. Which means a lower quality medical doctor. I've personally seen this happen.
3. If you think Private Monopolies are bad now, wait until we give the Government a total Public Monopoly. ALL of the evil little monopolists that would be working in a company, simply swim over to the State and run the agencies - they pay themselves sweet 6 figure salaries with massive benefits (the likes of which you couldn't imagine) for providing the lowest quality crap healthcare you could imagine. They aren't just as bad as these Crony CEOs - they ARE the same people!
The care will be worse - much worse.
Bernie can spin you promises of 'free' high quality cheap healthcare all day long - of course, he's not actually DOING anything medical related himself.... no no no, that's hard work. It's so much easier to spin bullshit promises to the unwashed masses tales of how the Great Redistribution machine is going to magically make cheap high quality healthcare happen - well, sorry, not going to happen.
You'll see.
Note: Currently, in our AMA regulated healthcare (they'll also 'regulate' the Government Care - and do) about 80,000 Americans die each year due to medical error and another 3 - 5 million suffer life long injuries. Once the Government has a total monopoly, expect these numbers to increase 10 x in the next generation.
2
-
2
-
2
-
GreatPirateSolomon
1) Of course Chartered Schools perform lower on Standardized Government Tests. The same is true of Finish students, they don't do well on MCQ and other standardized testing (recent article was in New Scientist looking at this fact - yet, they concluded Finish education is fantastic). The same is true of privately educated students who simply lack the "skills" to pass Government tests. These skills often involve schooling practices that are antithesis to actual learning - like being able to cram for 3 days of bulimic learning barfing factoids out onto a test forgetting all information within a few days. IF you want to learn like that, then Government School is for you. If not, then you may want to choose a Chartered School - but, if you do, don't expect to necessarily do well on a Government Test. And of course, some Charted Schools suck - which is why we need choice to leave either.
As a note, it's not uncommon for top Government Schools to 'limit' the population of students who take many of the standardized tests. Most of the time 'encouraging' the lower end of the spectrum not to take the test - or outright trying to prevent them from doing so.
2) How do I figure a German School in the USA will have to be a Chartered School? Because Americans like Government Schooling and so you're never going to get them to adopt a German style education system. Thus, the ONLY way to get Government funding is through a Chartered School stylized as a German School. Otherwise it will be a private school. Private German schools already exist in the USA. That was my point. Americans see 1 in 5 functional illiteracy as a norm and something that's perfectly acceptable. Why? Because most Americans couldn't give two shits. That's out culture. We care about sports, war and pop stars.
3) Yes, I understand, and I'm telling you this can not physically happen. We cannot 'copy German schools in our system' and have them function like German schools function in Germany. Americans are not Germans. It's that simple. It's like 'copying the Democratic process onto Iraq' and then wondering why it's an utter failure. They are not Americans, do not have our culture, and thus our system does not function there as it does here. Likewise for German schooling in the USA.
As an example from Japan. In Japan it's common to take public transport to school. It's common to get on a train, ride through the city, get off, walk through a neighborhood, cutting through yards even, and walking to your school. You'll see 12 years walking along all the time. Japan spends 50% what we do and have double the outcome. So? Why don't we do that? Why don't we just allow kids to take public transport and walk through cities unaccompanied like in Japan? Also in Japan, you'll see beer vending machines all over any city. So? Why don't we do that? Let adults, 21 years or older, just buy beer from vending machines. In Japan it's common to leave stock out on the street over night. Why don't we do that? Just leave cartons of food, beverage, etc.... out on the street? Hmmmm.... maybe because of our culture? Maybe because we are not Japanese? Maybe because children in the wonderful land of the USA would be abducted left and right, beer machines would be pilfered, and stock stolen - all on day one. Why the Japanese can do these things has to do with Japanese people. It works for Japan, because of Japanese culture. There's a reason why we don't do these things - that reason is called Americans.
German schools work IN Germany - for Germans. That's why they have them. We have shitty American schools and a 1 in 5 functional illiteracy rate due to our culture.
It's not that I don't want to see better schooling in the USA. But that'll only come via private Chartered Schools allowed to compete for Government money and put poorly run Government Schools out of business. Therefor, if German schools ARE something Americans want to get behind, then they'll choose to put their kids into them and in that way Americans would get German Schooling. It's that simple.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Rob McCune GDP is a very rough measure of prosperity. For example, a pandemic or flood can increase GDP - it's not as if this is good for society. Further, Japan has a rapidly decreasing population, and each year most things are better. For example, with less people, the new houses are cheaper and bigger and nicer. Yes, 4 of 5 schools have closed, but the one that is open is modern and nice. Did you know it is common in Japan to see 6 and 7 year olds walking alone through the city. Japanese cities are ultra safe. Yet, you hardly ever see a police person. Yes, importing a bunch of people would increase GDP - but then you end up with ghettos in the cities, a lot of disfranchied Japanese works (who will also end up working for less money as they have to compete) and then those immigrants also become old. So what? Import even more? You just end up living in run down dangerous US cities. That's no eveyones idea of a good ideas. Also, unlimited growth is not possible on a planet with a limited size. So, it's best to work on a sustainable society that lives within its means. AND this is the biggest problem with our ideas of economy and society.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Omega172 Japan has even tougher laws regarding the possession of drugs. Yet, Japanese cities are extremely safe. Just imagine dropping your 7 year old child off at a train station, they then ride this into a major city, get off and walk a few blocks alone to school. Not a care in the world. Don't get me wrong, I think the War on Drugs is immoral, stupid and should be stopped, but this isn't the root cause.
Regarding your neighborhood, you'd obviously know best. I think it's perfectly fine to have some immigration - just slowly, and high skilled (unless for marriage or school).
I can not see any good reason to have (a) large amounts of immigration of any kind or (b) large amounts of low skilled immigration. Outside of marriage or school, each person should be required to have a high in demand skill that cannot be met by current Americans (which would be very very hard to find, given we're a big country, with a good number of highly educated people). Another negative for society, though perhaps a net positive for the economy, is low skilled workers drive down the hourly wage of American workers. This is actually happening in Sweden right now. And Swedes are pushed out of the housing market as well due to so much immigration. Something similar is happening in Australia - many Australians cannot afford homes. In Germany there's calls for immigrants to be allowed to work below minimum wage.
I don't see how this is good for society. IMO it's not.
As for Japan, yes, the economy is not the same as when they had huge population growth. But, as we agreed, populations don't grow forever. At some point we have to deal with population decline.
2
-
Omega172 Here's original research published in a dissertation showing that in Sweden immigration has a negative effect on wages. http://umu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:741567/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Disney is being sued right now for using the H-1B Visa in the USA to replace highly paid Americans with lowly paid immigrants.
That aside, suppose the effect is small, IMO it doesn't matter. The effect on society with a large migration of low skilled laborers is negative. 25 years ago the idea of no-go zones like in the USA happening in Sweden where unthinkable, and unheard of. Swedish society was similar to Japan. Very safe, mostly monocultreal. Then they started this experiment where they'd turn their country into a multicultureal country. Now they have welfare ghettos where generational welfare families reside. You'd probably be stabbed in you walked in there. The police don't even like going there. Drugs, abuse, superstition, all the worse aspects of their society they brought with them. And worse still, it's getting worse.
Anyway, we'll have to agree to disagree as to the effects of low skilled, often highly superstitious, immigrants. Highly advanced, safe fair societies require a massive amount of effort to maintain. Particularly in the parenting area. There's no need to make the job of maintaining social standards any harder than it is already.
Even if there were a short term benefit, as we agreed earlier, soon these people will get old, and then we're right back at square 1.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
*****
Before the Federal Reserve the USA was the richest nation on Earth and had the highest standard of living for the most people. While depressions did occur, the free market ended them quickly. The (forgotten) Great Depression 1920 started out much worse when compared to the Great Depression of 1930 - which was caused by the Federal Reserve (Helicopter Ben says exactly this). The Forgotten Depression was over in 18 months, that was when the Fed did nothing, the 1930 Depression was extended by the federal reserve and ended in a World War. Not to mention ALL (and then some) of our productive gains are stolen by the State via their ability to sell bonds and print money.
The Central Banks allow the middle class to indulge it's base desires by voting for politicians who steal from tomorrow to buy votes today. The Government was LIMITED for a reason.
As an example, an NFL stadium built in 1960s at a cost of 20 million and demolished in 1990, still cost the children born in 1980 (who never even used it) $40 million in 2010.
You can think whatever you want I honestly do not care and know I won't change anyone's mind. To do that we'd need to discuss logic vs rationalism and that isn't possible. So, go down to the magic polling booth and vote O-blah-blah again, or Hitlary or whomever you're told who to vote for. It isn't going to matter one bit. Politicians do not create wealth - free people do. And thanks to Progressivism, we are no longer a free people. So, it's just a slow decline of our standard of living. Being a doctor, I'm not too worried at all. I am the people who will tell you what you can and can not do. I'm the so-called Progressive you think you need to be your Master.
Oh, well, 6 years down, about 25 years of slow agonizing painful decrease in standard of living to go.
Progressives have good intentions. And the road to Hell is paved with them. History may not repeat, but it does seem to rhyme.
2
-
2
-
1. Then he should say 'tax payer funded' not free. Free is incorrect.
2. I have lived in the USA (citizen), AU (citizen) and Japan.
3. I am a doctor and I lecture at medical schools.
4. The only one who doesn't know what they're talking about is you. Of the three countries, AU has the worse medical schools. Oh, did you know they only have 3 year undergraduate degrees? Those Universities are crap compared to Japan and the USA. Why? Because they spend a tonne of money on their low-quality medicine. Oh, and by the bye, how much do you suppose "FREE" medicine costs in Japan - where the quality is very very good. It runs a family of 4 around $800 a month. This is in Japan. Health conscious Japan. Super safe, honoest Japan. You can take the number and triple it for obese drug addled USA.
5. So? WHICH social programs does Kyle plan to cut? Oh, that's right, Kyle just craps on about stuff he has no idea about, because it sounds good.
Lastly, in AU a "FREE" doctors visit cost around $80. That's for about 15 min consultation. Oh, and each year the AU government cuts services while concurrently upping the costs and this year plans to raise the levy. Was any of this in Kyle's presentation? Nope. Oh, yeah, and to put things into perspective for you, our daughter's delivery would have run $12,500 in AU (that's ONLY the delivery). In Japan, it cost $5750 and that included 3 weeks stay in a private hospital. We would have NEVER been given 3 weeks stay in AU. We probably would not have a daughter had we stayed in "FREE" AU. Luckily, I work in the field, and so I knew to leave.
AU has a lot of low quality expensive "public" services that it uses to off set medical costs, everything from charging you to see a doctor, to restricting tests, to simply cutting University to 3 years of 12 week semesters with very very very little resources. Yeah, you think "FREE", there is no 'FREE', it's paid for one way or another.
Why is it you Left wing morons can't just pay for what you take? Why do you have to steal from everyone around you?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Echthra Mavros
1) Firstly, I said income tax should be phased out over time.
2) The amount of money the Government collects from non-income tax related taxation would be able to run the government at it's 1990 levels.
3) Public schools are generally not funded through income tax. Many are funded at the State level.
You state that without income tax there will be no public schools, transportation, facilities, etc... then how were all of these things provided for in the early 1900s when there was no income tax? The USA was the richest most advanced nation in the history of humanity without any income tax. We invented lights, electricity, cars, movies, etc... all without income tax.
4) Right now the Federal Reserve monetizes government debt by buying T bonds. Effectively funding government by simply printing up the amount of money that is needed. So, that's one method of the government paying for services. It can and does just create money out of thin air. If people had various currencies to utilize, I see no reason why one could be a Federal Dollar. This has been done in the past several times.
5) It would be best if we did not have any public schools - these are some of the most expensive horribly designed pedagogically backwards 'learning' institutions ever created. They cost way too much and deliver way too little in terms of actually learning. I know this may come a surprise, but in many communities, the level of literacy has gone down since before Public schools 100 years ago. Also, imagine this, 100 years ago, you had to know how to read and write BEFORE you were allowed to attend a Public School. Now 1 in 5 graduating seniors are functionally illiterate!? Come on, if you cared for education, then the last thing you'd support is Public schooling.
6) Society functions much better when government is severely limited. It encourages people to work with one another and not against one another. And, that's the entire bases of our US Constitution. The first 10 amendments are there to protect us FROM GOVERNMENT. They're called the Bill of Rights. Not to protect us from the rich or the bigot or anyone else. They're to protect us from the Government as it is the most powerful intrusive part of society - thus, yes, it would be best if it didn't provide education or facilities either.
That Government is the problem is a lesson all societies learn over and over again and again - usually on the way down. I'd say, right now, we're about 10 years on the way down. With many more decades to go. Funny enough, I was in China last year and the Chinese I was speaking to reminded my of how Americans must have sounded in the mid-1800s. They did not trust their government and wanted it smaller. Whereas in the USA the exact opposite occurred. Americans have the largest government in the world, and they want much more of it.
The rise and fall of nations can be measured by the size and scope of their governments.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Well, you're all in luck. We have O-blah-ma and the richest 1% are richer than ever. Government is larger than it's ever been in our history. Government has passed more rules and regulations in our history. We have the largest debt in history. The Government now spies on us. The drug war, the war on terror, the war on literacy (George Bush II words not mine). The POTUS can now order the death of innocent American children and be given a Nobel Peace Prize. The Central Banker's and Central Planners have pretty much crushed the hopes and dreams of the average American and the 10s of millions of bureaucrats finish the job by ensuring anyone who does attempt to compete against established interests are crushed under a mountain of paperwork - for our safety of course.
A 100 years of Progressivism, beginning with their support for the Central Bank and ending in the total subjugation of the American public.
Do enjoy the New Economy and try not tripping over the Farce when you waddle down to the polling booth to pull the magic lever for Hitlary War Hawk Clinton or Native American minority Elizabeth Warren or whomever the establishment pukes up: Right OR Left.
So, don't you worry your pretty little heads, we're getting more regulations, more government, more taxes, more laws, more debt, less privacy, less freedom, less opportunity and less prosperity. Welcome to life in Progressive American, final stop: Detroit City.
2
-
mistert800 Health and Finance are the two most regulated industries in the USSA. MASSIVE amounts of regulation. There's this 'myth' the the banks were 'deregulated' - this is a lie. It's a regulatory-captured market.
Not to mention, the banks are given 'special' trading privileges by the State. The State they own. AND guess what? This hasn't changed. Not to mention the Central Bank they own controls our money, then uses extortion to force us to pay the State IN it. Pay To Work Tax it's called. Otherwise known as Income Tax.
Like I said, you don't have to worry about Ron Paul. Nope, no RP for us. Instead we're going to get another sociopath like O-blah-ma. The rich will pick and back their players, the MSM will tell the American idiotocracy they must choose A or B. And the deal will be done. All the little idiots will be out waving our stupid flag (now that it's meaningless - at one time it actually stood for freedom). All for the next POTUS Sociopath In Chief.
Meanwhile, we'll get to pay more tax, more inflation, more regulations, more rules, more spying, less freedom, less civil liberty, less opportunity and less prosperity. And that's just way things are going to go.
Oh, and as for Healthcare - it's a mess because of the State. The State ruined healthcare by making it a monopoly. The chances are, you'll be killed off by our Fascistic DiseaseCare. Over 400,000 Americans are killed by Healthcare each and every year. That's a city the size of Atlanta nuked year after year after year.
If you really need healthcare, I mean if it's serious, do as we do - fly to another country and pay out of pocket. We generally go to Japan and pay at a private hospital (it helps knowing Japanese in this case).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
MrDragon1968 Well now you're just being petulant.
So, I'll summarize: Sweden and Germany are done for. Let me clarify, what I mean, and this is more easily evident in Sweden, is that soon they'll be like your beloved London. Which I am sure is normal to you, and any other Londoner.
See, what you think of as "normal", including living near areas of England where the majority of people are not ethnic British, areas where you would not be welcomed, areas where you'd possibly be mugged at night, robbed maybe beat-up for being the wrong type of person in the wrong part of town. Possibly the wrong color and/or religion. Well, believe it or not, that's not normal. I've been to London a few times. There are areas in and around that are not safe. We both agree to at least this much.
See, that isn't actually normal. It's also not "vibrant". Public housing filled with second generation immigrants is not vibrant. It doesn't attract the best. It actually repels the best.
Here in Japan, and most of E. Asians, such places are non existent. The very idea people would be okay living like that, is unfathomable here. Unthinkable. Unwanted. I only mention this as a comparison so that it's clear it's possible to live without such areas.
And guess what? The Swedish don't want their cities to be like London in that respect. They're just too naive and too complient and have had it too good for too long that they climbed up their own arses. They think they're getting interesting foods, and music and exotic people. Which is fine. They're also going to get generational welfare ghettos, drugs, rapes, murder and millions of people with a backwards bronze age superstitious belief. Just like the places aforementioned in London. They're getting cities with no-go zones just like the rest of Western Nations have.
But they didn't have to. They're not here in Asia. You could walk in any area of any city, even mega cities like Tokyo, night or day without a single worry in the world. In many cities you can hold a table by placing your phone on it. It's normal for 7 year olds to walk to the train station alone and ride it into the city to attend school. No supervision, no need to have any.
THAT is what I meant by done for. Sweden was once like that.
London OTOH is already gone in the respect. No one would let their 7 year old walk unaccompanied in many areas if London. Which is why it's a pointless comparison. You've already normalized to stepping past the beggars. But that isn't normal. A lesson the Swedish can learn the hard way.
I really don't see how we even have an argument here. More like a difference in aesthetics.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Here's an example of what the State can, and does, have the power to do to you: http://reason.com/archives/2004/01/09/flower-power
Sandy Meadows did not have a State licence to sell arranged flowers (why on gods earth would you need one?) and the police came and enforced the State's will as they and the State are obligated to do. They forced this innocent women to pay the fine of $250 dollars. Now, suppose she resisted? Suppose she refused to desist selling flowers AND refused to pay a fine AND refused to pay the State for a licence? Then what? They'd be forced to escalate. Suppose she refused to be put in a state run cage? Suppose she defended herself with a knife? The police could legally shoot her in the head - and, now a days, probably would. She'd be a 'crazy old woman' who didn't want to 'do her duty' and 'be a good citizen' and 'buy her licence like a good little tax chattel' - you know, for the 'good of society'.
And that would be that. Another dead innocent human - at the hands of the ONLY legal entity that can kill innocent people. The State. Which is why it was limited.
The problem isn't rich people (although they are A problem). The problem is the State. We can, as a people, make as much 'money' as we want - but what we need isn't paper money, we need goods and services. There's millions of unemployed - yet, thanks to millions of regulations, a Government schooled society educated in uselessness, and a huge government - people are no able to provide goods or services UNLESS they work for the rich who own this system.
I personally find it a form of insanity, when the State can shoot a little old lady who is selling flowers OR can shoot an adult who is smoking a weed OR can shoot an unlicensed doctor providing care and etc....
Oh well, Government Schools do get one thing right. Normalization takes care of the rest.
2
-
I have no problems with private Unions. I do have a problem with public unions - as we the public are forced to pay them, not the market. As an example, all of my family at my father's age and above were in the UAW and lived like kings, helped to destroy GM (no one wants to pay $30,000 for a Union made peace of crap car) and eventually the company went bankrupt - most of my family my age are working on minimum wage. Not all, I was smart enough to leave the State over a decade ago and worked my arse off, lived in share house and share rooms for a decade and have a pretty high paying job, but I'm 15 years behind most people.
Again, I have no problem with UAW. But I saw the union from the inside. I saw the functional illiterate who couldn't be fired. I hear the retired UAW workers (in my family, all my aunts, uncles, father, etc...) and they're on $4000 a month minimum pension and retired at aged 47! That's more than most of their kids made WORKING and those kids will be working right up until they die. AND worse of all GM went bankrupt and was bailed out BY the millennials! These same unioned retirees are working to get 'disability' (if they didn't already when they were in the shop) and are looking into ObamaCare - AGAIN, paid for by their kids who have piss poor jobs.
The nation is going into the toilet. Society is sick IMO. Just sick. Everyone looking to screw over everyone else. TBTF oligarchs. Central Banksters and our Central Planners and Political Masters. Cops who are insane. Literally, I had a State cope drive right up on my car's arse the other day. Was probably 2 foot off my bumper, I about got in a wreck and I had a 1 year old in the back seat. I can't stand the USA.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
AJ Beamish
If you think life in England is so good, emigrate. I promise you, the working poor in England are locked in their class more tightly than working poor in the USA.
That said, you are correct that many American universities have shifted from teaching how to think, towards what to recall. This is true.
Why did this happen? Probably because of a few reasons. a) Factories didn't need thinkers, it needed workers. Thus, schools taught children to sit in rows and raise their hand to pee. Essentially, children were taught to become workers. If you look back to the 1800s, when people had to actually know something or starve, when you had to know how to read BEFORE you could enter school, then schools taught children how to think. Of course, most of these were private. b) The administration you blames is made of teachers c) the politicians you blame, basically follow what teacher unions tell them to do - except the few brave that are pushing for chartered schools (often ex-teachers who go into politics).
2
-
2
-
2
-
0:45
"How can these people in the poorest" (Public Housing) "neighbors be against Scott Walker when he's against everything (the State) has done to help them" .......
...........like those Publicly Funded Welfare ghettos that have made your life a living hell. Or the Publicly Funded Government Ghetto Schools where 1 in 3 kids who graduate, do so as a functional illiterate. Or the millions of Progressive licencing scams, rent-seeking laws, and regulatory capture that has ensured the ONLY jobs for you is Welfare Queen, Cannon Fodder or Hood Thug. Oh, don't dare think about trying to start a business either, the State will come down on your throat with its Jackboot and crush your windpipe.
And then this Progressive Socialistic idiot has the gall to suggest these people (read: Black People) are too ignorant to know any better. Yes, she's their NANNY and she knows better then they. You know, because once she got off at the wrong turnpike and ended up in a Publicly funded Welfare Ghetto and saw a GASP black person once.
Typical middle class clueless Progressive Socialist. Guess what? Those 'poorest houses, poorest schools, poorest neighborhoods are all Publicly funded Welfare Ghettos suffocating under a fog of poisonous Public Services. Most of these people have NEVER in their lives come in contact with the FREE markets. They live in Public Housing, are shot and killed by Public Police, take Public buses on Public roads, to their Public schools where they're taught by functionally illiterate overpaid Public teachers, learn little and then graduate with no skills into a hyper-regulated unfree market, RINSE AND REPEAT.
Want to know why they support Scott Walker? The answer is simple: 100 years of FAILED Progressive Central Planning has destroyed their lives. The answer isn't MORE crap Public services - the answer is LESS. Much less.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
bohemianwriter1
(a) The Pledge of Allegiance is TO THE STATE. It's a pledge to die in defense of the State as symbolized by a pretty peace of cloth on a pole (aka: a Flag).
It starts out "I pledge allegiance to THE FLAG of the United States of America." I mean, how myopic can a person be?! Jesus H Christ, your own example shows YOUR level of conditioning. Which is pretty much reflected in 99.9999% of the people around you.
That said, Government Schools have, for the most part, been banned from forcing children to Pledge themselves to the State. But, make no mistake, Government schools used to force children into pledging themselves to the State because Government schools are in actuality propagandizing labor-cog factories.
(b) Government Schools overwhelmingly do not teach that a God or Gods or Goddess or Goddesses created the Universe (aka: Creationism). That said, some of the BEST schools in the USA are Private Religious Schools. As a matter of fact, I know of Catholic schools that costs $30,000 per year that have a line about 10 years long with a $1000 a year retaining fee paid for 10 years before your application is even considered. And get this, those students that graduate - they're not functionally illiterate. As a matter of fact, they are some of the best students that enter the best Universities. And there's tons of these Private Religious schools.
Just to make sure you understand that I am a strong atheists, I'll quickly commit the so-called unforgivable sin: I damn the Holy Ghost. If there is a God, please send me to Hell right now. Oh, gee, didn't happen. Maybe because Gods and other magic-people do not exist.
See? It's quite simple. You're a State-bot. Your god/superstition IS the State. The POTUS is your Pope. The Senators are your Bishops. Now, like a good little "Citizen" do your duty and pull the magic voting lever to the Right or to the Left. And Believe in "Hope and Change". Maybe even get our stupid flag (made in China) and wave it for whichever politician promises you whatever it is you hope to steal from some other citizen in the Great Society you're a cog in.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
tetsubo57
Even the word 'endorse' - do you know what you are suggesting? What? Use the police to force people to behave in a regulated manner? Are we a police state? Isn't the anti-civilization?
Example, a coffee shop owner opens a shop and makes coffee. She must sell her coffee at a profit or go bust. She can not put people drinking coffee before making a profit or she will go broke. Thus, no more coffee. This is common sense. If she hires someone, this remains that same. She must make a profit or end the business. Also, she can not force someone to buy her coffee at a minimum price. People either want the coffee and buy it - or don't. It's a voluntary relationship. Which is why profit signals she's doing something good. Yet, I'm sure you think you can force her to buy labor (you said 'workers rights'). Why do you think it's OK for the Worker to have a 'right' to force her to buy their labor at a price they want - when she could never do this to force people to buy her coffee a price she wants.
As soon as you stop to think a little about your own post, you may realize everything you said is a sound bite and makes no sense in the real word. Yet you got sympathy from other posters.
This is the reason why our economy is in the mess it's in. To explain in detail would take to long, but, I'd emplore you to do some research or forever live in a delusion of sound bites.
(maybe start by reading 1984, it's an OK book, but importantly it may get you thinking about why you think in certain words and have never stopped to think about those words).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Travis Rogers "Strengthening SS is the ONLY MORAL choice for America."
LOL, I cannot tell if I'm reading satire or the rambings of someone inudated with one too many MSM memes. Obviously it is immoral to use force against innocent humans: American citizens, the 1%, Jews, Blacks, Christians or whomever. Your ramblings remind me of those who propose a jizyah tax... and make as much sense.
If we want to care for people, then we care for them by forming organizations that actually care for people. Diverting tax money, in order to reallocated resources, via a faceless bureaucracy, is probably the least caring and worst possible solution to caring for people. Sadly, for the simple minded, this is about all they can imagine. To them, the world is an unlimited resource, only waiting for enough zeros at the end of a paper dollar to ensure everyone gets everything. Such a simple view of the world. Well, thank you K-12 Government School, you seem to be getting one thing right....
As a side note, I spend a lot of time caring for disabled with ED. Many whom attempt suicide. FOR FREE.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Elizabeth Warren pretended to be a Native American to get her $350,000 a year Harvard Law Professorship. She'd lie, cheat, steal and say anything to gain power and would LOVE to be POTUS. In short, she's your typical Progressive Socialist. It's no wonder she's loved by the Liberal Left, she's full of BS, just like them.
Cherokee genealogist Twila Barnes (whose group of researchers have done more than anyone to document Elizabeth Warren’s false claims to be Cherokee, was incensed at Warren’s continued insistence that she is Native American):
"Let me make one thing clear. Your Native American issue has not been put to rest.
You say your “ancestry” played no roll in your hiring. That is not the only issue. You were listed as a minority in diversity reports. That is an issue. You admit you made the schools aware of your “heritage.” They counted you as a minority in their reports to the federal government when the criteria to list you as such had a two part requirement – you had to have both the ancestry and maintain tribal ties. Something you did or said led the two schools in question to believe you met those requirements despite the fact you didn’t….
You continue to skate around the issue by repeating the same story you heard growing up. You say you didn’t ask for documentation because you were a child. Excuse me, but you were not a child when you started “checking the box”; listing yourself in law directories as a minority; or were counted as a Native American for diversity reports.
You were instead, an adult, 37 years old, and a lawyer, when you professionally “became” Native American. To make matters worse, your mother was still alive. Maybe children don’t ask for documentation, but adult lawyers should….
As of today, you still refuse to release your personnel records from the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law School. If there is nothing to hide, why? …
No one really cares about your family or the stories you were told growing up, but we do care about your integrity. The “Cherokee flap” is important because it shows what you have done when you thought no one was watching. It is important because it shows what you have done when you thought you wouldn’t get caught. And it is important because it reveals you still think you can get away with it now that you have been caught."
2
-
2
-
israel blasczak You're not making any sense. No one is going to ship goods around in a truck (on autopilot or otherwise) unless people buy those goods. This is one of the things you don't get, our money is a fiat currency controlled by the State for the good of the Banks that make it. In a world where trucks drive themselves, a new PS4 would cost around $50 dollars. A decade later, a PS5 would cost $5. And eventually a PS6 would cost $0.50 cents.
But that would require free people, free markets and real money. We NEED money, real money, to replace our fiat currency. But doing that would return the power to the people - real power. Not the power to vote for bullshit, or to labor 50 hours a week / work, but the power to trade. Once protected by the US Constitution - since long taken away by the State. If you're me, have an IQ nearly 140, life is pretty good. But if not, then you should support free markets. Because otherwise, people like me will always out compete you. ONLY freedom and sound money can bring prosperity to the most people. Most people in my position - they'd never think or wish such a thing to occur. I do though. I'll quit my job and go open a school for children in a few years in a different country. Because I find value in that.
Anyway, if you think driverless trucks, and 3D printers, and nearly free solar energy (all of which will eliminate 100s of millions of jobs) will make our lives LESS prosperous - you are wrong. The only thing they might make us is sedimentary, sloth, maybe uninspired and self-centered. Small minded. Which is what we already are. Or most of us anyway.
2
-
Rathelm MC
Yes, we surely do not live in a free-market (which is to say, we are not free people).
Free markets meant that other Americans were legally allowed to purchase cars and trucks made by other humans (say, Japanese). I see no problem with this. Why should it be legal for people living in MI to force the rest of the USA to purchase overly priced low quality cars? What gives people like my father the right to turn the State's security apparatus against those who 'dare' to trade freely with one another?
I personally think it was undesirable that my father, through the UAW, was able to secure such prosperity while leaving his children in a desolation. Like many of my generation, we Gen-X/Y enjoyed a life of welfare in white-trash trailer parks surrounded by single mothers who drank and smoked while our 20-something fathers partied like it was 1979 (which it was).
So, again, private unions (UAW) may or may not be undesirable. In a free market, I think they are moral groups. Public unions OTOH are immoral groups. Being composed of the same 'type' of middle class as my father isn't their problem - what makes them immoral is their legal access to the State's security apparatus. Unlike UAW, public unions carry the power of the State with them - they literally have the power over life and death to ensure they can take as much from the next generations as is physically possible. Their union members are even worse than the private unions members - if you can believe that. Having never had to produce value for pay, they wouldn't understand what it even means. At least with a private company, at one time, long ago, in its founding - was someone who knew how to produce value. Over time this culture is lost. Private institutions rarely, if ever, start with such individuals. The opposite actually. I know, I've worked at high levels in both.
IMO the same fate of GM awaits the rest of the USA, and for very similar reasons.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Complains about strawman arguments, goes on to say Boss is a Tyrant who can do whatever he wants to his employees. As if the employees cannot just quit and/or work towards opening up a competing business. I teach medicine, I'd LOVE to be able to open up a competing medical school - but I have to compete against Kyle's government-run "free" education (news flash, most academics in management don't care about education - they just want money like 99% of people). Talk about irony, I work for the Government - it's as bad or worse than working for a privately owned company. But anyway....
A short story about a socialist I knew (a doctor). He was all about "The Worker", he was pro-Union, and yes, he in fact wanted a One World Government (starting with Europe). Then guess what? He lied and carried water for corrupt managers, became a manager, and quit the Union and the, get this: He lied to a woman who's husband is on disability, she has two children. He told her she'd have a permanent job if she took a short-term contract, knowing full well he'd fire her in 6 months (aka: not renew her contract because then he'd be forced to hire her permanently). This is your classic socialist Academic and I have seen a million of them. These "Socialists" are just as full of bullsh*t as the crony Crapitalists. But at least if we returned to a free-market, there'd be some level of competition.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think exercising and eating healthily for most of your life is a good idea. Begin investing and savings in your mutual fund 18, stop partying after university 24, get married by 28, start a family before 33, stop eating extra sugar at 35, start 16/8 fasting 37, increase exercise and stretching at 40, begin aspirin and a statin at 42, start 20/4 fasting at 50, sleep during the day 51, more stretching, exercise and better diet 55, retire 60 and do stuff, 75 move in with kids, 85 get cryogenically frozen 😄
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
LOL
Cherry pick much?
WaPo: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/11/liberals-not-conservatives-more-likely-possess-psy/
By the by, I'm a doctor. I also do research into neurochemistry of a specifical area of the brain. So, no, I don't need to 'read more'. Look, like Tom Hartman - you simply need to have reality shoved in your face and down your throat. Otherwise, you will cherry pick data the conforms to your cognitive biases. As an example, you're a left leaning liberal - the study shows you're more likely to be psychotic and supportive of tough-mindedness and authoritarianism. Well? Reread your posts - does this sound like you? A little shit-lib that wants to use the State to force people to give you stuff? Someone who probably likes to live in an Authoritarian safe-space? Someone who's tough-minded and refuses to change their oppinion when confronted with direct evidence (like high GDP, low unemployment and better trading relationships?). Look, Trump is making it HARDER for people like me who do work overseas. Oblahblah on the other hand was an embicile who was great - he didn't have a clue as to how the economy worked and was happy to let the people who paid for his POTUS to do the 'thinking' / screwing / bailing out the rich.
Anyway, let's wait and let empiricism do the talking :)
Lastly, I mentioned IQ because (regardless of political affiliation) this is what is most strongly correlated with macroeconomic data showing increased standard of living. It's not the only factor - just the strongest. And it's falling in the EU, USA and AU (also a little in E. Asia, but nowhere near as much). Normalized against 1990 at 100, it's probably at 96 today. This is the cutoff for democratic institutions to function. Which is probably why they are not functioning. It's is expected to drop to 90 in the next 3 decades - at which point a republic cannot be maintained. Funny enough, Progressives (generally assoicated with empirisims) used to be huge fans of eugenics (feel free to look it up). Now they claim IQ has no relationship to genetics. Totally the opposite of science. Leftist Progressives now promote trotskyitism and don't even know why.
Sad.
Anyway, lets laugh as the Left goes full-on Communism in the race to find new ethnicities to milk votes out of while blaming Whites (and of course now they blame POC like my family - Asians, you know, for our' Priviledge' of working hard). Pathetic.
Hey, I have a prediction. I predict before 2040 I will be living in Japan watching anime, and America will be in full-blown Civil War. Invest wisely, because if such comes true, the Left will be decimated by a bunch of Whites who got tired of paying taxes to people who blame them for everything while trying to detroy the 1A and 2A of the US Constitution. Not to mention the debt that you mentioned - that will become a problem by 2034.
Have a nice weekend, you're too insulent for me to waste more time on.
2
-
And you wonder why Ann Coulter didn't want to bother with you. In one breath you crap on about how we should 'tax the rich' and how the poor are getting screwed (as if giving government more money to waste will help the poor), and in the next you want us to be a 'democratic' socialistic paradise 'LIKE SWEDEN'.... LOL, Newsflash, Sweden affords its poorly-run welfare-state by taxing THE POOR, and NOT the rich (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lxD-gikpMs). Not to mention, they have school choice (similar to our Charter schools - something else you hate, decent education). Sweden also documented the rise in quality of education, when private schools open up nearby. It's called competition - and it's made possible by REDUCING taxes going to a pit of uselessness called GiverMint. The USA was founded on LIMITED small government. If you don't like it, it's simple: leave. We don't you want you here. Go live somewhere else. I predict a massive RED WAVE comes and washes you communist-lite wannab's from power. Let's wait and see. Hopefully the GOP is able to implement voter ID laws, required English (and other competency tests) inorder to vote (personally I'd require 5 generations of good character American ancestors). Hopefully we can begin privatizing Social Security (like SWEDEN DID). We can increase competition for government schools by privatizing many of them or allowing even more private competition (LIKE SWEDEN DID). We can end generational welfare and massively reduce government regulations by cutting tax and closing useless governmental institutions (LIKE SWEDEN DID). My guess is, when you 'Progressives' see what real democracy looks like - you're not going to like it. So, do yourself the favor, and move somewhere more suitable to your fantasies of rainbow socialism. Try South Africa. Or Cuba. Or wherever - just leave :)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Either adult IQ is mostly genetic or it is not, what ethnic nationalists believed 100 years ago (or Buddhists, Jesus or Harry Potter) is irrelevant. It should be noted, 100 years ago, DNA had not been discovered. Anyway, the scientific data show that adult IQ is mostly genetic. The data also show that IQ correlates with socioeconomic status. Thus, countries with high general IQ, like Japan, if given an efficient free market, will become prosperous. Whereas low IQ countries, will be less prosperous. Importantly, for this discussion, is that in multicultreal countries, low IQ populations will be sorted downward - and they will then vote AGAINST free markets. Which is why we see in many US cities with high populations of low IQ poor people. When the overall general IQ is low enough, the overall prosperity of the nation will decrease. This could happen to Japan - but is less likely to happen as they will have a general IQ the regresses to the mean of 107. That said, if low IQ people have more kids, then over time the IQ will indeed fall. But this will take a long time. A much quicker way to lower the general IQ is to allow for millions of low IQ people to enter the country. This appears to be why the IQ in the USA is falling precipitacy (and it is, look up the data yourself). Thus, it stands to reason we can infer that in time, free markets will end in the USA, together with institutions that require high IQ, like democracy. It takes times, but is likely to happen given the trends.
2
-
Okechukwu A. I linked a PEER REVIEWED article that came up in the reputable journal Intelligence that showed up in a PubMed search. You ask for a linked article, I provide one. Then you go off on some conspiracy rant just as I predicted would happen. The irony being that a White Supremacist would want to publish data showing whites to be inferior to E. Asians. Well, if that's the case, then this suggests that the data is quite repeatable. And its the data that is important not who was motivated to gather it or why. And, it is repeatable. Are you claiming that all populations of humans should have no divergence in brain function? As if mental fitness is somehow exempt from natural selection? It's not even just IQ - dispositions are ALSO genetic. You say you support multiculturalism, and then spend paragraph after paragraph denigrating E. ASIAN culture. LOL
Believe me, Japan has a unique culture with an amazing past. Was it equivalent to Europe's Enlightenment? No, not in my opinion. However the Age of Reason ultimately led to Europe destroying itself with mass immigration in yet another one of their hairbrained ideas. Before it was National Socialism, then Communism now it's multiculturalism. From my vantage I'd suggest Europe would have remained better ruled by their monarchs. Democracy doesn't appear to suite their nature in the long run. As for the USA, I've lived there. I know all about the types of ghettos that litter the cities there. About the horrible violence and drug addled populous. Not to mention the horrendous trillion dollar phony wars. It's sad to see what multiculturalism and cultural Marxism has done to Wester Society. IMO the West will be lucky to make it to the end of this century intact. Possibly not even a fee more decades. And get this, it's not coming here. Two nuclear bombs and decades of occupation has not changed this. And the West idiotic flirtation with its new fad: mutlicultrealsim (an oxymoron) will never be accepted in the East. Ever.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You live in La La Land. If YOU think YOU can provide a cheap affordable alternative, then put together a proposal, open a\ health insurance company, and start dishing out the savings. Let me give you a small idea of the 'best' case scenario. In Japan, there is a mix of public and private. Single payer insurance for a typical middle-class family is about $850 a month. Now, unlike in America, Japanese don't have to worry about wasting trillions on a massive low-IQ population of unhealthy crackheads living in State run ghettos. In general, Japanese are honest. In general, Japanese are healthy. So, if you wanted to run single payer healthcare in the USA, you can expect to triple the cost on the middle-class tax payer. You're looking at around $1500 a month per family at the very least. Also, unlike you, I have experience working in medicine and have lived in multiple countries, including the USA, you really have no idea what happens when you turn something into a public service. Well, let me tell you, it turns into the public latrine. IOWs, healthcare will be as safe as Government Welfare Ghetto and as useless as a Government High School degree in the hands of a functional illiterate. One more time, you are clueless. You just want to live in fantasy land where you get free shit (or cheap shit). Which is all Bullshitter Sanders has to offer - bullshit. One more time, in Japan, we pay $850 a month for insurance - don't think it'll be anywhere near that cheap in the USA.
2
-
We do not spend trillions arming the middle east. We spend trillions on our fascistic military. But get this, it's that same military that gives the USA the ability to print free money. Unlike in Japan where we have to work and pay our way. So, yes, nothing would make me happier than to have the USA military get out of the middle east, and leave Japan, Korea, and Europe while you're at it. Then, without the military forcing us all to use the US dollar, you can start working to pay your way like the rest of the world. You really have no idea how anything works, how anything is funded, and are next to clueless as to the actual price of things in this world. I OTOH work in the medical field, I'm a research doctor, and I have lived in 5 different countries. Continue to believe the B.S. you're being fed, it isn't going to change reality. In the real world, single payer will bankrupt the USA. Which, is fine by me. I don't care. But that's the fact.
2
-
Except you don't really save a lot of money, and if you've ever worked in a public institution (I have) then you'd know there's very little 'We' in anything. Public Institutions are often run by small-minded public servants wanting to make as much as they can, working as little as possible. Most run over budget and few actually deliver on their public good at anywhere near the price of cost to produce said good. I've worked in a few countries with public healthcare: AU and JP for example. In AU, medical doctors are very very poorly trained, the undergraduate training is a joke - and get this, where do you think AU get's it's medicine from? Mainly from Made-In-The-USA pharmaceutical companies. As for JP, the cost is around $850 a month for health-cover for a middle-class family. What did we pay in AU? About $200 a month. So? How is this possible? Well, in AU they've cut funding to education. Thus, an Australian "Undergraduate" is 3 years instead of four. Often semesters are 12 weeks instead of 18. Often lectures have ZERO wet-labs instead of 4 hour wet-labs per class. Often students live at home instead of on campus. What is the result of this? The result is poorly educated doctors and almost no GASP for profit industry. Thus, Australians must sell off Australia piece-by-piece to rich Asians and Middle Easterner's inorder to pay for the 'Free" poorly run healthcare. It should be noted, if possible, NEVER go to a Public Hospital in AU. Buy private insurance and go to a private hospital - that's where you're going to get a decent outcome. Lastly, you are using the word "Profit" in a way I do not. You should use "Spoils". You see, Profit is a virtuous act (no, I'm not going to explain this to you, read Aristotle). What we have in the USA (and pretty much everywhere) is Fascistic medicine - where the State decides who can practice, who can open a hospital, who can do what - all of which adds up to "Regulatory Capture" by the AMA - and a lot of For-SPOILS run crony-crapitalistic corporations. Oh, it should be noted, before Obama-Care catastrophic insurance only cost around $75 a month and would prevent total bankruptcy due to an accident or disease. If you choose not to pay, then that's your choice, don't shovel your poor decisions onto others. If you cannot afford $75 a month, then bankruptcy is pretty much meaningless for you, as you have no assets. If you can pay, then you should pay.
2
-
Yes, I agree and I'll say again, yes Denmark is doing well - but this is mostly due to genetic IQ (which is around 100) and a level of homogeneity. However, this is what I am saying: This will not always be the case. The IQ in Denmark is expected to drop, as your society becomes multicultural. Look, I've lived in numerous countries, I have an IQ of 133, I have given this a lot of thought, I've read a lot (Aristotle is one of my favorites, along with Hume). I understand it is very difficult to imagine what life would be like, but I promise, it would be better WITHOUT State welfare or general health care. Yes, is difficult to imagine. But, it is true. IF society is as good as you suggest - then TRUST IT. Trust people to act in a manner whereby they do not need a Police State to force them to be good. IF you do not this - then your culture will slowly degrade. Which will take decades - but it will happen. Anyway, it doesn't matter. What will be - will be. If the USA ends up with a Univeral Healthcare - it will bankrupt the nation, at which point the State will (maybe) succede, and start again with a limited Government.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
technatezin There's no need to 'give out' grades at all. As a matter of fact, formative assessment is only required by the student, the instructor doesn't require this information. Summative assessment can be performed by private organizations along with their particular certificate. This is effectively what the AMA does, and I'm sure you have little to no problem with MD's being qualified by the AMA.
I'm not sure why you think grades are all that important. If a child wants to be an artist, and they learn graphic design, what do they care if they are given a low grade? What's important to them, is if they learned the skills needed to provide a good or service to the free market / others in society.
It may be true in the short term that kids with genetics that select for scholastic activity are chosen to attend specific schools, but this is okay, if there is a demand, then others will similarly offer educational services. "The Poor" certainly do not lack smart phones as good as "The Rich". Why? Because companies make a lot more profit selling to the poor. And when they are in competition, the poor get as good as the rich. Compare this to highly regulated (by Government) markets like Medicine. Thanks to Government regulation, market players (like the AMA) are given a regulatory monopoly and use this to enforce rent-seeking on their part and that of their members. What happens is the quality of education goes down (and it has) while the cost goes up (and it has). Thus, places into medical school have wait-lists miles long, while at the same time, medical error is the number 2 killers of Americans (after heart disease).
1
-
technatezin as for profits, there's many examples of Chartered School out performing Government Schools using 2/3rds the resources.
However, I think we need to use two differnt words. Profit should be used to refer to virtuous activity (efficient use of limited resources to ensure good education) whereas Spoils can refer to making money through cheating (example: rent-seeking). In this way, we can see Private Schools are often Profitable (even when run as non-profits) and act virtuously whereas Government Schools are sometimes Profitable, but do so through vice and rent-seeking, and therefor are actually Spoilable. They make Spoils.
The best way to ensure kids are given access to good education is free-markets, sound money, and laws that protect private property and uphold contract.
Let"s remember, the DoED itself publishes statistics showing ZERO improvement since it's inception (late 1970s) and if anything, things might be getting worse! They also publish statistics showing 1 in 5 of their "High" school graduates cannot competently read and write. The only other place where you see this level of stagnation and regression are the industries found in the old Socialistic Republics of USSR and China. And, I promise, for the same reasons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
TheSpiritOfTheTimes Actually, I Japan and Korea both outperform Finland. Therefor, according to your logic, we should actually adopt their pedagogical standards. Incidentally, Japan spends less per student in terms of GDP. Therefor, again, according to your reasoning, we should also spend less. Koreans attend school 7 days a week. Japanese usually attend cram-school for 4 hours after normal school. I know, I've lived in Japan. Therefor, according to your reasoning, we should too. Oh, and no summer's off. As a matter of fact, the US Government would be legally bound to choose the best performing pedagogy - which is not the Finish one. Sound good to you? Probably not. Because you prefer the Finish program. You probably want the SCHOOL CHOICE don't you? You probably think it's a bad idea to send kids to school year around, 7 days a week including evenings. Isn't it nice HAVING THAT CHOICE? Or would you prefer someone in Government make that choice for you?
1
-
1
-
TheSpiritOfTheTimes I just posted two recent ranking showing Korea out performs Finland. As a matter of fact, Finland will probably continue to drop as Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai surpass them. But, I do find it interesting you still would like to utilize the Finish system. Well, sorry, that's not how Government agencies work. They would be legally obligated to use the Korea model. That's the way Government bureaucracy works. If Korea is better, then it will be chosen. If Japan can do more with a smaller budget, then that will be chosen.
It'd be nice to have School CHOICE wouldn't it be? That way you can pick the pedagogy you think works best for your children.
Of course, no thanks to people like you.
Incidentally, Japan has a thriving private school system. But hey, I've only lived there, so what would I know.
Regardless, and one more time for good measure, it's nice knowing you have the CHOICE of pedagogy. That way, if YOU want the Finish model, then YOU can take your tax-credits and pay for it from a private provider of that pedagogy. See how nice it works? If more and more people do likewise, then that becomes the norm.
Good, then we can agree to that much :)
1
-
1
-
TheSpiritOfTheTimes A decent civil society doesn't need the State to force people to pay for education. Therefor a decent civilized society will by default use Private Schools. The goal is to privatize all education. This will ensure the poor have access to good education in the same way they can easily afford a good super computer that fits in their pocket / smart phone.
The truth is, you prefer the Finish model and if given the choice you would choose the Finish model. And you would not be happy to be forced to instead put your children through the hell that is the Japan/Korean model.
You want choice.
Your choice.
Which is why you continue to push the Finish model even when evidence shows the Finish will be lucky to remain in the top 10 and will soon be superseded by other Asian countries. Why? Because the Asian model works better in our current system. Now, that said, I would personally choose the Finish model. Why? Because I like that pedagogy.
I lived in Japan, part of my family is Japanese, and I may move there again. In Japan, if you do not choose the Japanese system, you will NOT be attending high school and University. Sure, you can attend a private school (even alternative schools like Montessori or Democratic) in Japan, but you will fail in their higher educational system. Which requires 12 hours a day 7 days a week dedication to study. This means many many many Japanese children will buckle under the mental stress of studying so hard they end up developing all sorts of stress related problems - but that's okay to the Japanese AND people like YOU. Because what is NOT important is the individual and their personal choices. No, what is important is the "Social Good'. You know "Society" (whatever that is). Thank the GODS you people are in the minority in the USA. And you're losing the battle. Government schools will compete with Public Charter Schools and eventually all education will become Private. Then we will reach that 'decent' "society" you want to live in.
1
-
1
-
technatezin "With a government run school operation the left side of the equation can be at zero since the government can run the school as a break even non-profit operation indefinitely with no problems." This is so far from the truth as to be laughable. Have you ever run anything? Anything at all? I've worked in both private industry and public institutions and this, again, is literally laughable.
(A) The world has limits, thus there are budgets. As an example, see the mass starvation of Government run Communist China. About 30 - 50 million humans statrved to death - the Government couldn't even provide the basics / food, let alone education.
(B) Government isn't something 'magical' that poof provides education by pulling it in out of the ether. Government redistributes the goods and services of the private sector. Thus is buys educational products and then provides that service after levying a tax to pay for it. Of course, levying a tax is LESS efficient than paying directly becuase you also have to pay for the IRS and prisons to hold tax evadors as well as agencies to write tax code and etc... etc... etc... vs just paying directly for private education. Thus, Government School costs more / wastes more Earth limited resources.
(C) "Government" is a collection of humans. Many humans in Government work in education AND could NOT give two shits about if children are educated. Because Government doesn't go bankrupt, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get rid of these people - and they are in the MAJORITY. Most of the people I have worked at in Government - don't care much about education and focus instead on their public 'career'. Whereas, when I work in the Private Sector, they do care. Why? Because in the Private Sector they will lose their jobs if they do not provide VALUE (which again, is subjective). A person working in Government on the other hand, has NO NEED to provide value - and most don't or very very very little compared to those in Private Industry.
Again, this seems to be a case you missing a key point, that being subjective value, as well as presenting an argument in the Platonic Perfect Forms which frankly cannot and will never be able to measure our subjective experiences AND ALSO cannot ever know the true supply of goods and services available. The only known means of measuring both subjective value and supply is the price mechanism. These aren't 'side issues' they are CORE issues. There's also a good Ehtical argument for why private school is moral and Government school is immoral, but I have to leave it here.
1
-
technatezin The most important thing is to satisfy your customers. If you don't do that, you won't be making a profit. However, making a profit in a FREE competitive market is virtuous and signals a couple of things to society
(a) you are indeed providing a good or service of value to society, we know this because people are paying for it and
(b) you are doing so in a manner that is efficient and thus are able to make a profit - IOWs, you are not wasting the Earth's limited resources. One of the worse things about Government, is how inefficient and wasteful it is. The US Government, for example, wastes more energy than any other institution (in history) and likewise creates the most pollution (in history). Go start a business with your own money, see if you don't want to make some of it back - if anything, just to live on.
Most companies are small and do not have investors outside of the people who start the business and bank who lent them the money.
Also, most people start a business because they WANT to provide something of value. Almost no one starts a business just to make a profit - that's asinine. If you're not the type of person who likes people and thinks about their needs, you won't make a good entrepreneur (but would probably make a good public servant).
Again, I doubt you've ever had any real experience opening a business. Everything you suggest sounds like a talking point from some political hacks memo. So, my advice is, do it. Go offer a great pedagogy and see if people are willing to pay you for it.
See how far you go with an attitude of only trying to make profit. I promise, with that attitude you will be bankrupt in a month. People aren't idiots, they can see value and most can smell a bullshitter when they have to part with money. Not to mention contract and fraud laws will ensure you live up to your end of the deal or go to jail. So, again, do it. Start a business with your own money. Put some skin in the game. Then talk to me. I promise, you'll have a completely different attitude. One based on Empirical reality as opposed to belly button lint and counting the number of angles on the head of a pin.
1
-
1
-
technatezin RE: "You can still sell for a profit by selling goods of dubious quality and still remain in business by selling something of expected average quality to the customer."
And?
Microsoft was one of the largest companies in the world, they marketed Zune, it was of 'dubious value', some people bought it, most decided they wanted an iPod. That's competition in a free market (or at least close to one). They we have Apple and a thriving smart phone market.
If the Government was "selling" Zune (providing a 'free' MP3 player as a public service) then we'd still have Zune. Apple probably would have went out of business and there'd be no iPhone and possibly no smart phone market.
See the difference? This is why Government school monopolies are bad for society. Which is why our Government Schools are being replaced by Charter and Private Schools. Which is GOOD for society.
Sadly, thanks to Government School monopolies, for 100 years, we have no idea of all the great pedagogical ideas that just never happened due to unfair Government monopolization of this market. However, in a free market, good Government Schools (of which there must be some) can compete and if they truly provide value, then people will pay for those services.
Hypothetical aside, I've personally worked in a Medical School that removed human anatomy laboratories. Why? Because they said the MD's didn't need that training. Because Government regulatory capture ensures AMA rent-seeking status, only Government approved medical schools can issue licences. Thus, without competition, students just think getting an MD and having no anatomy is fair value. Not that they care, they just want the MD. This is some serious 'dubious value' here. You do understand medical error is the #2 killer of Americans? You'll likely die of it. You can thank Government School monopoly and Government enforced regulatory capture and rent-seeking. The fact is, in the REAL world, the objective world, this is happening.
1
-
1
-
@celestialmorpho I sent my daughter to an extremely small private school. K to 6 was a total of 32 students.
The pros: teachers know students attributes extremely well, all the kids know one another, music teacher was very good, kids naturally took in leadership roles, most kids were quite engaged.
The Cons: Small number of kids could lead to some sense of bullying as there are only so many "best friends" to go around. Although the school did have some strategies in place, if a bully was dominating, that is an issue. Sports teams was not a thing, instead kids did swimming at a university pool, played tennis, and had competitions with other small schools.
Overall: Graduating kids have a very good reputation for taking initiative, being better at music (being able to play and read sheet music for multiple instruments), and generally being good natured. The biggest drawbacks were if you wanted team sports and some bullying around having a best friend.
Compared with better funded public schools, small private schools (which also get some public funding incidentally), are probably better in many ways. But, I can see that it also comes down to the teachers. Probably small schools attract and keep good teachers and don't have the resources to put up with bad teachers – and get rid of them. So, that's also worth thinking about.
1
-
@celestialmorpho
In addition: private vs public
My feeling is, having 8 years more experience, that is not necessary for public institutions to be horrible and it's not natural for private institutions to be superior. What I think is that both are so-so, and that over time private institutions that are so-so often go bankrupt. Where as public institutions don't. This means that the people who work in public institutions can engage is "politics" and get promoted while not providing value. Hence the term: "Institutionalised". But, this probably happens at very large companies too. Because they're nearly too big to fail (many secure government contracts – Amazon for example).
Thus, one factor that probably helps society is having poorly run private institutions go bankrupt.
However, there's another issue at play, and that's the fact that private, public, and society are not separate and overlap in both positive and negative ways. Sometimes public money goes to competent people at public institutions. And sometimes private institutions get the inside track or act devious or just get lucky. Also, people themselves are a player. People are supposed to act as a check on poorly functioning public institutions. But they don't seem to care. I recently volunteered at a new private school (that gets a lot of public money) and it seemed that ONLY me and two other people where there. No one comes to these meetings. But "society" requires that members of society get involved and do these things. Yet they don't want to.
Any thoughts or questions?
1
-
1
-
elvenbread191 What do you mean 'eliminate manufacturing'? Firstly, me being able to buy a made in Japan car is my business. GM in the USA may or may not like my choice, but that's on me. Secondly, suppose one day 3D printing comes along and eliminated 85% need for mass manufacturing. Are you going to suggest we'd be worse off? Think about how the tractor put 85% of farm hands out of work, were we worse off? Yes, it may eliminate millions of jobs - so what? That's a good thing. Imagine all the doctors put out of work when we cure cancer. Again, this is a GOOD thing.
I think you'll falling for a number of talking points. If I own a business, and I want to build my items in China, that's my decision, There's no 'WE' shipping manufacturing overseas. There's individuals. Those jobs are gone, and good riddance. The problem is the fact people are looking FOR a job, instead of looking to create a job.
1
-
1
-
BramSLI1 The 1950s was much LOWER regulation, less rules, wages were generally running higher than minimum wage, and while labor had rights, it was nothing like today. Also, the 70s were not all that prosperous (inflation was bad) and at the end of the 1960s we were at war, again, not that great for a lot of people.
As an example, the AMA did not have near the monopoly on Rx they do now.There was no Drug War. Regulations to open a business were low. There was no Department of Energy, Department of Education, Homeland Security, TSA, and etc... they simply didn't exist. You didn't need a licence to cut hair, or sell flowers, or etc.. all of these have either come into existence or massively expanded.They are strangling our economy. Also, there was no such thing as Too Big To Fail. All of these problems were and are being created BY the government. Or government hand in glove with various crony capitalistic corporations.
I remember listening to an interview of a Russian who immigrated to the USA in the 1960s and he said he was dumb struck with how everyone wanted to start a business. It was as if every single person he met had and idea and was giving it a go. Compare that with today.
The ONLY way we're getting more jobs is if we're allowed to create them.
1
-
BramSLI1 Which is a very very very inefficient means to fund research and one of the reasons we make such slow progress. For example, I've seen liars write great grants and get awarded hundreds of millions of dollars, up to a billion dollars if you count infrastructure, and have next to nothing - sometimes even going backwards, then before all that tax money was blown through. Anyone with half a brain would know a politician, some of whom think the earth is 6000 years old, others who have degrees in social sciences or are lawyers - are completely clueless as to who to fund or how to equitably allocate research funding. When left up to the Scientists themselves, they fund their colleagues projects, In short, you are again, clueless. Further, because resources are directed towards some projects, those same resources (including human talent) are not used in more efficient and beneficial manner. Many of the institutions today, are worse than they were in the 1980s in terms of organization. The Public ones are the worse of the lot, crammed to the rim with crony-bootlickers. Which is why you don't see your standard of living rising as quickly as it should given the massive gains in productive capacity. If you think you're going to pin the loss of your standard of living on a few corporate CEOs, you're smoking crank with your crack. The biggest more corrupt corporation in our country is the US Federal Government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
silat13 It's not a monopoly, if it were a monopoly then the solution would be to break up the monopoly. Although, in general, monopolies benefit the buyer and are usually bad only for the competitor. History shows monopolies generally align with a low cost point to keep competition from entering the market. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of Progressive magic thinking. Never mind that everything the State has touched turns to shit: See Public Welfare ghettos. Government schools with their 1 in 5 functionally illiterate graduation rate, the NSA and it's spying on Citizens, the never ending wars the State continues to lose year after year, the FDA regulated pink slime or the Central Bank bailing out the top 0.01% to the tune of trillions and etc...
Don't worry, by the time the FCC is done, you'll be paying much MUCH more and getting a much slower, much more regulated internet with a Logon ID and daily limit - you know, for the Good of the Commons. Would want you using more than your fair-share of the Commons. Thank you Progressives, another industry you've destroyed. The LAST tiny bit of freedom snuffed out thanks to our Central Planning Progressive Socialists.
1
-
ckildegaard There's no need for the FCC, simply use contract law to deal with companies that slow speeds to certain websites. If you sign a contract with Provider X that says they will not slow down speeds, and they do, then they get sued. It's that simple.
But don't worry, the FCC "protecting" you from something that isn't happening but might, maybe, could, someday, happen - is just the camels nose under tent. We'll pay more for a slower internet and eventually require an internet ID to logon to the internet. The Government will continue to regulate every aspect of the internet until programmers are required a State licence and to open an internet site will requite a licence. You know, so your State Nanny can protect you from something that might happen one day.
And thus, you Regressive Socialists will have destroyed the last free-market left on Earth. By the Gods it sucks having to live in a country with pathetic people who need a Nanny. Oh well, to anyone out there who isn't in need of a Nanny, my suggestion is to become one. Because there's plenty of American's who need looking after.
1
-
1
-
silat13 Libertarians are for a limited government. It's what the USA was founded on. The first 10 amendments to the US Constitution are to protect us FROM government. The US Constitution is to protect FROM government.
LIMITED government, not no government. Libertarians want a Government, just a small one. Libertarians support: sound free market money, ending labor tax, support contract law and laws that protect private property. All of which requite a small amount of government.
In the past, because the US government was limited, Americans were forced to work WITH one another. Not so in modern America where the US Government is now the largest single entity in human history. The US Government can be used AGAINST other Americans - even, as in this case, just because 'maybe' a company 'could', 'maybe' one day slow speeds to a site, even though this has never been a problem in the USA.
Yes, humans work best together with a non-violent social structure. Which is why we need LIMITED government. Because the humans who work in Government, are the one's with the most power to use violence against innocent humans. We need protected against them - the ones working in Government, the most. Contract law and competition will deal with corporations.
ONLY a Public Official can strangle an innocent man to death for trying to break up a fight. ONLY the Government can tell you who you can legally marry. The US Government is the largest polluter in the history of humanity, it uses the most of our limited energy, it spends trillions of dollars killing people in phony wars and has been doing so since the 1950s. The US government just bailed out the richest 0.1% and you keep blaming the Koch brothers? What planet do you live on??? The US Government has killed over a million people in Asian and the ME, and you keep blaming the Koch brothers? You are a State-bot. You worship the State just like a religious fundamentalist worships their religious institution. The POTUS is your Pope. Our Senators are your Bishops. The State is your religion.
Don't worry, we're getting more government, and unless you're a Regulator or in the top 0.1%, then your life will probably get worse.
Note: The Koch brothers might make a good boogeyman story for children or Progressive Socialists, but in the real world they provide hundreds of thousands of people with good paying jobs and have absolutely nothing to do with why 1 in 5 Government school graduates are functional illiterates. Oh, and it doesn't matter who you vote in as POTUS, this isn't going to alter the fact that 1 in 7 Americans are illiterate, 1 in 5 Government school graduates are functionally illiterate and of those that can read, most do so at the level of a 7th grader. Vote in for whomever you like, it's not going to change this fact.
1
-
The AMA started out regulating medicine for "The Good of Society" because maybe, just maybe someone would sell someone else medicine that wasn't what they claimed. While we could have used contract law to deal with this, we instead gave the AMA a monopoly over Rx. This then meant only State licensed practitioners could prescribe Rx.
What was the fallout of government having this power?
1) Today over 450,000 Americans are killed by medical error each year, up from 80,000 in 1990.
2) Our prisons are filled with millions of non-violent drug dealers. Some for selling marijuana which is now legal in many States.
3) Our cities are littered with drug gang ghettos.
4) Heroin derivatives make up the drug of choice for middle class America, even though it's not legal to take recreationally, most easily get a Rx script for their drug of choice turning Physicians into drug pushers and Pharama into pain-pill manufacturers.
5) Tens of millions of students waste their lives hoping to get into a limited spot to become a Rent-Seeker in the medical field.
6) Medicine is now way over priced and falling in quality year in and year out. The MD qualification today is barely worth the paper it's printed on.
You think the FCC is going to stop here? No way. The will do what all Government agencies do, grow and this means more regulation (to keep us safe from one another) and over time all of this will become normal, eventually we'll need to pay an Internet Tax (for the Good of Society) and this will require a Log-On ID (issued by the State when you pay your fee).
When this happens, and it will, remember it was demagogues like Thom the Progressive Social Justice Warrior that killed off the last true Free Market in the world: The Internet. It may take 10 years, but our Internet Tax and ID is coming. Then you'll need a State Licence and State permission to build a website. The biggest players like Google, will buy off Government and be nearly impossible to compete against.
You'll see.
1
-
ckildegaard Like I said, in the USSA the new norm, one could say "The American Way" isn't to deal with social problems (or in this case, total lack of any problem) using free-markets and freedom, but to turn to the use of State violence to solve any and every perceived potential social problem (or, in this case, total lack of a problem).
Like I said, IF this problem would have arisen, and by all account it wouldn't have ever occurred, it could have been easily solved using contract law and free-markets. But this isn't what Americans want. No, that would require thinking and maybe getting involved in the markets. Nope. Americans, with their collective 6th grade reading comprehension, want a State Nanny to solve any existing or potentially existing problems.
Talk about pathetic.
Don't worry, soon we'll have an Internet Tax, regulatory capture, rent-seeking and slower internet. You'll log onto your Government managed slow-net with your Government issued ID to slowly visit Government licensed websites that have been approved and issued a permit by the State.
If you ever wonder why nations rise, peak and then collapse, just look in the mirror for your answer. It's because of people like you. I was recently reading a novel written in the late 1800s in Japan about Japan's golden age, and there you were. A whiny little 17th century Japanese peasant too worried about their own shadow and more than happy to give more power to their Lord to protect them from non-existent danger. Well, let tell you how it ends, not too good for the little functionally illiterate piss-in-his-pants at his own shadow peasant.
1
-
1
-
ckildegaard The AMA is given State privilege to licence practitioners. What? You think YOU are allowed to practice without AMA approval?!? Give me a break. The AMA has a Government granted near-monopoly on medicine. Yes, it's a Private fraternity. AND? Welcome to Fascist America where private interests use the State to control the hyper-regulated markets. Which is exactly what will happen to the Internet. It's called regulatory capture, licencing schemes and rent-seeking.
Don't worry, there'll come a day when you'll need a State Internet ID "For the Good of Society" to log on to the Internet. And you'll of course be required to pay an Internet Tax. And, to ensure you don't use up too much of "The Commons" / aka: use too much internet, your access will be measured and limited "For the Good of Society". Oh, and to develop software you'll need a degree and licence from a University. You know, for the "Good of Society" and to keep you safe from some non-danger, like a webpage that doesn't load.
The State and the Corporate interest that own it, have wanted to regulate the Internet since it became such a large FREE MARKET. The Progressives just gave it to them. They just gave the last free-market over to the State.
Don't worry, the State will destroy the free-market internet with millions and millions of regulations just as it has destroyed medicine, education, finance - everything. And when it does, remember today. The day you whined you wanted the FCC to protect you from the big scary 'free-market'.
1
-
1
-
Expect the FCC to regulate the Internet the way the FDA regulates boiled in ammonia, snout, foot, ear, tail, skin and other off cuts colored and sold as Human "food". The Internet we enjoy today is a (nearly) free-market - which is why it's so great. The FCC Government regulated Internet of tomorrow will be a functionally illiterate pink slime welfare ghetto.
Oh, and if you think Government regulation comes cheap - think again. Once the Internet becomes part of the so-called "Commons" we will have an internet tax. Eventually, we will need an official State internet log-on ID. Much like the FCC 'regulates' what's legal to show on TV or legal to hear on the radio - that's going to happen to the Internet. Oh, and no more live-game streams or other innovative ideas. No torrents. No freedom to open up a website not needing a State issued licence. Nope, that's using up too much of the "Commons" and is taking away from the functionally illiterate Progressives' share of The Commons.
So, thank you Progressives (Social Regressives) you've just destroyed the last shred of somewhat free-markets left in the world. Just like everything else your ilk touches from Education to caring for the poor. You literally turn everything you touch into the Public welfare ghettos. There goes the last chance humanity had at (nearly) Government free communication.
Good on you.
Oh, and do enjoy your shitty Netflicks and old FCC approved re-runs. It pretty much cost us all our only free space/free-market/freedom we had left.
Progressive Socialism: Regulating your life, so you don't have to.
1
-
For anyone who wants to know the real story and not the BS fairytale / State-worship the Regressive Socialists sold us: http://www.techpolicydaily.com/internet/caused-web-slow-down-comcast-twc-verizon/
Excerpt:
"Network analyst George Ou offered his perspective of what had happened: “Cogent purchased on the order of 1 terabit of capacity from Comcast and got 4 terabits from Comcast. When I say ‘purchased’, I mean bartered. Then they turned around and sold 100 terabits of capacity to [their] own customers. That’s why Cogent customers are suffering slow performance. Then they demanded 8x the bandwidth from Comcast at no extra cost and when Comcast refused, they blamed their slow service on Comcast.”
Note 1: As I stated, all of this COULD have been handled quick, legally, and with no need of violence using voluntarily agreed to contract law.
Note 2: If the CONgress, POTUS or the FCC were honest, then they'd also see no need for more Government regulation. But, this isn't about providing service - this is about voting buying off a largely Government schooled and functionally illiterate voting public (DoED found the average reading comprehension is 7-8th grade in the USSA) by O-blah-ma and other crooked politicians and is a power grab by the FCC so that middle and upper management can gun for high paid positions at Comcast dealing with FCC regulation - that they themselves are rapidly creating by the thousands and thousands of pages as you read this. Not only will we get to pay for the FCC, but we'll get to pay more for Internet access as the ISP providers will be required to waste more time on useless FCC made-up-red-tape.
Note 3: For any recent Government schooled graduate, an 'excerpt' is a short extract from the writing cited.
Note 4: Expect more Regulatory Capture, and now Rent Seeking on the parts of the big players as people in the FCC begin to use their State-given power as leverage over various businesses and those businesses fight back.
And thus Progressive Socialism will come full circle as the State Fascism it, in reality, already is.
Don't worry, we're getting slower, more expensive internet and we'll need a State licence and log-on ID in order to access it. You know "For the Good of Society".
Again, thank you Regressives, you're doing such a wonderful job destroying Civil Society.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ckildegaard I provided actual evidence that no ISP provider was slowing Netflicks or any other site - yet, this doesn't matter to the State-bots. Nope. MAYBE, an ISP provider might, could, possibly will one day slow speeds AND even though this can be addressed without using the State (through contract law) our Regressive Socialists instead demand that the State (which was purposely LIMITED by the founders of the nation) expand it's size and scope even larger.... just in case.
You Regressives made the same argument in support of the decades long War on Terror. We all have to get used to the TSA, The Patriot Act, the NSA spying, the never-ending-trillion dollars wasted on Warfare - all because maybe a "Terrorist" might, could, possibly one day kill more Americans. Never mind 480,000 needlessly die every single year due to Medical Error.
Don't worry, you're in luck. Almost everyone in society thinks just you. Religious kooks who cling to their security blanket, be it their Sky-Daddy and/or their State-Nanny.
So, we get to lose yet more Civil Rights and Personal Privacy and live in a Police State where never ending Wars and bailing out the top 0.01% by the Progressive Central Bank is the norm.
My advice to you is to pay your taxes, get used to the lower standard of living and keep pulling the magic voting lever to the right or left.
Enjoy your weekend.
1
-
1
-
In the minds of our so-called Progressive Socialists, State violence IS Progress. That's how demented these people are. They're insane. Even when provided evidence their insane delusions are just that - delusions, they still demand more State expansion and more intrusion into our lives. They will never stop until every single aspect of our lives are controlled and regulated for by the State. It's in their DNA. It's what they are.
Thus we get to live with Internet Nanny-Overlords at the FCC deciding which websites are "Legal" and have met all the FCC "Standards" and "Guidelines" and are deemed fit for Public Display just as the FCC does for television and radio.
You know, "For the Good of Society". Because in Progressive's mind, voluntarism and free-markets equals to BAD, whereas State violence and regulation equals to GOOD.
So, one day we'll see that any images, words, or ideas not-approved by the FCC / Government will be cause to revoke your Government Issued Internet ID. Exactly as the FCC controls what we hear or see via radio, tv, film, etc.... they will do this to the internet.
Then we can all live in our Progressive Socialist Paradise where the Government Regulates every single aspect of our lives, from who we can legally marry, to which herbs we can legally smoke to what ideas we can legally access to read, to which video games we're allowed to play.
Don't color out of the lines, or the FCC/Government will remove your State issued Internet ID access and if you dare to use the Internet without using your NSA issued State-Internet-ID then you get to go to jail with the other 10s of millions of Americans who committed non-violent thought crimes or dared to smoke a fricken weed.
Welcome to the Progressive State's of America.
So, again, a BIG THANK YOU Progressives for helping to destroy the last free-market in the world. All because MAYBE an ISP might, maybe, could one day, slow your God damn speed to shitty FCC approved re-runs from the 1970s. Jesus H Christ you people suck. You destroy everything you touch.
1
-
ckildegaard
You just watch as the FCC guts the Internet. The people at the FCC couldn't give two flying shits about 'Protecting the Internet'. What a childish simpleton thing to suggest. The people running the FCC are like people anywhere else. They want power and more of it. And you Regressives just handed these sociopaths the Internet.
FACT #1) There was NO problem with the internet.
Thus, the FCC isn't protecting shit - because there was nothing wrong with the internet. But don't worry, now that the FCC has the power to 'Regulate' the internet it will not stop until it regulates the Internet just as it does TV, radio and any other form of communication.
So, again, THANK YOU REGRESSIVES for destroying the last Free-Market left on earth. You should be happy with yourselves - given how much you hate free-markets, aka: free people.
FACT #2) There is NO evidence ISP were slowing internet speeds. Actually, the opposite, the evidence shows ISPs were NOT slowing speeds - exactly the opposite of your deluded fantasy land where FCC and Government violence 'for the good of society' comes and 'saves' the day by regulating the hell out of everything.
FACT #3) YOU little State-bots are the ones who live in a fantasy land.
Even when the State outright lies us into a trillion(S) dollar Phony war that is loses year after year, guts our civil liberties with the Orwellian named Patriot Act and bails out the richest 0.1% - there you Regressives are, first in line to wave your stupid flags like the Religious State-bot kooks you are! I feel sorry for you. You must really think the world is such a horrible place that only a Police State can give you the 'freedom' you want. That's sad. Really sad.
Yup, the free-market Internet had to go all because one day, somewhere, just maybe, someday, someone might, could, maybe do slow the internet like the big bad free-market boogey man that lives under your bed.
You Regressive Socialists destroy everything you touch. E-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g. And now you've just handed over the Internet to the Government - and destroyed the last vestige of free communication and free-markets left to human society. Which is exactly what you wanted because you hate free-markets. Regressive Socialists are positively repulsive.
Like I said, you will see. Watch across the next 10-15 years as the FCC guts the Internet. As it stands, the Internet is pretty much done for. It'll become another Government Hyper-regulated stagnate market where you'll be required to have a State-issued NSA Log-On ID and fill in forms and pay fees to open a FCC approved website. You'll need to 'demonstrate there's a need for such a website' (which is common for many business licences) and if you publish something that tarnishes the FCC or the Government, you'll have your ID revoked.
You just wait and see.
1
-
1
-
ckildegaard
I posted a link showing that ISP were not purposely slowing the internet. The empirical evidence is staring at you in the face.
The very fact that this information was available to the FCC showing they were not needed at all, AND yet these people running the FCC still (happily) accepted a new and powerful (profitable) role 'Regulating' the Internet - should at least give you pause for thought.
You do understand the State you worship is spending $600 billion dollars this year alone, fighting and losing a way it made-up? You do understand that 1 in 5 Government schooled Americans have a reading comprehension at the 6th grade level? (which explains a lot)
Anyway, being a State-bot, you cannot question your God. It's simply impossible.
So, you should instead try and image how frustrating it is for people like me, to have to be surrounded by 49.99% Theo-bot imbeciles and with the other 49.99% being State-bot imbeciles. As much as I cannot stand Religious superstition, I'll take it over State-worship any damn day of the week. State-bots have murdered 100s of millions of humans across the last 100 years.
Enjoy the FCC 'regulated' Internet along with the loss of freedom to interact freely with others in a free-market open space. That's what 6th grade level Idiocracy wanted, so that's what we get, because maybe, someday, possibly Shit-flicks may slow a little. And it only cost of our last free-market left on earth. You Regressives should be proud.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
007ohboy
You keep pointing to "Northern European" countries. Cherry pick much? Germans pay a religious tax, as an example. No one checks your ticket when you get on a bus in Germany. Why? Its assumed you paid - because people are honest.
Scandinavian countries are still relatively homogeneous (like Japan). They are SMALL countries with small populations. They also value education and the public is generally hard working and honest. NOTHING like the USA where 1 in 5 Public funded, Government Schooled, Americans is a functional illiterate. In some school districts, 50% of children drop out and of the ones that stick around and graduate, of them, only 35% can functionally read and write. Even less can perform basic arithmetic. Yet, America spends MORE per student than most 1st world nations. Do you see Northern European countries invading other countries?
You want to see a Socialist State the USSA will look like? Try Greece. Try Spain. Try looking at the Southern European countries - that's a much closer parallel to the US. The ones going broke.
What we need to solve this problem is State succession and freedom of movement. It's non-violent, voluntary and is legal. Then you can go live in Socialist Paradise (say, Detroit or Phili, both cities had Progressive Socialist Democratic Mayors for 60 years and are shit holes) and those of us who want to work hard and live in a free society with a very small limited government - we will move elsewhere to one of the States with these ideals.
Done and Done.
It's pretty simple. I honesty don't care what you do or where you live so long as you don't use violence against me or my family. That of course isn't good enough for you, so, State succession is the best option for both of us.
Oh, and if you think an Amendment is going to magically solve the problem of the State - you're smoking crack. The problem is the people. The State is a reflection of their ignorance and greed. Want to know the real reason Americans eat HFCS pink slime and burn coal and drive SUVs and invade other countries to kill their women and children? Americans.
Want to know what my Scandinavian friends say about America? "I'd be a nice place to live if it weren't for all the Americans". Yes, I agree.
1
-
007ohboy
You're putting the cart before the horse. Socialism doesn't bring about honesty. If that were the case, North Korea, the Chinese and the ex-States of the USSR would be the most honest people in the world. They're not. Also, policies do NOT bring about prosperity. Jesus, who told you that bullshit?
Prosperity is defined as civil liberty + time. Policies generally mean regulations which often erode both liberty and rob us of time. Therefor, less prosperous. We need MORE freedom. Not less. More. But, if you think Europe is so great - move there. See how it goes for you. I hear their economies are doing great.
Anyway, you're in luck. We're getting much more State. Not less. More. Also, we get to give up our privacy and lose more civil rights along the way. So, I do hope you like the Progressive State, our Central Planners and our Central Banksters - because these sociopaths have the legal obligation to initiate force against innocent people (and have no qualms doing so) and they're going to get more power over you.
We're not going to get a Scandinavian honest hard working society. We're getting a mix of Greece + Detroit.
Oh, and by the by, Cenk's so-called Wolf-pac Amendment isn't getting passed. That isn't what most Americans want. So, that's that. It's probably good for a view Youtubers - but most functional illiterates do what they're told to do. The learned that in Government School.
The Unions want to Lobby.
The Corporations want to Lobby.
The Banks want to Lobby.
The criminal Politicians want the money. They will NEVER make ANY amendment that limits their power and money. It's simply never going to happen. Not until States actually start succeeding from the Union itself (I'm guessing, 30 - 50 years from now).
A few facts about the State you love:
- The US Government started a war with Vietnam and Iraq (both over lies) and killed millions of women and children.
- The US Government is the largest polluter on earth - in the history of humanity.
- The US Government consumes / wastes more limited energy then any other institution in the history of humanity.
- The US Government created the Public Housing Slums that litter our country.
- The $80 Billion a year Department of
"Education" has destroyed education and nnow 1 in 5 Americans are functionally illiterate (don't worry, soon it'll be 1 in 3).
- You like the trillions of dollars of Progressive debt - good, your children will be forced to repay or go to prison. We're getting 10s of trillions more.
- The US State imprisons more non-violent humans, in rape cages, than any other nation - in history. Our prison system dwarfs Stalin's Gulags.
You think these sociopaths given two f*cks about anyone other then themselves? I hate to break it to you Sunshine, but no, they don't. They never have and never will. Which is why the Government was LIMITED. The first 10 amendments protect us FROM the Government. Not from the rich. But from the State. Because the State is inherently evil.
1
-
1
-
007ohboy
There is not such a thing as 'good' governance. When one resorts to using government/force against innocent people, that means you've failed to provide society with what it needs and wants without sticking a gun in their face and telling them: "this is good for society".
That's what you don't seem to get. Government is ANTI-progress. It's a return to the Jungle. A return to "Might makes Right". You want the poor taken care, you claim most Americans do as well because you can't enact 'governance/violence' without a majority - and yet there's more poor now than ever. Generational poor. Worse still, you can't seem to get in through your thick skull that the Progressive Policies (which were all just vote buying) of the 1960s failed miserably. We have generational welfare, over priced hyper-regulated medicine that's killing upwards to 450,000+ Americans a year, schools that graduate functional illiterates, children in welfare families with 3 - 5 fathers, prisons overflowing with non-violence prisoners, never ending wars, the State is now illegally spying on us, the Citizens you claim it works for, the State bailing out the richest 0.1% with generational debt, the State as the largest polluter in history, the State consumes more of earths limited energy. And on and on and on it goes.
You're the one living in La La land. Because someone used the word Progressive (in the late 1800s) and you seem to think if a nice sounding word is used with good intentions - then it must be sound. As they say: The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
The ONLY solution to our problems are the same solutions they've always been: MORE freedom. Not less - MORE. It's pretty simple. Freedom to trade, freedom to work without paying the State a labor tax, freedom to associate, freedom to use sound money, LIMITED government to protect property and uphold contract law, and that's it.
But don't worry, that's not the path we're going to go down. We're getting more government, more taxes, more debt, more regulations, less privacy, losing more civil liberty and we'll be poorer for it. So, I hope you like the New Economy, it's the first 6 years and 30 more to go. The end result of Progressive Socialism is this mess we live in now. Take a look around you, you're living in a police State. I'm shocked when I return from overseas how worse the USA gets each and every year. Last year was beyond belief. Absolutely shocking. And it's getting worse, and will continue to get worse - because Americans now hate personal freedom and love "Progressive" State violence. Which, historically, fits in perfectly with our stage of Empire - the very very beginnings of Decline.
You'll see.
Tax the richest 10% as much as you like, it's not going to change a thing. The Department of Education/Propaganda costs us $80 BILLION a year - that's 3 times what Apple Inc makes in Profit every year. Three Apple's worth of productivity just to pay for ONE of the hundreds of Government bureaucracies - yet education has never been worse.
As I said, you'll see. Because each civil liberty we give up, isn't coming back - ever. Not in your lifetime. And the State passes millions and millions and millions of lines of regulations each year.
1
-
007ohboy
1. I did not say big government is 'bad'. I said initiation of force is immoral. And, Ethically, it is immoral. Government has that legal obligation in society. Thus, it has always been limited.
2. You keep picking out the Scandinavian countries. What you fail to understand is the USSA is not Scandinavian. The socialist paradise you're looking for in Europe is Greece. Spain. Portugal. Italy.
3. Even in Scandinavian countries, they oscillate from having more regulations (more government/violence) and this impacts on their economy by reducing prosperity. Then they oscillate back towards the free-market and become more prosperous. And right back they go towards socialism.
4. It's much easier to run social programs within monocultureal states. Like the North of Europe and Japan. Why? Because you can make up the difference in other freedoms. For example, in Japan you can leave beer vending machines out by the road, for anyone to steal from or children to buy beer - and have no problems. You can leave boxes of food out by the road (as a store owner) again, no one steals. You can trust people to do their own thing (opening shops out of their houses that would NEVER be legal in the USA). The fact is, the USA cannot have those freedoms - because Americans are not those people.
What you also don't get - is just how much of a Police State you live in already. You do not live in a free-market / free society. Those countries you point out are much freer societies. And, as I stated - move there. You'll soon see this is true. I have. I've lived in Japan. I'd happily move back if I could continue to do, professionally, what I'm going now. Unfortunately, the level of technical Japanese is beyond me in my particular profession - or else I would. And I may anyway. I'd also happily move to Germany or Sweden to enjoy their social freedoms and put up with the oscillation towards socialism.
The fact is these countries are much freer. They gain that freedom by being monocultureal. It's simply much easier to provide social services to people who all pretty much think alike. You're able to agree and get things done quicker.
I'd watch Sweden closely. Let's see how they do now that they're feeling the effects of immigration. Because guess what? While the countryside is fine. In the city people are talking about how unfair it is to pay for general welfare. See? They're now where near as multicultreal as we are - and it's already taking a toll on their socialistic system.
The truth is, Scandinavian and Japan works, because of their hardworking, honest, intelligent people that make up their monocultural society. Nothing like the USA.
As for "good" government. This is an oxymoron. There is ONLY immoral government. Which is why the first 10 amendments are there to protect us from it. As for economic prosperity, this is derived from being free. The solution is more civil liberty. Not less. More. More freedom. Not less. More.
Freedom, law, private property rights, sound money. Those are the main ingredients. However, you needn't worry as we won't be getting those. For us it less freedom more regulation, continue loss of privacy and property, and our central planners at our fascistic central bank will continue to debase our currency. So, in 15 years, when you wonder why life is so shit in the USSA, try to recall this last paragraph and compare today, with then.
You'll see.
1
-
007ohboy
Last points.
(1) There's nothing wrong with capitalism. It's just a fancy word for savings and investing.
(2) What's Progressive today is Conservative tomorrow. The Central Bank (by all means "Conservative") was a Progressive idea from the 1800s. Yet, here this Progressive idea just bailed out the richest 0.1%. Income tax was another Progressive idea from the 1800s. It was ONLY meant to take the millionaires (billions in today's dollars) and NOT the workers. Now most tax it paid by laborers. See? This is the thing about using force against innocent people - at all seems well and good in the beginning, and it all ends in tears.
(3) Those female progressives of the 1800s would barf to see what has become of women in the 2000s. IOWs Progressives then would be Conservatives now. So, I'd stop thinking in those terms as they are meaningless.
(4) You're going to give someone the power over you. Either the free-market where you have control. Or the government where you do not have control. The SAME people you fear will take a job in either. Which do you want "Policing" and "Regulating" you? A sociopath who is legally restricted from legally using force against you OR a sociopath who must be law initiate force against innocent people? Which is it? (note: The USSA has the most non-violent humans in government cages than in all of history).
You seem to think we 'need' to use force against innocent people to live Progressively - the fact is, it's exactly the opposite.
Last point: Initiation of force against innocent people is, Ethically defined, as immoral. Government is given this legal obligation in society. Thus, government is, by definition, immoral. Further, IF >50% people truly do desire the service provided by government, then there is not need FOR government to provide it. Because there's more than enough people to pay for it. Which they WILL DO one way or another. One way through free-market voluntarism and their other - through force.
Whether you know it or not: You're living in a Police State. That isn't going to change in your lifetime (or very unlikely to).
1
-
007ohboy
Do you know what an oxymoron is? A round circle. A paradoxical statement.
The fact that you must employ the use Force against innocent people to forcefully achieve your Progressive ideals should give you pause. Because, its an oxymoron. If people truly actually 'want' to live in your Progressive Paradise, then you wouldn't have to resort to the use force against them. It's pretty simple. You have to give people freedom. Not take it away - but return it to them. With LAW and sound money, they will be prosperous.
Oxymoron's are why we hear jingoistic phrases like "for the Good of Society". Which is no different than saying "for the Glory of God".
Logically, it doesn't matter if the Police State is employed for either Progressive or Conservative purposes - the fact is, when one group of people uses force against another group of innocent people, that is immoral.
Anyway, as they say: "So this is how the world ends, not with a bang but with a whimper..."
You'll see.
And don't worry. We're getting less freedom. Not more. Less. Less civil liberties. Less privacy. a broken currency. We'll become a poorer, less prosperous "Progressive" nation. More tax. More regulations. More phony wars. More control. And an ultra- rich ruling political elite using the Progressive Police State to rule over a poor ignorant people willing to die for their Leaders. Just like now.
The ONLY solution to NOT bailing out the rich is to LIMIT the State. Because no matter who you elect - they will do what their political masters tell them to do (with the exception of MAYBE Ron Paul, but you can see how the MSM and TYT crucified him - even though he stated we'd have this crash 15 years ago and was against the war and wrote a book - END the FED). Thus, the ONLY viable, realistic solution, is to end the State. That way, when the rich get into trouble for f*cking up the economy, they don't get bailed out, they instead get pulled down with the rest of us.
But, this isn't going to happen. Nope. The rich will become richer and we'll become their property. As a matter of fact, we already are. We're Citizens "OF" The USA. The "of" is a denotation of property ownership. Property of the State and the ruling Elite that wields it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I live in Australia, I can promise you, this is a slanted view of Australia.
The firs thing to notice, BOTH he and his wife work. This is a MUST to get by in Australia. The AU government gives vouchers to put your infant in "daycare" beginning at 6 weeks! And you'll probably need to do that because you will be paying out the arse for everything you buy. Take the price in the USA, double it. Prices in AU are at least 40% higher. Most young Australians can not afford a home - and many never will own one. It's normal to see adults sharing house to make rent and bills.
Most Aussies will tell you this is not the lucky country any longer.
Healthcare is NOT 'free' and the levy is going to go up again this year. Public hospitals are NOT where you want to go for anything serious. They're training grounds for surgeons on their way to private practise. Do NOT go to a public hospital for anything serious if you can manage not to.
The AU economy is built on a fake housing bubble, minerals being sold hand over fist to China (who is also buying up a LOT of land and property in AU) and the massive immigration (1/4 - 1/3 are from overseas, mainly Asia) and the cities are showing the wear and tear. I've been mugged at knife point downtown Hyde Park in Sydney. Expect to see homeless begging just like any major city - particularly around Central Station.
Pubic schools are next to useless - unless you want to be a waiter. Inflation is ungodly out of control. Private school cost $20-25,000 a year and this is a a MUST if you want your child to have a decent education.
Anyway, David and his simplistic view of the world again where the magic government takes care of everything. IF it were THAT easy, then all multinational countries would follow Australia's example. They don't because it doesn't work. AU is a resource rich country like KSA, Kuwait or UAE. Almost any idiot can run it and there's still enough money to go around - but, those times are coming to an end. Life in AU is tough. Which is why we can't wait to leave.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Keith Voltaire
1) I find it interesting you claim that as societies become more complex, that more central force is required. I on the other hand think exactly the opposite is true. As societies become complex, it becomes harder for central authorities to model and manage said complex societies - which is why, as States become more 'socialistic' they simultaneously lose more liberty and privacy. It's one of the reasons we all must lose our right to privacy as the State's central planners attempt to model our behaviours. As this fails (and it always does) the State then restricts our behaviours. All of which is happening currently.
I have a tea cup sitting next to me. You don't need to see it, other than to know it's mine - I own it. How much is it worth to me? How can the State discover this? It can't. The ONLY way anyone, perhaps even me, can determine the value of my tea cup is if I'm allowed to trade it for a sound currency.
Thus, a free society with sound money is the most efficient means to maintain (and develop) a complex society. Not a central authority.
2) RE: The State (as defined by Max Weber, see Princeton University: .http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Monopoly_on_the_legitimate_use_of_physical_force.html)
*The monopoly on legitimate violence (German: Gewaltmonopol des Staates) is the definition of the state expounded by Max Weber in Politics as a Vocation, which has been predominant in philosophy of law and political philosophy in the twentieth century.
It defines a single entity, the state, exercising authority on violence over a given territory, as territory was also deemed by Weber to be a characteristic of state. Importantly, such a monopoly must occur via a process of legitimation, wherein a claim is laid to legitimise the state's use of violence.*
--
Anyone can legally use violence in defence against aggression. ONLY the State can initiate force against an innocent person. Examples of State violence include income tax (labor tax) and drug laws. The first one is used to force workers to pay to maintain value of the State's fiat paper. When Chinese buy 30 year T-bonds - they're buying labor from children not yet born, let alone given a vote - which makes a mockery of democracy. When Rx monopoly was given to the AMA, it initiated the legal use of force against everyone attempting to take ownership of their own body - this small act of violence of the State has ended up in the largest prison population in history as well as hellishly violent inner cities that would make bootleggers look like angles, not to mention ruined healthcare. Currently 480,000 Americans die each year due to medical error. Up from 90,000 in 1990.
Violence doesn't work in ANY society. Larger State is a return to the jungle. Government is ANTI-society. It's a return to might makes right.
The State is by definition immoral. Public institutions are based on violence. Private enterprise on the other hand is virtuous. Because the ONLY way a private group of people can interact with you is by your voluntarily agreeing to do so. Apple Inc is the largest corporation in the world, yet you feel no fear at telling them to piss off and buying Samsung. Try that with a police officer or the IRS. You'll quickly see the difference between Private and Public.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm not sure why you propose this is a 'conundrum'?
If wages are going down and productivity is going up, then items being sold are simply sold for less - or not sold at all. As an example, see your smart phone. You get much more for the same, or less money, compared with 10 years ago. A second example could be (where I live) avocados. They used to be expensive, now there's more sellers and the price is less - the price to pick avocados has in relative terms gone down due to inflation.
There seems to be this mantra that we 'need' 2% inflation - as if most Americans care about saving 2% annually. Hell, many have CC with 18-25% annual interest.
IMO the reason why we have low paying, low quality jobs is because of our educational system. With 1 in 5 Americans functionally illiterate, the massive amount of regulations required to be met to open a business, the restriction on wage regardless of business, and the unsound fiat currency we use - why would anyone want to open a business? It's just too much of a hassle - just get a high paying job with security and benefits in Government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Full Quote: I’m not going to speculate as to how the police in New York should react. What I do know is part and parcel of living in a great global city is you gotta be prepared for these things, you gotta be vigilant, you gotta support the police doing an incredibly hard job, you gotta support the security services. And I think speculating, when you don’t know the facts, is unwise.
What is he referring to when he says 'part and parcel'? He's referring to living with the continual threat of Islamic Terrorism. This way of thinking would NEVER be acceptable in Japan. Oh, and he is right, if Western people do nothing, if they go on as is, they WILL live with the constant fear of not just Terrorism but also being assaulted - this will go on until one day these Western cities are finally conquered. Which, looking at London and many little towns around England, for many parts of the West, isn't far off in the future. More like right around the corner.
We in Japan, actually all of Asia, look at such a person as a loser. We also look at the West and pluralism no longer as an ideal to achieve (which none of us believed anyway), but a huge mistake to avoid. Which we will.
1
-
1
-
1
-
What fear? I'm stating a fact. Germany and Sweden have been pacifists and they are not safe. This suggests your hypotheses that Japan is safe because we are not involved in the ME wars is untrue. Japan is safe because we're extremely homogeneous AND Japanese/E. Asian. The few Muslims living in Japan (between 70 - 100K) are strictly monitored (as are all gaijin - but in this case more so) and are for the most part in Japan only for work related (mainly oil) businesses. Most leave Japan. Why? Because Japan is not a place for non-Japanese. We are not pluralistic and will never be. Like all E. Asians, we do not tolerate pluralism. Further still, our educational system is extremely difficult - if a person is of average ability, they will find life in E. Asia difficult and hard work with little reward for those of low ability. Even learning to read will be difficult for those of low ability, if not, impossible. Lastly, we do not reward people who do not work..... with life-long generous welfare. We find that insane. You may think the Mayor of London has your best interests in mind. That's not how we see it in Japan. Not even in the slightest. Anyway, London is not my city, and here in Japan we needn't worry at all about Islamic Terrorism (or being stabbed on the street, as happened randomly while the Terrorists were on their murder spree elsewhere in London). It's clear to us in E. Asia, you in the West no longer have what it takes to make your cities safe -
like ours. Your countries are lost to you, along with your culture and your future. That's how we see things. Thus, to us, the Mayor is a Loser.
1
-
1
-
A neighbour called the police and reported the man before he murdered those children last week. Vigilance isn't going to stop these murders. In another week or month, there'll be more and more and more of these terrorist acts. Your so called leaders will only tell you is to pretend everyone is the same, everything is fine, go out shopping and don't forget "“Diversity is Strength" (not to mention: War is peace and Freedom is slavery). Off topic: In terms of Japanese birthrate, it is low, as is the case in all prosperous modern nations, and appears to be an effect of prosperity itself. That said, Japan does not have a 'problem' with our birth rate. We are procreating more than Germany and Italy, but less than America. Not that this matters to us. We don't care about other nations and what other nations think it appropriate. Given our population is 120 million, I think decreased population is okay for a generation. Also, we are using this opportunity to make housing affordable for young people and decreased labor is driving robotics innovation. Overall, I think it's a net positive. On topic: I'd also just say this, there are areas of England where less than 50% of the people living there are ethnic English. This is unthinkable to us in Asia (including China and Korea). It is a sign of your eventual collapse as a civilization. I'd say, it's all but inevitable across the next 250 years. I'd also say, all of the problems you face, are common in other nations like India, the Philippines, Egypt, etc... for the same reasons. In the Philippines they are actually dropping bombs on their own cities. I imagine, in the future, something similar will occur in England. There's a reason they elected a dictator.
1
-
1
-
Perhaps, but then ISIS will be replaced by something new. Again, many other nations have been dealing with this for generations. Look at the Philippines or India and Pakistan - they're the same 'race', speak the same language, but religion has led to terrorism for as long as anyone cares to recall. Look at East China. Look at how the Chinese in Malaysia dealt with this problem, they formed a City State: Singapore. Anyway, perhaps the Loser of London is correct: Just get used to being attacked, it's part and parcel of life if you live in pluralistic 'Western' city. Thankfully, this is a mistake no one in the East would make. When calls were made by politicians to 'be more modern', or 'accept refugees' or 'to open up like the West', they were quickly and quietly voted out of office. Others learned that's not the way forward for their political career. Oh, and another thing you may find interesting about the E. Asia. Our culture is built around shame, not guilt. We'd never be 'guilted' into accepting a million refugees. This is not a part of our culture. But we'd think it shameful to accept them and give them welfare that they never paid into. Together with a very difficult language and negligible welfare payments - they stay away from our cities. Lastly, this is good for both people. We think each people should have their own homeland, with their own culture. This much we should agree on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I do agree we see more visitors working, these are mainly students and they leave when their VISA's end. We also have short term work VISA's for Philippine women to work as nurses. Hardly the type of person coming into Europe. Also, we have very very strict rules that monitor foreign workers. While not perfect, obviously, your idea that Japan will become multicultural is unfounded. Yes, some people will marry and stay, their children will quickly become Japanese or they will have a very hard time living in Japan. We do not tolerate pluralism. What we see in England, with cities where most people are foreign and don't speak English and do not share the same religion, this is abhorrent to us. Not just Japanese, also Korean and China - which both have very very very safe cities. By no coincidence, only China has a problem with terrorism and big shock, it's due to the Muslims in the West, whom are quickly and quietly being replaced by Han Chinese. The replacement is happening the other way around in the West. They will not accept your culture - as they are more likely to have children while Westerner's are not, they will replace you. The only way to stop this across the next 250 years is to block immigration and end your policies on pluralism. Western people will never do that. Lastly, yes I agree Japan does have an ageing population (though not as bad as Germany or Italy). However, you probably need to come to Japan to understand this isn't a problem for us. People have been calling for the end of Japan since the property bubble popped, 35 years ago. In the real world Japan, the standard of living continues upwards a little better each year, houses are bigger, food is plentiful, stores a full, and we are still homogenous and extremely safe. See, Japanese have very high IQ (105) and work hard. Therefore, if you're using a smartphone, probably we own 40% of the material patents, we made the high-end silicon, we invented the hardware technology. Again, these are objective facts. Only Germany and the USA come close in terms of material technology (metals, plastics, glass). Anyway, the West could have had such a safe and homogenous society as the East, but now that is too late. Not without major restrictions on your lives, which we in the East think will happen to you. The price you will pay for not caring for your culture will be your culture. Along the way, you will lose your freedoms and civil liberties. Lessons your forefathers died, apparently in vain, to provide you with. You'll see. It's not just Japanese who think so, all Chinese I work with say the same thing.
1
-
"The Mayor said ____________ is part and parcel of living in a big city." You fill in the blank for clarification, as you seem to suggest my English is obviously too low of a level to understand the language. What is it he is referring to? I'd also just add, if the Mayor of Tokyo asked the Citizens of Tokyo to get used to living with muggings, rape and crime (normal everyday occurrence in major western cities, terrorism aside) he'd be expected to do the right thing and kill himself. To imagine, one of the three murders that day was 'normal' and 'was not terrorism-related' completely boggles the mind of us, in Asia. This is why we think the West is in midst of social collapse. For us, this is as clear as day, and so, of course, you elect a loser for a Mayor. For you on the inside, it was just another day in the life of a major western city. You don't see what we see clearly. Don't think we like it either. All the Asian people I discuss this with (and I have family in America) feel sad for the West. It seems you've not learned the lessons of history, and are about to repeat them. To bad too, because Western Civilization of 120 - 200 years ago really was something of a marvel. Not perfect, but really a great society. Those days are past.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ybrix101 Yes, he did grab her. Which, as you will find, was legal. As a matter of fact, given she was harassing a presidential nominee, he actually acting in HER self-defense. Why? Because if she had continued, and one of the federally funded official guards decided to, he could legally level her to the floor. In that way, by Lewandowski physically moving her back (as she and all the reporters were instructed to do) he may have saved her from serious harm. Of course the MSM never tells anyone this, and also our crap Public Schools are so shit most Americans have no idea what is and is not legal. So, we'll wait for the case and then watch as she loses. We know she'll lose, because Trump has a policy of never, ever, paying out. He always goes to trial. Who knows? Maybe she'll be the one charged? Particularly given she showed bruises on her wrist as 'evidence' when the tape shows she was grabbed on the upper arm. Not to mention she has a history of making false claims for attention and was fired from her job for exactly these reasons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Courtney L If she earns $42, 000 then she is worth that much. This means she generates more than $42,000 worth of value to her employer. That said, 42K will not buy you much in some countries, in AU for example, where a small 2 bedroom cost nearly 400,000. But, as I said, with unions and competition, the price of labor goes up. Which is the real price, not a contrived price. As for me, I'm a doctor. But I have worked in restaurants when I was at University - these jobs were meant to be transition jobs to higher paid skilled jobs. I won't blame Obama for the mess that is our supposed 'free' markets. That blame sits squarely on the shoulders of Americans. The real reason why there are no good jobs, is because government regulations have made it less valuable to create jobs in the USA. I for one, plan to leave the USA an open a business in Asia. This means that the value I produce (service) as well as the jobs and skills and training will all be in Asia. Again, not Obama's fault on this one. But a fact nonetheless. Look at China, how sad, freer than the USA. Or Japan. Or Korea. All freer in terms of markets as well as civil liberties. Yes, it's sad, but true. Oh well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
vedant varma LOL
Most people agree with all politicians, that's WHY they're politicians.
Politician: Free education for everyone, housing for the poor, drugs off the street and a turkey in every pot.
Electorate: Yay, we want that.
Reality: Government schools graduate functional illiterates in the USA at a rate of 1 in 5. Further, the average reading level in the USA for an adult is grade 6, those going to University is grade 7. Housing for the poor is welfare ghettos filled with violence and crime. Drugs are worse than ever and laws against them ushered in the prison industrial complex. FDA approves boiled in ammonia off cuts of snout, hooves, ear, ground together with bone meal and wood pulp with food coloring (pink slime look it up) but makes raw organic milk illegal and raids farms with guns.
Yes, I do agree with you, most people probably agree with Bernie Sanders. And? So what? They agree with most Politicians - it's why they're elected. They're bullshit artists. Bernie Sanders is no exception.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
vedant varma Greece is a socialist state.
As for Norway, it's an oil rich nation. Can 'socialism' work well while oil profits are rolling in? Sure. But only because non-oil rich nations have to pay for the oil and in exchange produce goods and services Norwegians enjoy. It's why the Norwegians use the Krone. Which is something to think about. Norwegians are so 'socialist' that they refused to joy the Euro and share their wealth.
Thus, "Socialism" doesn't even work in Norway. Norway is really Nationalist. If Norwegians really felt 'Socialism' was so wonderful, they'd share their wealth with the other Scandinavian countries. Something you may want to consider.
Oh, Norway (like the other Scandinavian countries) also doesn't have a State mandated minimum wage. My questions are:
1) Is NOT having a minimum wage "Socialistic"? You just gave Norway as an example of so-called "Socialism:, they don't have a minimum wage.
2) So, given Norway was your example, you'd also like to eliminate the minimum wage in the USA?
Yes, Norway does have a really great educational system. If we were to model ours on theirs, most Government schools would be shut down as inadequate and most Government school teachers would have to be fired as they wouldn't have the qualifications nor the aptitude to be a teacher. Are you in favor of firing 99% of the public school teachers in the USA? IF Bernie wasn't just a bullshitter, he'd say as much. Is he going to? No. DO you have any idea what the Teacher's Unions would do to him? If not out-right put a hit on him. So, no, don't expect Bernie to say anything other than we need to give more money to a failing system.
Note: Japanese spends less PER Student than the USA. Having a smaller or larger population has nothing to do with it. We spend about 20% more per student with MUCH LOWER outcomes (See: The 1 in 5 functional illiteracy rates of students who graduate from a Government "High" schools). Yes, Norway spends more, and they can afford to, they have a lot of oil.
Lastly, Norway is nothing like the USA in terms of people. They don't have the huge Government welfare ghettos. They don't have the massive regulations - in most ways, they're freer Capitalists than Americans. So are Japanese. While both Japan (where I've lived) and Norway are nothing like the USA socially. What works there does not work in the USA.
As an example: Japanese save a ton of money NOT having a Police State. Japanese kids can walk through any area of any city with no fear of being harmed. It's NORMAL in Japan to see school kids walking home. Japan has a ton of trains and this saves them a ton of money. The cities are close to one another. They work very hard and are very honest people. Japanese sit their iPhone on a table to 'save' their seat and go buy coffee knowing their phone will still be there.
No, the example from Europe that best represents the USA is Greece.
As for Bernie, he's no different than Obama - just full of bullshit. If he wasn't, he'd have attacked the Teacher's Unions decades ago as this is the single biggest problem in the USA. He'd have attacked regulations in the USA as this is the second largest problem. He doesn't, because he knows he'll be kicked out of office the next day. So, like any other politician, he bullshits the public with airy fairy "Socialism" and other magic thinking nonsense.
There's no magic bullet. Electing a person as a Civil Servant, POTUS or otherwise, is NOT going to fix anything. We need LESS public servants and more personal freedom - particularity monetary freedom and freedom to trade (free trade). We also need freedom FROM Government schools (see: Charter Schools).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
boutchie06 People like Bernie are the reason we're in the mess we are in. Outside of electing God herself, no politician is going to give you what you want.
No one.
1) Manufacturing
Bernie isn't going to stop the jobs from going to China, because Americans WANT their cheap throwaways made in China or other cheap nations. Putting up a tariff may mean you pay $2000 for an iPhone, and then Americans stop buying as many smart phones. It doesn't mean Apple will open a plant here to make phones. That is asinine.
Those kinds of jobs are NOT coming back. It's that simple. Has Bernie made this clear to you?
2) Education
Government has a near-monopoly on education. Our $100 billion a year DoED itself has released statistics showing 1 in 5 of its own graduates are functionally illiterate after 12 YEARS of 'education'. The average reading level of a college freshman is 7th grade. The average reading level of an American adult is 6th grade. Has Bernie made it clear that we need Charter Schools and to end Teacher's Unions? No.
We could go on, but why bother? What you really like about Bernie is he treats you like children. He tells you what you want to hear. He blames the right people using simple analogy that simple minded people like to hear. Usually slips a 'Government is failing the middle class' and then it's yes yes yes, I agree, yes.
Re: Anime all day. I'd love to watch Anime, at least part of the day. But, I'm too busy to do that.
Re: Big Pharma. LOL. Yeah, that's what 'Big Pharma" does with it's time and money? Hahaha... lay off the Alex Jones. That aside, do you have ANY idea how much time and effort and money it costs to bring a drug to market? No. You don't. I do agree pharmaceuticals seem to be morphing into pill pushers, working with many AMA licensed GPs.
8 Years ago half of you were waving your flags for Hillary. What happened? She didn't turn out to be a 'Real' Progressive. Speaking of which, how'd Obama turn out? Or what about Bill 'I like raping my interns' Clinton? He signed deregulation into Law - he Progressive enough? You're no different than the Religious Conservatives who voting that idiot Bush I and II into office. Exactly the same. Haha... they'll probably vote for that idiot with the toupee. Good ole' 6th grader America.
1
-
dm9910 1) The European country you're looking for is Greece, not the Scandinavian countries. We are nothing like Scandinavia.
2) Communism is NOT full of good ideals or ideas. It's immoral. The underlying premise of Communism is the use of State violence against innocent humans 'for the good of Society'.
Communism is an oxymoron.
It should be noted here that Progressive Socialism is the SAME in this regard. The underlying premise is to use violence to take from one group of people and give to another group of people. It is, by definition, immoral.
3) Communism wasn't undermined by greed. Communism doesn't and did not work because there's no price mechanism. Therefor it's impossible to have the information needed to produce the goods and services needed. This has nothing to do with greed. As a matter of fact, personal disposition has nothing to do with it.
4) Chinese factories are NOT slave labor. But what was slave labor, was Communist farms. China will soon be the richest nation in the world. Two decades ago, Socialist Chinese were starving to death. Now Capitalist Chinese have a problem with too much food - obesity. It should be noted Chinese bought 1 in 4 properties in the USA in 2014.
Chinese line up around the block at a chance to work in a factory like FoxComm and here's a FACT, the suicide rate in comparable industries in the USA is HIGHER than in China.
Here's another FACT. The USA spends more than most countries on education and the DoED itself released data showing 1 in 5 (20%) of Government high school graduates are functionally illiterate.
You go on ahead and vote for Bernie the Bullshitter. I honestly would LOVE to see hom elected for 8 years. So that, finally, after 16 years of failed Statism, Americans might be forced to face up to reality.
When that happens, remember this: The solution is MORE freedom. Not less. More.
Freedom to trade INSIDE the USA
Free markets INSIDE the USA
An end to Labor tax.
Elimination of most regulations and replacement with simple Law that protects property (body and land).
Sound money.
Until then, enjoy WWIII or whatever never ending War our Progressive Socialists on the LEFT and RIGHT drum up for us.
1
-
1
-
dm9910 Preface: I believe most people (not all) want the same things. A rewarding life, security, love. You think using State violence is the way (i.e: Progressive Socialism). I don't. You're in luck. We're going YOUR way. We have been for over 100 years. Let's see where we end up. Oh, and just remember. The Police State you see springing to life all around us - that's the force needed to provide for Progressive Socialism. Don't forget that.
1) "Your opening statement is ad hominem". Hey, we can agree. That doesn't mean it isn't true.
2) Re: Kant
I didn't say anything about 'justified' I said 'immoral'. Kant uses the word 'justified' because the action of stealing is immoral. Of course Kant also believed the only society we could live in is an immoral one because he couldn't imagine how humans could live morally. So, instead of using google, try reading Kant.
3) "Taxation" isn't always immoral. Gas tax is voluntary, paying a toll is voluntary, paying to enter a fair is voluntary. Being forced to work for someone as a slave is involuntary (example: Progressive Income/Labor tax) thus it is by definition immoral. If you think it's 'Justified' - then that's your 'opinion', it's still immoral. I'm sure plenty of Slave owners 'justified' Slavery (See: Thomas Jefferson). It's still immoral.
4) No, you are insane to think that free people will go on a rampage and murder and rape. Unfree, enslaved people do this when there is a break down in system that rules over them. As an example see your own example of Zimbabwe or closer to home, New Orleans.
Freedom is NOT the same as free-for-all. Free people have Law and a police to enforce it. You simply don't understand what freedom is. Just like you don't understand what immoral and moral means. You also don't understand what valid or sound, cogent or strong means. My guess is you simply want to 'believe'. You want to hope that someone, preferably in the position of 'alpha male' (see: Pope, God, POTUS, King, Emperor, whatever) is going to fix everything for you. You'll get out our Made-In-China flag and wave it for Bernie, just like all the other zombies. Well, it's simply not going to happen. Sorry.
Take a good look at Detroit or Greece. This is the end result of the Progressive oxymoron that thinking the use violence against innocent people is 'justified'. Enjoy our hyper-regulated Progressive Police State. Where we need a State licence to cut hair, sell arranged flowers, fix a PC. Where we have to pay the State to work. Where we have never ending Wars. Where the Progressive Central Bank sells T-bonds on you and your children's labor to bail out the Banking criminals stealing the most. So, again, take a good look at Detroit or Greece. This is the end result of Progressive Socialism.
You'll see.
1
-
1
-
C/Gw You stated you want to use State coercion to redistribute other individual human's private property. That is, by definition, immoral. Using violence (of any kind) against innocent people is immoral. It's why "Progressive" Socialism is an Oxymoron. Violence against innocent people is NOT "Progressive" and is actually ANTI-social.
Try and 'justify' the initiation of violence any which way you like. By definition, it is immoral. There's no "Argument" here. It's a definition. Taken as axiomatic.
Further, I gave you an out - as in offering the option of instead non-violently creating money as needed (as an example: See Bitcoin). Then leaving it up to free people to decide IF and WHEN they choose to use that money. But you don't like that do you? No. You prefer to steal. You'll call it 'Tax' and make yourself feel good. But in the real world it's actually stealing. Thus, the only person here who's attempting to make a false argument is you. If you find my pointing this out to you insufferable, good. It's still the truth.
Oh, and your misuse of the word 'freedom' to suggest 'free for all' is, quite frankly, disturbing. There's a reason why the US Constitution was written, and that reason was to LIMIT government. In addition, the first 10 amendments were to further protect us FROM government. Not the rich. Not the British. Not cheaply made Chinese goods. Not internet providers. But from the US Government itself. A lesson it appears society must learn once every 250 years or so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Simon Mortensen The USA is NOT a free-market. The USA is hyper-regulated.
Depending on the State, you will be required to obtain a State licences to cut hair, sell flowers, drive a taxi, fix a computer, sell BBQ chicken, etc... etc... etc... The USA has some of the biggest restrictions on starting a company and pays some of the highest tax rates. A FREE society is (in a sense) Darwinian - it's a survival of the most empathetic and kindest. Why? Because in a free society you make money by selling to people the things they want, to be successful you have to understand what people want and figure out how to get it to them legally and without using violence (basically the opposite of State socialism which uses the State to force you into buying something or simply steals it from someone and gives it to you).
Anyway, you needn't worry. We are NOT getting more freedom. We're getting less freedom. And, we'll become poorer as a result. National Socialism here we come.
Let me just be clear: What I support is freedom, sound money and laws that protect private property and uphold contract. This means people must work with one another if they want society to advance - because they are not able to use the State to steal from those around them (which is how Socialism works and why it fails).
1
-
Simon Mortensen I didn't say in a Darwinian society full-stop. I said in a Free society. As in, the freedom to trade with people with sound money and within the law. In other words, a FREE market. In a free market there is a 'Darwinian' aspect to the people who succeed. The people who succeed are those people who provide other people with what they want, thus other's WANT to do business with (trade with) them. Examples would be Apple, Google, Toyota, Ben and Jerry's, etc....
Socialism OTOH is the use of State violence against innocent people who happened to, through no fault of their own, be born a Citizen of a country at a particular time and place. At the center of "Socialism" is violence. Violence against innocent people. It often goes hand in glove with Nationalism.
If I do not want to buy an Apple phone, I'm FREE not to. If I do not want to pay a tax on my hourly wage to the State, and I keep working - I can be imprisoned and even shot. That is NOT socialism - THAT is the "Darwinism" you referred to. With the State playing the part of Predator and Citizens the role of Prey.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Simon Mortensen Let me make sure I have your position correctly: You're against giving a select few the opportunity to be too powerful in society, and therefor you want to give a select fewer even more power to ensure this doesn't happen? That doesn't make sense.
In a FREE society, 'powerful people' either serve the needs of society, or they go bust. In our society, they get bailed out by the Governmental Political Elites who wield much more power. The Democratic Socialists always bailout the Crony Capitalists because that's who pays the bill.
As an example: The Koch brothers have about $ 120 billion. That's a lot of money and power. But get this, they also provide people will a lot of goods and services - including high paying jobs. And if they don't keep provinding society with goods and services, they would have gone bust. Now compare with the DoED. It has about $80 billion - that it spends each year. Each year. That's the lifetime of wealth the Koch brothers, and it's spent in a year. What do we get? Well, the average reading level in the USA is grade 6, the average incoming university freshman reads at grade 7/8 and 1 in 5 (20%) of Government school graduates are functionally illiterate. This is LOWER than it was in 1910. Oh, and as for pedagogical innovation ... there is none. NONE. ZERO. If anything Government schools get worse each year.
Also, the Government just BAILED OUT those elites you worry about. They're richer under Obama than at any point in HUMAN history, and getting richer.
So, if you want the powerful called to heel. Then you want MORE freedom and LESS government. Particularly, a LIMITED government that is not able to bailout crony capitalists. What you do NOT want is Democratic Socialism. It doesn't work. It just leads to Nationalistic Socialism. Which is where the USA is headed towards. Along with more Wars... never ending Democratic Socialistic Wars, like the War on Terror, War on Drugs, War on Privacy, etc....
It's simple: Freedom (free-markets), sound money and laws that protect property and uphold contract. That's what's needed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Simon Mortensen
1) We both agree that the Government doesn't pay for anything itself, it only redistributes other people's wealth?
2) We also agree hospitals are not 'free'? Someone provides a service (say a nurse) and someone pays for the service.
I think these first two points are very important you get clear in your mind. The government doesn't create wealth - it redistributes other people's wealth. Medicine is not 'free'. Someone pays. If a tax is levied, then that item costs more. If it's an income tax, then the laborer has less money to spend. If it's GST, then the buyer pays more. If it's currency expansion, then everyone pays through inflation (which hurts the poor more than the rich). Nothing is 'free'.
3) Re: Go to jail.
And there you have Socialism in a nutshell. Violence. She's a morally innocent person. On top of that she made a medicine that saved lives! The government's use of violence against her is immoral. It may be legal, it may be the will of the people - it is still immoral. I happen to think a moral society is preferable to an immoral one. The initiation of violence against morally innocent people is immoral by definition.
Finland is oil-rich. I wouldn't compare them to the USA. A more accurate social democracy would be Greece. See Detroit as an example of Greek style socialism in the USA.
While we both want the same ends, I want to get there without resorting to violence whenever possible. See, I think providing the medicine is itself a virtue. I think it's great if that scientists keeps are her money. All that happens is it's put in a bank and lent out to other people in society. Which is a good thing and much more efficient than using a Police State to redistribute it. Money doesn't sit in vaults collecting dust. The majority of it is 0s and 1s. And the internal motivation of the person is irrespective. Who knows? Maybe she would have donated much of it to a charity? Or maybe most of it would be in stocks? Who cares? It's being put to use one way or another and it is HER property.
Now imagine if this woman was from a different country and she charged that same amount per pill. Well, now I'm sure you think she doesn't "owe" anything in tax - do you? That's the interesting thing about in-group normality bias. As soon as she's not in your 'country' suddenly she owes you nothing. Even if that country is only 0.1 mile away. Just down the street. Whereas if she lives 2000 miles away but in the same country - you feel she 'owes' you something and she should pay 'tax'. And you're even willing to use violence against her - and if she resists, the government, they'd kill her. That's sick. That is NOT pro-social.
That is ANTI-social.
If you want to know what's wrong with society, this is your answer.
1
-
Socialism: USA vs Finland and Norway
Finland has one of the world's best government run schools. The USA, could in theory attempt to replicate this pedagogy, but we do not. Why? Teacher's Unions. As a matter of fact, the ONLY schools that attempt to replicate the Finnish system are Private and Charter schools (both of whom are viciously attacked both through the media and even legal attempts to make it impossible for parents to even choose them!).
Also, look at Norway's sovereign wealth fund it is the largest in the world. Each citizen in Norway is (in theory) a millionaire. In the USA, each Citizen is born about $60,000 in DEBT obligations and these are expected to balloon 500% as the next generation retires with it's expected 'Social" benefits. Some States have passed Laws making it illegal for the voters NOT to pay these debt obligations (of course, Judges are directly the benefits).
Compare the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund with the oil revenues in Alaska. Each Alaskan gets $1800 a year from the Alaska Permanent Fund. THAT is the American way. Not to save and invest, but to take now. Not to go without so that the next generation has more, but to sell Debt obligations (T-bonds and Municipals) STICKING the next generation with bills for goods and services LONG AGO GONE.
What works in the USA is Capitalism and free market private enterprise. Neither of which exists any longer. We don't save capital, but take on debt. Free markets are LONG GONE. You can't even cut hair without a State licence. In some States you need a licence to sell flowers or fix a PC.
We're not like the Finnish and Norwegians (and we don't sit atop an oil supply making us all millionaires). We are instead a broke nation of functional illiterates who haven't seen a free handout they didn't like. We are a nation of warmongers. And we're scared of our own shadow thus are happy to trade away our privacy and freedom for a police state and NSA.
National Socialists like Bernie Scammers can be expected to make huge political gains in the coming decades - IF history is anything to go by. Only a Demagogue claims they want to help the poor, while at the same time trying to prevent the poor (Chinese) from being lifted out of poverty. Bernie will BOTH claim the Chinese are 'stealing' your job AND are slaves in factories. Neither of which is true. Keep that in mind as his story begins to unravel leaving only the promise of 'free' government handouts. A message perfectly suited to the Americans voter.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dan Mac
1) I live in a country that provides public healthcare.
2) I work in the healthcare field.
3) I am a doctor.
4) I train doctors.
5) I see the medical profession from the ground up. It's much worse than you probably believe it is.
We need free market competition in ALL aspects of medical and healthcare goods and services. You simply would not believe how poor the entire system is.
You talk about 'all other advanced nations have public healthcare'. Yes, this is true. Why don't you compare Public Housing in the USA with Japan and Germany. Notice any difference? Why don't you compare Public Schooling in the USA with Korea or Finland? and etc....
I'm not sure if you live in the USA or not. But get this, if you do, you are LESS free compared to these other places. They generally have a freer market - including in healthcare. The USA has more healthcare regulations than any other nation in the world.
The solution is a free market. Which isn't to say a free for all. We need to reduce the role of government in all aspects of society including healthcare - but also education. With a free society, based on sound money, we will produce healthcare goods and services (including insurance) that are high quality and low price.
The Government cannot fix this problem. It will only make the problem worse. There's too much money and power involved. The people who work in the Government, the ones you want to fix the problem - are purposely causing healthcare to BE a problem. There is NO fix coming from Government.
Just watch, in 5 years you'll be paying more and getting less. In 10 years you'll be normalized to paying a lot more and not expecting much AND you'll be paying out of pocket for anything non-essential. In 25 years, public healthcare will look like public housing and be as useless as a public "high" school degree.
From my experience, and I have quite a bit of it, this is my prediction. It's not that I don't wish we could pray to the magic thing called "Government" and have It fix everything - it's that it cannot and will not. I also WANT everyone to have good cheap high quality healthcare (and education etc...). The only solution is a free society with free people providing goods and services in competition. Exactly the opposite of our society.
Lastly, YES I'd be more than happy for you and your mates to provide public security through a security company. If you can do the job and cost less - why not? If you don't live up to your end of the contract, out you go and let another company try to compete. The worse service is public police. I mean, they sit on the god damn side of the road funnelling cars by the 100s over to a catchment area just to give tickets to make up for what they can't steal in taxes. It's f*cking sickening. They do this in AU and the USA and I've even seen them in Japan now.
Anyway, you'll see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jennifer Hunter
This is where I see the problem and where we completely disagree:
"competition exists in the US market."
I see this as THE problem with healthcare in the USA (and elsewhere). We do NOT have a true free market. We have a limited amount of highly protected markets with a teeny tiny small amount of competition.
You may be correct that in the short term a public healthcare option will be better than the fascist healthcare system we presently have as the State could directly regulate costs. But, what will happen over time is this will be as horrid as public housing. Sure, it seems good at first, fast forward 25 years and it's horrid.
In Australia you have a 1 in 5 chance of being misdiagnosed in a public hospital. Those are not good odds. And it's getting worse.
Also, stop and think of this, there are hundreds of thousands of students who spend nearly their entire lives attempting to get into medical school and yet they aren't accepted and end up wasting 10s of thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands of hours of study and maybe the best years of their life. This is insane. Most of these students would be perfectly capable of practising medicine. Let the free market decide if people would or would not like these people to provide them with goods and services. Allow different schools of medicine to flourish.
I know students who went to the Philippines got their MD and came back and practice in the USA. That is ridiculous. I mean, he's a GP and probably perfectly capable - but it's ridiculous he went overseas and it shows you how there isn't real competition in the USA. There's a huge limit to the people in the market not to mention the ridiculous number of regulations.
The only solution is to allow free market competition and slowly, over time, we'd have good high quality inexpensive medical care and insurance that would cover most people.
Lastly, I'd just say this. It's not just healthcare. It's our entire society. The problems are fundamental and healthcare is just one facet of a much MUCH bigger problem. One I'm fairly certain the majority of the American public is not up to the task of fixing. I think we're going to see a slow decline in our living standards over the next 25-50 years. We are becoming poorer and this will continue as far as I can see.
1
-
Jennifer Hunter Do you think DO's should be allowed to practice medicine? A DO did my friend's kidney transplant. That DO would never be allowed to practice medicine in AU.
As for medical standards, Many over seas doctors are not all that well trained. Yet an MD can get them a place in the US practising medicine.
So, I'm not talking about lowering standards. I'm talking about something much more radical. Total free market. Notice I didn't say 'free for all'.
Anyway, let's do it this way. Watch how ObamaCare is today and then compare in 25 years. Just wait for the public hospitals, public unions, public quotes, and holidays, and regulations, and etc....
You'll see.
In 25 years, I bet most Americans would rather take a chance DIY surgery with a iPhone app rather than go into a public hospital. It's not that I want it to go this way, but I'm 110% sure it will go this way. It's the natural progression - one could say, baked in the cake.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
imaginepeace63 And others were Jewish, Muslim, Animalists, Buddhists, Shinto, Hindo, RomanGrecco polytheists, Shaman, Taoist, and etc.... Yet, the people who ended Slavery were Christians, primarily white male Christian abolitionists in international trade hub England.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
joe jarden . RE:
"Unbridled capitalism leading to income inequality"
1) Why should I care about income inequality? I don't. Guess what, if you live in the USA, you're probably making much much MUCH MORE income relative to some poor peasant in Africa.... AND?!? So what? You're not stealing from them, you have nothing to do with them. The same is true for the USA.
Even stop to think about the Honda or Toyota families in Japan - does it matter to ME if they are rich? No, I couldn't give two flying figs. So long as they offer me a car I want at value - that's the END of our relationship. I'm not jealous of them, I couldn't care.
2) . Unbridled capitalism?!? What planet do you live on??? Certainly not Earth. Every f*cking aspect of our lives are regulated. From the Central Banks/Central Planners to the roads, food, drugs, beer, toilet paper, toilet height, water, even gawd damn marriage! There's NOTHING the State doesn't try to regulated in the USSA. . Unbridled capitalism my arse. Hell, in some States you need a State licence to sell Gawd damn arranged flowers!
....Unbridled capitalism what a f*cking joke. We live in a Progressive Socialist Nanny Welfare/Warfare State, and it's a shithole.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Veronica Rossi I understand, however, when the Government subsidizes your higher education, it does so by cutting other social services. It has to, or run a deficit for the year which means less next year. You probably are happy, but what of the person who had their services cut? Are they as happy? Wouldn't it be fairer if you paid for your education? You assume you will pay it back in income taxes - well, okay, but you got more out of the system than someone who did not go to a Government paid for University. Therefor, you should pay more in taxes? Agreed? If that's the case, then we don't need to use the taxation scheme, instead you could repay your student loan. This could be adjusted for your income. Then you could pay the same amount in taxes. Why do this? Well, there's nothing holding you to your country - what's to stop you from leaving, and moving somewhere else? Then what does the tax payer get out of this arrangement? They will have paid for your education in full, and you would have left. That's why a loan is more fairer, both for you, and the people who paid for your education.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tyler Hurson Hyperbole much? Okay, give me an example of how the two largest corporations in the world would "turn into savage gangs roaming the streets terrorizing" the very same people they hope to win over through multi-billion dollar marketing campaigns. Because, I'm pretty sure that's a crock of shit. So, the two largest corps I recall are Apple Inc and Toyota. So, give me an example of how less regulation will 'unleash' these companies. Oh, and remember, no regulation is NOT the same as no law. Companies cannot defraud customers, they can not harm customers, they can not sell devices that are faulty - see, all of that falls under property rights and contract law.
Okay, give me your example.
I also will give you an example of how regulation harms consumers. My example is FDA regulated boiled in ammonia off cuts (ears, feet, tails, snout, viscera, skin) died pink and sold as as 'meat'. This FDA regulated "meat" is unfit for gods, let alone humans. It should be noted the FDA (being a mafia / part of the government) is also working very hard to put all GASP Private Organic certification business OUT OF BUSINESS. Why would the Government want to certify organic? Because they're a monopoly crony corporation that is looking to steal market share. Once they put all competition out of work, destroy more jobs, then they can licence brands like "All Natural" even though ALL NATURAL can contain oil based chemicals and GMO food.
You're the one, like Anna, who is living in a delusion. The Government's military budget is $600 BILLION this year. the Government is the one who is spying on us. The US Government literally murders people for selling 0.10 cent cigarettes.
Frankly, I'll take my chances with big scary Apple Inc. and a LIMITED government. Libertarians are not for NO Government, they're for a LIMITED amount of Government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
trtnec
Actually, your reply wasn't too bad. Actually, relatively reasonable. I do take note of your use of the word fact. Perhaps you mean axiomatic assumption? Statistical likelihood? Strong cogency?
I personally don't like to mix the word 'fact' with the word 'science'. If I want to say 'fact' then I'll use Truth. If not, then I'll give a statistical value or quote one.
Is there evidence Keynesian economics provides economic benefit? Sure. Particularly in the short term when accumulated wealth is being plundered. Given the Chinese Empire accumulated much wealth, is this good evidence for rule by Emperors? I mean, many millions of Chinese lived at the highest standard of living, at that time, for centuries. How about Slavery? Many nations that utilized Slavery also accumulated wealth. How about colonization? The English empire accumulated much wealth. How about the Japanese Shogunate? Certainly under the Tokugawa much wealth was accumulated. Or what of the second industrial revolution in the USA? That's correlated with possibly the greatest economic prosperity in human history, and happened at a time when there was limited government, no income tax, little if any regulation, no modern patents, no copy-write, and little social services. Yet, it ushered in the post-modern era.
Tell me, why do you think Communism is such an economic failure? Why has Japan been in an economic slump for 25 years? Why is economic freedom in China, correlated with, possibly, lifting the most humans out of poverty in the current era?
IMO we need more freedom, not less more. We will get less though. And, people will vote to eliminate more freedoms, and privacy. We will become poorer for it.
1
-
trtnec When you say free markets were too free, what you're really saying is that people were too free. Free market is just another way of saying free interaction.
Also, Libertarians do support limited Government and Law. Free markets isn't the same as Free-for-All.
The 1920s and 2000s were not too free, both economic crashes were caused by our central banks. In the roaring 20s they extended to much credit and this exactly happened again in the 2000s. Both Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan have suggested these were the cases. It's the reason why Ben used the Progressive central bank to create a class of people called TBTF and bailed out the richest Americans for "the Good of Society".
You suggest 'corruption' of government as the answer why communism didn't work.
Well, we in the USA spend more than most first world nations on Government Schooling. We pay our Government school teachers more than most other counties. Our % GDP on Government schooling is much high than Japan as an example. In the USA 1 in 5 Government school graduates are functionally illiterate. Is your contention this is because Government schools are 'corrupt'?
- The USA military's $has a 600 billion budget this year alone, and will lose the war for another year spending all this money. Is the US military losing the war because of corruption?
- We imprison more non-violent humans than any other society on earth, in history. Is this because all of the legal system in the USA is now totally 'corrupt'?
- How about FDA regulated boiled in ammonia off cuts, nose, feet, tail, ears, skin / pink slime? Is that an example of corruption?
- How about our Progressive central bank bailing out the richest 0.1% during the GFC? Is this corruption?
Also, why use northern Europe as your example of progressive socialism? What of Greece? Italy? Spain? Portugal? Their governments are structured similarly, are they corrupt but Germany's isn't? Germany is wealthy because it's government is structured a certain way? What of German people?
Japan has been in a slump for a couple decades? What happened? Suddenly the government went from non-corrupt to being corrupt? Funny enough, Japan was so rich in the 1980s they claimed they could do communism the right way. Chinese back then used to joke, if you want to learn about Communism - go to Japan. A decade later and the Japanese economy imploded. Do you really think this is due to corruption? Suddenly corruption popped up out of nowhere?
All these communist countries just happened to have corrupt governments?
Lastly, I'd also suggest late-stage Progressive republics are ripe for becoming Fascist States. IMO that's where we're at with our never-ending-wars, TBTF corporations, NSA spying, its all (to me) examples of neo-fascism. Had we not allowed ourselves to become a Progressive republic, and had we maintained and stuck to a limited government, then we might have developed both the culture needed and the institutions required to deal with our social problems.
As it is, we did not. So, now we're stuck with fascism in a land of functional illiterates. Too bad to. Life was pretty good and could have been great. Oh well. There's no turning around now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Blah b "So is Syria a paradise, or are libertarians wrong in their religious dogma that all government is evil?"
Let me see if I have your argument correct, because Syrians are in the middle of a Civil War, according to you, this is a classic example of a Libertarian "paradise"? Are you an idiot? Libertarians are for LIMITED role of government in society - you know, the foundation of the USA? That whole "US Constitution" and its first 10 Amendments that protect us FROM government. Ever read about that?
Libertarians, in general, support:
1) LIMITED government
2) sound free market money
3) laws that protect private property rights
4) laws that uphold contract
Simple enough for you? Currently Syria is run by a Dictator, one that uses fiat currency, and because of the Civil War the Government in Syria cannot protect private property or uphold contract. Therefor the Syrian government cannot meet ANY of the 4 listed characteristics of the sort of State that libertarians support..
But don't worry, we're getting more government, not less - more. Much more. Who knows? With the way things are going we'll eventually end up living in a State-bot North Korean gulag Paradise with plenty of UNlimited State you State-bots dream of.
Have a nice weekend.
1
-
Blah b What don't you get? The Syrian government is run by a Dictator. Does the word Dictator sound 'limited to you' or are you a complete imbecile?
I've seen strawman arguments before but yours takes the cake.
Secondly, saying 'magically' isn't an argument. It's an ad hominem and makes you sound like a peril child.
Thirdly, ALL major US University economic departments teach free-market capitalism. ALL OF THEM. It's economics 101. Maybe if read an actual book instead of watching Youtube all day you'd learn something about what you think you know about?
One more time: ALL economic depts teach that government should play a LIMITED role in society. They teach this because there's hundreds of years of empirical data showing the free-market, NOT GOVERNMENT, to be the best means of allocating limited resources in society and results in the highest standard of living for the most people. This IS what Libertarians support. Libertarians do not support ZERO government. A SMALL role for government in society.
Note: Free-market is another way of saying FREE people. Or Freedom. Exactly what you State-bots hate.
But, don't worry, we're getting more Government, not less - more. And, unless you happen to have a very specialized and very valued skill set (I do - I'm a doctor) then your place in a government-run society is going to be labor-cog or farm-hand.
Don't worry, you State-bots will get the accompanying lifestyle to match your government-determined worth to society. Hope you like standardized testing, you'll see what unlimited government has in store for you.
As I said, have a nice weekend.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
BramSLI1 You are insane and you have no idea what I do or do not believe. Yes, CEO's are paid a lot of money, many are probably paid too much. But, how can YOU know that? Do you sit on the board of directors? Do you run a company? So what if Steve Jobs was paid billions? What's it to you? If you buy Apple all that matter is if the product is worth your money or not. If you work at Apple, all you care about is your job. Therefor, the ONLY way we know is a CEO is paid too much is when they bankrupt their companies. As a matter of fact, the same is true of ALL employees. One last point you may want to consider, CEO's of publicly traded companies are often elected by shareholder, so it's up to them if that person is worth the money or not. What would it matter to you? If you work for Apple and you don't like how much the CEO is paid, the answer is easy, quit. Other than that, it has nothing to do with YOU personally. I'll give you another example. Do you know how much the Toyota family makes? Does it matter to you? No and No. But you can buy Toyota cars and trucks. What would it matter to you if the Toyota family makes $100 a year ot $100,000,000. It doesn't matter to you. Because you have no idea what you are crapping on about. You're just reiterating who that douche Sanders told you to blame. That's HOW he gets elected. Other than hot air, Sander has never actually produced anything in his life.
1
-
Rusty Mckee Slave Labor, what an oxymoron. You mean like the Chinese? The Chinese who are getting rich? China, who will soon be a richer nation than the USA. I find it funny that in one side of your mouth you crap out one-liner's like Slave-Labor and out of the other side of your mouth you whine those same Slaves are stealing all of the good jobs. Your argument is literally a joke. Surely you can see how Chinese are not BOTH Slave-Laborers AND becoming immensely rich AND stealing your jobs. Now, let's stop and think about what it means to be a Slave, seeing as in you like to abuse this term. A Slave is FORCED to work, in China, Chinese stand in LONG LINES at the opportunity to work in a factory. No one is a Slave-Laborer in China or in the USA. Secondly 'Stealing Jobs'. Um, no. Someone wants to buy labor and other people want to sell labor. The Pizza Hut that moves in is NOT stealing business away from Subway, people are voluntarily spending their money. Thus, as you can see, you need to go and read a book and stop listening to lying politicians.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
BramSLI1 Care to name some so-called 'Free-Markets'? They certainly do not exist anywhere in the USA where 30% of the occupations require a licence and the other 70% are heavily regulated. And where the regulation is the most, the markets are the most crony and corrupt, as an example see Finance (has the most regulations by number) and Health Services (runs neck and neck with Finance and may take #1 position depending on the year). In the USA where selling raw milk, that humans have drank for 1 million years, is illegal but selling Pink Slime made of ground snout, hooves, skin, teeth, ears and tail mixed with wood pulp, died pink is 'Regulated' as safe to eat 'food'.
As of now, the ONLY place we see semi-free markets is the Internet, and it's probably the best place for someone to attempt to start a business and get anywhere in life. All the other markets are so hyper-regulated that I wouldn't waste my time bothering with them unless you have a very highly in demand skill and/or the money to buy off politicians / Regulators / Law-Makers in your favor.
So, again, please name this time and place where these FREE markets exist. It certainly isn't in the USA for the last 115 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: Robber Barrons. So, let's clearly state the argument. In the 1800s a few Americans got lucky and capitalized on the second industrial revolution and got rich providing other Americans with goods and services. Like electricity, radios, trains, planes and automobiles. Okay, so their crime was they GASP got rich.
Now, let's compare that 'Crime' of the GASP Robber Barron's against today's HYPER REGULATED MARKETS. You know, the ones where you need a licence to cut god damn hair, to legally marry someone, to sell alcohol, to drive a cab and in some states to sell arranged flowers. You know, where selling raw milk will send you to prison but selling FDA Regulated Pink Slime is A-Okay. The one where the State makes our currency by fiat and then charges us an income tax to use it - forcing us to us it. THIS ONE. Let's see now. HAS 100 years of REGULATION WORKED for us? The richer are even RICHER!!! They'd make those Robber Barron's blush they're so god damn rich. The mansions of a Robber Barron wouldn't house the cleaning staff for these rich f$ckers. AND get this, 2015 was a RECORD BREAKING year for number of regulations - how's it working out??? Why don't YOU apply YOUR same god damn logic? If you didn't think free-markets worked in the 1800s because a few guys got rich, well that isn't shit compared to what the Regulated-Markets and the State have done in the last 100. Korean War ring a bell? How about napalm set alight and dropped on children over Vietnam? How about the phony war on terror that has killed a million children in Iraq? NSA wire tapping? And you have the god damn GALL to sit over their and whine about a few fat rich old industrialists over 100 years ago!? Give me a f*cking break.You are clueless.
No wonder Sanders wins the likes of you over to his side, all he has to do is off you Moar Free. Because, at the end of the day, that's really all it is for people like you. You sit there and say Robber Barrons 'proves' free-markets can NEVER EVER work while Regulated Markets have literally destroyed entire civilizations. 100s of million of humans have died due to State regulations. Oh, but but but, Robber Barron's got rich. The Ford Family was rich. The Rockefeller's made some money. Jesus H Christ, what load of crap are they teaching at Universities now-a-days. Not like I'd know, I'm only a doctor, but hey, you have an undergraduate in business. While I was doing Physical Chemistry you were probably playing cards and watching TV.
And, if you made it this far, I'll end on this note. LOOK UP the word Argument, because you don't appear to have a clue what that word means. I'll clue you in, there's two big families, deductive and inductive, try not confusing them next time you attempt to make one.
Good Day
1
-
1
-
Heads Tails You listed crony capitalists of the 20th century. Robber Barron's refers to Industrialists of the 1800s. Two totally different groups of people. Do I think removing regulations that protect crony capitalists and provide regulatory-capture for rent-seekers by replacing them basic common LAWS that protect property right and contract? Yes, that's correct. As an example: FDA regulates ground pig snout, hooves, skin, tail, anus, hair, boiled in ammonia, mixed with filler (wood pulp) and dyed pink as FOOD and raw milk as POISON. You understand how insane this is? Today, thanks to regulatory capture (primarily Rx) by the AMA, we have the largest population of non-violent humans in prison (Drug War) AND at the same time a heroin epidemic! Oh, and medicine is now the most expensive its ever been - due to AMA enforced limitations on supply side of the curve. Oh, and to boot, Government Regulated Medicine now has Medical Error as the #2 reason you will die in the USA. How's that for 'Regulations'? You do understand out Regulators BAILED OUT the criminal bankers and then fed them trillion MORE in money. And that doesn't even begin to mention the MIC. You'd literally have to be insane to think Government Regulated markets are in ANYWAY better than free-markets, lawful markets. Notice I said LAWFUL. We were NOT an anarchy in the 1800s and we would not be one if we had free-markets. Yes, some people got rich - so what? No where near as rich as the crony crooks of today's hyper-regulated markets.
1
-
Rusty Mckee The only person who doesn't live in the real world is you Statists. Here's some facts: In 2015 the US Government passed the most regulations ON RECORD. The US Government has invaded numerous countries and killed millions of innocent people and is doing so again, today, over phony made up reasons. They did it in Vietnam and did it again in Iraq (WMD). The US Government is the largest polluter in history. The US Government consumes the most energy in the world. The US Government imprisons the most non-violent humans in all of history. We imprison MORE total humans than China, and China has 1.3 billion people AND is Communist. So, again, it is YOU people that do not live in the real world.
A few more FACTS you can look up. The two most regulated markets by number of regulations written are finance and healthcare. Oh, and geee, which are the two most broken markets? Finance, which is in the process of destroying society, and healthcare, which is now the number #2 reason you will die in the USA, Medical Error - feel free to look up that Stats.
In addition, I have lived in 5 different countries. And by lived, I mean, LIVED. Not visited, not attended school at, but lived in. Some in the West, some in the East. The problems we face are due to Governments - ALL Governments. How do I know? Because they arise in Government that do not have Congressmen and POTUS and they arise in societies where there are no Koch Brothers to blame.
1
-
BramSLI1 We need a Bernie Sanders. Jesus H Christ we Americans have become so f#cking pathetic. You remind me of an Iranian I knew who said, The Ayatollah is trying his best it's just bla bla blah. Seriously, you sound like her. Or a Chinese I knew who just knew Dear Leader was trying his best - if only he had some help from blah blah blah....
News Flash, thanks to the DoED regulated Government Schools 1 in 5 (20%) of Americans graduate from high school FUNCTIONALLY ILLITERATE. You do understand that electing Bernie Sanders will do NOTHING to change this. His wife is part of that problem by the way, and she has done NOTHING to fix it. How do we know? Again, look up the DoED own stats on functional illiteracy rates. If anything he'll make it worse. You do understand that Government regulated healthcare is f&cked. More regulations are not going to fix it. Take a look at Government run welfare ghettos - you think Sanders is going to magically fix State sponsored generational dependency?? The Government created the problem and you want it to now fix it?! Are you insane.
You Statists are no different from Theists. Seriously, the only difference is you worship the State. Instead of Bishops you praise your Senators. Instead of the Pope you pray to the POTUS.
Yes, let's hope Sanders is elected, maybe he can fulfill his promise to turn the USA into that Democratic Socialistist Progressive Utopia Sweden he's always crapping on about. The quicker Progressive Socialists sink this economy, the quicker those of us who will fix things ourselves can to work. So, yes, vote Sanders.
It should be noted, if you go to Sanders website, most of his list (pretty much every item) is MOAR FREE. Free free free.... how pathetic. It seems to get elected in the USA today, all you need to do is promise free stuff. What you will NOT see on his website is ending Teachers Unions, make it easier for common people to access Private Schools, ending the AMA, or anything else that might change things over the long run. The problems we face will require at least 3 decades to fix, just to give you a clue as to the magnitude of the problems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee One major reason why the private sector is more efficient right now is because they do not have to deal with austerity cuts" HAHAHA.... yeah, because they EARN their money. But, the solution is simple, sell off your Governmental Services TO the Private Sector. See how simple it is? IF what you say is true, and you are providing value for money, then you will continue to do so in the PRIVATE FREE MARKET. It really is THAT simple. If you DO provide a valued service, and maybe you do, then you will continue to do so through making GASP a profit selling said service. It means people in society WANT you to keep doing what you're doing and are willing to pay you to keep doing so. This is why we NEED Privatization - which also means, no need for you to worry about CONgress, because you"ll be working directly for the people you claim to want to serve.
As for your allegation that if schools were private then ONLY the rich would learn - again, you are clueless. The 1910 US Census showed in a Chicago Suburb African Americans had a literacy rate of 85% in 1910. This is without Government Schooling. Why? Because African's THEN valued learning to read and write and wanted to better themselves and the lives of their children. The 2010 census showed this SAME neighborhood, these are the great grandkids kid, THEIR literacy rate was under 50%. Again, you turd, you are wrong. The facts show you are wrong. Government Schooling does NOT work. Unless you call 1 in 5 functional illiteracy "working". You can look up the data for yourself. Unlike in 1910, Africans in 2010 can just get on generational Welfare, there is no NEED to improve. Raising children is tough work, why do that when Progressive Democrats are willing to foot the bill.
Lastly, taxing does NOT increase the supply of good and services you dolt. Taxation only redistributed existing goods and services. As an example, the DoED spends more than the Koch Brothers lifetime earning in a single year and have nothing to show for it. You keep thinking we need more tax money - News Flash Sherlock, the Government raised over a TRILLION dollars this year. The US Government has NO problem raising capital. Jesus, are you completely clueless? The Government has MORE than enough money. One more time, taxation does NOT increase goods and services, it redistributes those that exist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Roberth Pilesund
The vast majority of FDA regulated food in the grocery store will make you ill - possibly even kill you. And pink slime is legally bought and sold (and ate) in the USA. If you think there's some Dr. Evil out there buying off the hundreds of thousands of food inspectors you're living in a fantasy. Our poor foods are a result OF regulation.
Secondly, the Department of Education is a massive $80 - $100 BILLION dollar a YEAR bureaucracy. And, again, there's no Dr. Evil (other than Teacher's Unions) that are buying off the teachers and ensuring American Government Schools graduate functional illiterates at a rate of 1 in 5.
As for 'For Profit' schools. Are some scams? Yes, and they specialize in securing Government loans. That's their whole scam - getting the Government to buy their bullshit, sticking us with the bill.
That said, the top universities in the World are Private American universities. And YES, they MUST make a profit or they will go bankrupt.
Here's a list of 'Private' for profit Universities in the USA:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Harvard University
Stanford University
California Institute of Technology
Princeton University
Yale University
The fact is, we DO have hyper-regulations controlling every aspect of our lives. This is a fact. Regulations on who we can marry, what we eat, who we can seek medical advice from, who can sell flowers, who can drive taxies, what we wipe our butts with. We live in a Nanny State run by psychopaths. We live with never ending War. The USA government imprisons more non-violent humans than any other entity in history. The USA government creates more pollution and uses more limited energy than any other entity in human history. It's destroying our lives and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
You'll see, expect Government run Schools to produce 1 in 3 function illiterate graduates in the coming decade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
synapse131
"And so many of the policies that led to the conditions you describe were put into place by Republicans and sometimes their lackeys, the Democrats: The War on Terror, the War on Drugs, the police state, etc. While we do have a lot of state and local regulations that are onerous, many of these have been put into place by corporations and their lobbyists; often ostensibly for health and safety reasons, but really to provide companies with monopolies."
I'd pretty much agree with you here. Except for the notion of monopolies, there has only been one true private monopoly in the USA and that was aluminium. As soon as it was busted up, the price went up. Same thing with oil, as soon as Standard was broken up, the price went up. The only way to maintain a monopoly in a free market is to keep the price extremely low. Good for the consumer. Bad for the competition.
The other monopoly in society, one you seem to overlook, is the State. It has a monopoly on the use of legitimized legal violence against innocent people. THAT monopoly is why both the Rethuglicans and Democrips work hand in glove with the worse aspects of the unfree/fascistic markets to maintain (even to the point of bailing out) our ruling oligarchy.
Solution?
Limit government. IF we had a limited government, then the rich wouldn't have been bailed out, and there'd be a much more level playing field.
You can't have it both way. You can't dance with the devil and call the tune. It doesn't work like that.
Yes, the rich buy can Licences - this is because of the State having the right to determine who can and can not give someone a ride. Anyone should be allowed to offer their services as a cabby. It's up to adults to determine if they want to get into a car with some creepy guy or pay a premium and take a ride with a highly respectable cab service.
1
-
1
-
synapse131
RE: " It's free, public schooling that allowed modern nations to thrive, become more financially stable and to get rid of public schooling would take us back to the times where we had few skilled, educated workers and mush less ability to compete economically. "
What are you talking about? The second industrial revolution occurred prior to 'free' Government schools. The entire modern world came into being before Government schools; electricity, movies, lights, cars, rail, engines, etc.... ALL of that happened before Government schools were common.
Also, the first Government schools, were obviously run by people NOT educated in a Government school (fact from necessity). Therefore, I'd argue, the first Government schools were run much better than 100 years later when we have the effects of Institutionalization (which happens to ALL organizations - and is why we need a free market so bad players go bust and leave us alone).
Literacy rates were higher in some Black neighbourhoods 100 year ago! Stop and let that sink in. THAT is how crap Government schools are. Are you going to argue that Blacks in 1910 had MORE resources compared with today? I mean, come on.
"Only those who are well off would be able to get a good education; and this would cripple our productivity"
That's not true of Apple iPhones - super computers that fit in your pocket and can access almost ALL information in the world, pretty for very reasonable rates. I's argue we're wasting $80-100 BILLION a year on Government schooling. With that much money we could really get some good alternative educational institutions operational.
--
Lastly, Government schooling was created with one idea in mind - to create labor cogs to work in Aristocratic owned factories (started in Prussia/Germany). This worked well when mind-numbing mundane factory jobs were common. Well, now they're not common. We no longer have jobs for the functional illiterate (yet compliant) low quality education that Government schools produce. So, yes, in that sense our future was derived from Government schooled factory cogs. It didn't have to be that way, but it was.
I'd argue Government schools don't produce quality. The bar is just so low it appear like quality. But it's not. It's mediocre at best. The entire structure of Government schools, classes, age based, grade based, etc.... is all antithesis towards learning.
A much better system would be flexible and allow for children of different ages to be educated to their strengths. Basically, the entire structure of a Government school hinders learning. Thank the Gods we have some competition in the form of Charter Schools.
I'd also say this, when something is 'FREE' it has no value. If something is valuable, then people pay for it.
Also, the USA spends much more than most nations on Education, yet does much worse. It spends more than Japan, as an example, and has much lower outcomes (at least according to standard literacy and numeracy testing).
1
-
1
-
Roberth Pilesund
Violence against innocent people is initiating violence against a person who is morally innocent. Taking a vote does not change the immorality of initiation of violence against innocent people. In the early 1800s Americans voted to maintain Slavery 'for the Good of Society' and used violence against those innocent people. It was legal. It was immoral.
1) A ponzi scheme is fraudulent and so no that would not be legal as it would be a breach of contract law.
2) Pilots with bad eyesight could be illegal. It depends on the extent that their vision endangers passengers. I could see a couple aspects:
(a) breach of contract (the tickets) - people buy airline tickets with the unwritten rule that the pilots are competent.
(b) One could argue fraud, again, breach of contract.
(c) Airline insurance companies would obviously have contracts (outside of ours) that would require pilots can see. Here we're have all sorts of insurance (i) bank loans (ii) airsafety (iii) the airports themselves
So, you can see, in a free society, it'd be pretty difficult to unknowingly end up on a plane with a pilot with insufficient eyesight.
3) Manufacturing toys for children with poison would be a violation of property rights. Children are a special instance of property and normal property rights would be more stringent because, until consciousness is achieved at a proper level, the owner is the parent. Also, if the toys were sold as safe to play with, then this would be fraud.
4) If a person doesn't want to sell me a cake because I'm an atheist, that is perfectly fine. So long as they didn't enter into an agreement before knowing so. Which is good, that way I don't patron bigots. The last thing I want to do is trade with bigots.
5) Anyone offering Medical services would not have to attend school. But, they would not be legally allowed to call themselves 'Doctors' as this is a claim to formal education and they would be engaged in fraud and, assuming they harmed your body - which you own, in violation of property rights.
If should be noted, thanks to the near monopoly the AMA has on Rx and thus medicine, the medical field is totally f#cked. Not only is the price astronomical (due to Government regulated shortages) but the quality is dropping like a rock. In 1990 about 90,000 Americans died of medical errors. In 2010 about 240,000 were killed due to medical error and 3 - 5 million seriously injured.
This would be like nuking mid-sized US cities each year. Yet, not a peep from our illustrious 'Regulators'.
6) Pipes would be insured or you'd fix them yourself. If you were buying a service (say water) then the company would pay to fix. As for the roads, while private roads would be idea, my guess is this would remain under control of limited State government and would be repaid through gasoline sales tax (as is the case currently).
7) Internet companies could try to charge you $9000 a year. They'd go bust soon. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure the bank loans secured to open their business would be violated by such incompetence.
8) No a 9 year old has not reached a mental state to sign a contract and therefore can not engage in legal transactions such as buying beer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
Sure, there are a teeny minority of people who would happily pay a plumber to do brain surgery on them. Yes, the world is full of complete morons and yes I support you/them being free to be that level of stupid - preferably before you/they breed. That's just part of living in a free society. As for the rest of society, namely hospitals and insurance companies, we'll require a certification of competence to tender for brain surgery.
Note: I wonder why electronic companies never hire plumbers to do complex computer coding? Geee, and without any State requirement to only hire people with State certifications somehow GAAASP the free market is able to align goods and services with customers to produce $150 super computers that fit in my pocket.
While the current system sees the AMA (a private fraternity) with a near total monopoly (thus quality is low and price is high), in a free-market more certification options (example: DO and others) will drive quality up and price down.
Oh, and by the by, you are indeed free to walk over the magic State line and have surgery elsewhere in the world by people without USA regulated medical background. In many instances for a much lower cost and much higher quality of care. Japan is a good example of this.
One more time, healthcare IS the MOST regulated market in the USSA. It has the most regulations. No other market is more highly regulated than healthcare. And as a result we have extremely crap outcomes (400,000 Americans an KILLED each year due to medical error in our State-regulated medical care)
1
-
1
-
*****
I don't think you understand what logic is. You don't seem to be making a logical argument and your premises are unfounded therefor your conclusions are unsound.
As an example, you state the 'clusterfuck' we had prior to Obamacare was due to lack of regulatory enforcement - this is not true, further, the added regulations are NOT making us safer. Empirically, the data shows there were 90,000 deaths due to medical error in 1990 and with the addition of millions of more regulations the deaths due to medical error are now 450,000. The 'clusterfuck' (as you say) is due to (a) too many regulations (b) AMA monopoly (c) regulatory capture and rent-seeking.
Again, you're showing your ignorance, regulation is being used to maintain profits. It's the exact opposite of your presumption (that regulation is to bring down costs). One more time, regulations are there to keep profits high. As an example: cities in the USA are restricted on how many hospitals can be opened. IF it's determined (by people using the system to make money) that a new hospital will impact on the profitability of an existing hospital - then the State will refuse a new hosptial from opening. The same is true of all sorts of medical care. The number of fMRI that can opened in a city is also limited. LIMITED - to maintain profit.
Summary, the reason why medicine costs to much is due to State-enforced regulatory capture by the AMA to maintain it's rent-seeking.
I promise, more regulation, ObamaCare or otherwise, will see that 480,000 dying per year going up to a million.
You'll see. Much like you think you understand what 'logic' means, you'll find out you don't - and you also don't understand medicine and how regulations is making it more expensive and more dangerous. The problem is IMO, people like you are allowed to vote. You 'think' you understand something and you think you should have your say. But in reality, you don't really understand anything and having your say with 'your' logic is the very last thing we need as a society. Therefor, limited government and free-markets are the only solutions to people like yourself.
It's not that you are intentionally trying to destroy society, it's just what you do. You like to think you know much more than you actually do know and that makes you, when in aggregate, dangerous to the rest of us.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jack194343
I know this is a simple concept, and I'm not sure if I can make it any simpler, but I'll try. Zero regulation is not the same as Zero law. Law protects your 1. civil rights, 2. property and 3. against fraud. Regulation often violates the law.
Stop and think, if you have Law to protect your private property against someone pouring pollution into the water and washing up on your property - then what use is there for regulation? It's already illegal!
Oh, I know the answer - regulation's are NOT to protect YOU from the polluter, it's to protect the polluter FROM YOU suing them. In that way, the polluter can put a 'regulated' amount of pollution into the water and your property can be polluted in a 'legal' manner. Thus, the law of the land is not decided by jury and court but by regulators who often go and work in said corporation that they so-call 'regulate'.
I am 99.9% sure the public school system is being purposely used to dumb down the general public.
As I said, if you like life as a cog in a chain store then good, hyper-regulated America is the place for you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
fliteshare
My father retired from GM at 47 and is paid $55000 a year in pension. That's AFTER the bailout. This mean, if you're paying tax, some of it is paying hundreds of thousands of his fellow retirees pension. That's not 'capitalism'. That's socialism and it's not fair sticking the next 3 generations with one generations larges and debts.
In terms of Labor, the cost of a car in Germany is ~10%. Which isn't that bad. This means you can pay a higher wage because it's not adding up to that much of the cost. Want to know how Germans achieve this cost efficiency? Massive automation. A few highly skilled people running a lot of automated processes. The role of the blue collar 'factory worker' is coming to an end. Even in China their labor is becoming too expensive.
You seem to think there's this magic land where price of labor and production are unrelated. If ONLY we had X, Y, and Z and then finally poof magic happens and labor is paid well. When you purchase your food, your electronics, your house, your car - YOU demanded the best quality for the cheapest price. When you buy your coffee today, you'll want the best deal you can get. Are YOU a greedy capitalist? Well, the same is true when a business owner buys labor-hours. There's no difference at all. It's exactly the same.
If we want a prosperous society we need more demand for labor and this means more businesses - which means less regulations preventing people from opening business. Less taxes on business so people can stay in business. It means we need end Government schools and bring in competition in education. Government schools do not educate children to be owners of business but to want to 'get a job' and be a laborer in a business. They're labor-cog factories. Well, guess what? The world no longer needs labor-cogs. Heck, when 3D printing becomes economical, even the factory owners will be out of a job.
Anyway, you're in luck, because we getting the opposite. We're getting more regulation, more Government schooling, more State licencing, more taxes, more debt, more war, less services, less privacy and less personal freedom.
1
-
fliteshare
Parents make the choice to have children, its therefor the parents responsibility to care for their children as the children are dependents of the parents. You OTOH are not a child. You're an adult. See the difference?
While you like to think of the State as your parents - it is NOT your parent. Our representatives are not our mommy's or daddy's. Many are complete sociopaths - which is why they love never ending war.
The State (a geopolitical creation) has a Government that rules over the people within that area of land. The Government differentiates itself from the rest of society in that it has the legal obligation to initiate force against innocent members of society. Therefor, if we use your analogy of the State being a parental figure, then The State is, an abusive parent who hits innocent children.
Examples of it's abuse would be the War on Drugs, where millions of adults who dared make a choice over their own body are put into State run rape cages. Or the Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam wars where millions of innocent children, their mothers and fathers were killed over lies. Or the Income Tax - used to tax laborers when they work. This means you don't even own your body. If you labor for an hour, you must pay the State a transaction tax when you do so. This tax was meant to 'tax the rich' - but the State made sure it now taxes the worker and bails out the rich. As has happened with the GFC where the people who should be in prison are instead bailed out while the workers are left paying the bill.
When the State runs services like education, they force all other market participants out of the market. The end result? The USA spends more money than Japan on education and 1 in 5 high school graduates are functionally illiterate.
Summery, no one wants people to be poor. No one wants people to go without. State violence isn't the solution to these problems - many times, it's the cause.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
Maybe you don't quite understand Japanese social rules, but think about this, the Japanese language itself is grammatically structured, one could say evolved, to maintain social harmony.
Japanese don't think as you think.
As in, do not "think", compose thoughts, as you do.
You compose your thoughts in your language. You just happen to think as an individual, because that was the language you were taught to think in as a child - it really has nothing to do with you. Just dumb luck. German Anglican languages place much more emphasis on nouns, this probably had to do with wheat farming. Perhaps it's even more natural to be self centered. Eastern languages (many at least) place the emphasis on the verb. This probably has to do with rice farming - which required social agreement.
Had you been born in Japan, you'd think in a different language and you'd compose different thoughts and those thoughts would place society above the individual.
Have you ever heard of being "Two Faced"? Pretending to like someone, when really you despise them? Well, in the West, being two faced is bad, because you're not being genuine. In Japan being two faced is good, because it's the other person's feeling that matter - more than you or your feelings. If you can warmly make them feel good, while at the same time hating them, then this is good for society and so it's better. A virtue you could say.
1
-
nora ekard
It's true that as Japan is more and more influenced by the Western way of thinking, more and more men will choose to MGTOW. But, this is not good for society, and so they will be appropriately shunned.
That said, I'd rather some people do not have children anyway.
If you're worried your child is not your child, by DNA at least, simply have a DNA test. It's not that big of a deal. As for slaving away in a corporate structure. Most people work 12 hard year at schooling, then 4 more in University, just hoping to get lucky enough to have such a job. But, because Japan is a little freer than the USA. You could just choose to open your own business. Our friend worked as a pastry chief from the age of 16 and then opened a restaurant at 27 and is doing fine. She doens't even work any longer now that she has a child. Time to stay home, that's the deal.
1
-
nora ekard
No, society isn't going to operate at their expense because they will be shunned out of having a job and refused accessing social services (which are always paid for by the next generation). See? As a few MGTOW find their lives living hell, other men will be less inclined to want to be shunned. That's the wonderful thing (moral actually) of shunning. It's a non violent means to encourage the appropriate behavior is produced in a voluntary manner. As a matter of fact, I'd say there is nothing more powerful than shunning - it's much much more effective a punishment than prison.
Like I said, I have no problem with some people not having a family. If they are providing value to society. However, if they think self-centered MGTOW is the way to go, they can leave and live in the West or they can face being shunned. And, let me tell you, Japanese people are very very VERY good at using shame and shunning to change behavior. Hell, it's the backbone of the nation, in a way you simply cannot perceive unless you live in Japan and are Japanese.
1
-
1
-
nora ekard
Again, Japanese men WANT to have families, the reason they don't because they don't feel they can provide for a wife and kids and are worried about not meeting social expectations. I'd suggest this is 1 in 8 men. True MGTOW are men who actually want to be self-centered and don't want to have a family - these people need to be shamed into growing up. AND the former need social support to help them get going and some pressure taken off them.
I hope I've made myself clearer. You shouldn't think MGTOW is true in Japan - it's not as true as the media would hype it. It's a minority. Most Japanese men WANT a wife and family. They just don't think they can do it because they can't find a good job.
As for a woman's age, 30 is the traditional cut off with 28 being the natural marriage date to allow for some buffer. But, women get married after 30, it's just not something you'd want to do.
I should also say, life in Japan is really good. The cities are clean, modern, less regulated by government and so you can open up some pretty cool businesses there. Like a bar that seats 3 people and is open all night. You can drink and walk about and not worry it's illegal. You can buy beer, soda, cigarettes, wine, liquor from vending machines, and etc... Yes, Japan has a LOT of social expectations, but in exchange you get a lot MORE freedom to make your own way in life.
1
-
1
-
Joshua J Free trade with Asia has pulled millions of hard working Asians out of poverty and at the same time given millions and millions of Americans higher standards of living by producing electronics cheaply ushering in the internet age. If Asians weren't making smart phones, and they were made here in the USA, they'd cost thousands of dollars and most poor would never afford them.
As for why the poor are left with crappy low end jobs. Well, that's pretty easy to answer. Government schools are next to useless. As a matter of fact, the DoED found 1 in 5 American graduates are functionally illiterate. Further, the DoED found the average American reads at the level of a 6th grader. Next, thanks to Progressives like Thom, there's sooooo many millions and millions and millions of regulations making it impossible for poor functionally illiterate Americans to open up their own businesses. Thus, they have only two choices, work at McDonald's et.al. or go on to Government Welfare. Just think, if we didn't have a central bank, and didn't have minimum wage, and a trillion regulations, maybe all those jobs would have stayed in the USA?
The American middle class has spoke, when given the opportunity, they'll buy made in Japan, Hong Kong, China, Taiwan etc... over made in America. The only thing a tariff's do is prevent free Americans from purchasing the items they want. And what they want is made in China.
Notice Japan and Germany are still able to compete. That's something to think about.
Let me ask you this, in the next decade, we'll have 3D printers that put most Chinese out of a job, as we'll be able to produce anything we want in our own homes. Are you going to suggest this is going to make us poorer? Because, a cheap Asian making stuff for next to nothing, is pretty much like a 3D printer.
1
-
1
-
thrisbt1 Voting for anyone who promises to redistribute other people's money for the 'good of society' is a waste of time.
What exactly has Bernie Sanders himself done that doesn't involve taking other people's money and spending it? I mean, that's a god damn good gig if you can get it. Has Bernie inventing anything? Discovered anything? Created anything of note other than increased taxes and more paperwork? Has he created any successful businesses? Or is he a career bullshitter?
Politically, has Bernie taken on the Teacher's Unions? Has he radically tried to change the broken system that is Government schooling? I'm not talking about throwing money at Union officials, I'm talking total reinvent education? Nope, No, and No. Is Vermont reducing regulations to make it easier for the poor to open businesses? Nope. How about reducing income tax? Nope.
Bernie Sanders is successful at one thing, and only one thing - spinning bullshit people want to hear. It generally goes like this: Yes, I agree with you. Yes, you are right. The Government is failing the middle class. Yes, I'm here to take from the rich and give everything and anything you want. Free education? Done. Free healthcare? Done. Free University. Done. Free roads. Free internet. Free free and more free. Oh, and we'll stick it to the rich while we're at it.
As I said before, I'd be happy if Bernie won. 8 years of more failed Progressive bullshit and maybe people might start to get it. Probably not. More than likely we'll have to sink into 3rd world nation status with a banana republic dictator before Americans get that what made America prosperous was a LIMITED government.
Maybe we'll move back to Japan. Japanese generally agree on two things: politicians are full of crap and American politicians are a joke. It's also a much freer country in many respects. Progressives don't make much headway in Japan as Asians in general don't buy into airy fairy bullshittery.
1
-
Joshua J
Free trade with China has benefited much more than the 'corporate elite', it's pulled hundreds of millions of poor working Chinese out of poverty (a poverty caused by central planning I might add. The same sort of central planning that's leading to our lower standard of living). Chinese aren't making us 'poorer' because they're taking our jobs, they're actually propping up our standard of living by offering us extremely high value electronics for next to nothing. Just imagine, a super computer that fits in your pocket, and as soon as a new model comes out, Americans just toss the old super computer into the trash bin.
Corporations probably will move their operations to a cheaper country. And they'd have to. Or they go bankrupt. Not because THEY are greedy, but because Americans want the best of everything and they want it for next to nothing. Blame the middle class American consumer for the need to make everything so cheaply. They COULD have supported made in America, but they don't want to. Free trade simply shows the true face of America. Which is the price we pay for living in a free society. People are free not to buy made in America. Further, many Americans have the entire retirement dependent on stocks. Hundreds of millions of Americans REQUIRE that corporations turn a fat profit and if they don't, the CEO is quickly fired.
I personally make a distinction between making a profit (which is virtuous) and spoils (which is stealing, indirectly or otherwise). If you open a cafe and make a profit (be it a chain or otherwise) and you're competing in a free market, then this means you're providing people with something they want without threatening them in the process. That's virtuous. If you were not making a profit, that'd be a signal to you, people do not want what you are selling - regardless of your good intentions, or ill intent. That's the reason we need profit in a free market.
I didn't understand why you said small business need help from the government and then say you support crowd sourcing. Those are mutually exclusive statements. What we need is deregulation to make it fairer to compete. Just look at the Taxi scam as an example. Taxi's are small businesses, but as soon as Uber came along and offered competition, many ran straight to government trying to outlaw this competition - which has happened in some places via 'regulations'.
The only viable solution is to eliminate government's role in regulating the markets.
It seems to me that you're hung up on 'money' and 'jobs'. You suggest 3D printing is both going to put everyone out of a job AND at the same time bring on the Great Depression? This makes no sense. People do not 'have' to work and money is only a means of transaction. For example, if we have solar energy and 3D printers and recycling centers, then yes, there won't be as many jobs. That's a good thing, it means we can spend more time doing things of leisure. Life therefor is better - and the end goal is no one works at all and there's no need for money. Right now we live in a time when people toss supercomputers in the trash because they don't look nice, so, minus the State starting WWIII, we have a bright future IF we can return to free trade / free societies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee Welcome to the end result of Progressive 'Socialism'. Of course we are worked to death - it costs a ton of money to pay for all the governmental 'free' services we are 'entitled' to. Particularly when it comes to the Federal Government bailing out the richest 0.1% crony so-called 'capitalists' that run our country.
In a FREE society competition FOR labor ensures wages remain high. I've personally witnessed this. We don't live in a free society. We live in a hyper-regulated society, thus, demand for labor remains low - and will continue to remain low until we admit we have a problem with too much government. Which isn't going to happen.
Then there's the trillions and trillions wasted on the Government's wars. Next comes the Federal Register which churns out approximately 80,000 pages of fine print regulations every year. This regulatory order is cumulative. Most of these regulations stay on the books. They are not repealed by the bureaucrats; they are amplified by new rules.These regulations are primarily aimed at protecting market players and locking out competition.
Imagine, today you can be fined for letting your children sell lemon-aid. THAT'S how 'free' the markets are in the USA. While you'd go to jail for selling open BBQ chicken without a licence, your neighbor can open a State 'regulated' tacobell and sell boiled in ammonia pig hooves, tail and bone meal mixed with HFCS, filler and food coloring. You know, because the Government wants to make sure we're "safe".
Why are we working to death? The DoED costs nearly $100 BILLION a year. What do we get for our money? Institutionalized 'education' where 1 in 5 graduates are functionally illiterate. They graduate with a degree in uselessness, barely able to read and write, little practical knowledge into hyper-regulated markets where they'd go to prison for selling unlicensed lemon aid.
Yes, the corporation of the USA is a huge problem - one the Government perpetuates. And will continue to perpetuate regardless of WHO is elected. Do you think Bernie Sanders is going to do a god damn think to decrease sales at Walmart? No way. Walmart is paying the lion's share of the taxes to the Government - which Bernie thinks is fantastic, because he's going to magically redistribute 'money' and this will someone make all our lives better.
Americans are addicted to Government. And, in this case, we'll have to hit rock bottom before MAYBE we'll admit we have a problem and do something about it. I'd say, in another 40 years of so. Give or take a decade or two.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee So you'd prefer to let millions of Chinese children starve to death? Is that your solution? No one in the USA is starving to death. Americans are, in reality, fat. 80% of Americans have air conditioning in their homes. Americans in the bottom 15% live in homes that are larger than the middle class in France. You have a distorted view of what's real.
The jobs ARE going overseas. There is no stopping that. Just as tractors replaced low skilled labor, Chinese are replacing low skilled Americans. One day 3D printers will replace Chinese.
And our standard of living is rising. We live in an age where Americans toss away old smart phones like trash because they want a new 'look'. We have access to ultra cheap electronics. People aren't starving in the USA, they're getting fatter. Food is plentiful. Education is nearly free and higher education has guaranteed for anything through State loans and tons of scholarships. We are going to gain access to solar power cells (made in China) that will make our lives even better.
If you have a high level skill, getting a good paying job in the USA isn't that difficult. Engineering, writing computer code, law, medicine, biotech, etc.... if you have a low skill, then you are not getting a high paying job in the USA any longer. Primarily because other Americans do not want to buy your stuff. They prefer made in China. It's that simple. You can try to restrict what other Americans can or cannot buy, but it won't work. They'll vote for the person who is giving them a cheap iPad not a job making a cheap iPad. It's called Democracy.
I personally have only bought 1 thing at Walmart (bag of pretzels). Not that I think they're a bad company, I just don't like their crappy products and their food is low quality. But Walmart makes its money serving the POOR. I've spoken to well connected people who suggest one reason the government gives Walmart subsidies is because Walmart does such a great job feeding the poor. While the Government on the other hand does a wonderful job creating poor. It's sort of a hand in glove relationship. That may or may not be true.
What is true is low skilled manufacturing is going overseas and when it comes back, it'll be in the form of a 3D printer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee Our entire monetary system was designed and implemented and voted into law by Progressives. Most notably Woodrow Wilson, he started the Progressive Party for Christ's sake. You saying there's been 'no Progressive in 35 years' is the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. The fact is Progressive Socialists are ALL we have - they come in two flavors, Fascist Corporatists and Fascists Socialists. Think of it like this, what is "Progressive" one day, is "Conservative" the next. A 100 years ago a Central Bank and taxing people by their Labor-hours was all new and "Progressive". Now it's unthinkable not taxing labour-hours and not having a central bank. It's "Tradition".
As for the worker missing out on the gains in productivity. Like I said before, until Labor is in demand, then the price will continue to fall. You can use the State to force the price of low end labor up, but you can't make people buy it.
Anyway, we can agree the monetary system is completely unfair and no longer functional. I think the way to fix it is to limit government and maximize personal freedom (the entire foundation of our society) and you can think redistributing from one group to another using a Police State is going to fix it (the antithesis to the foundation of the USA). I can promise you, the only thing the Police State is going to do, is work for the highest bidder - which is NOT the middle class or the poor. We can see they did exactly this when they bailed out the richest 0.1% during the GFC.
1
-
marisafari Inflation should NOT be occurring. As we become more productive and can make things cheaper, the prices of these items should drop. Therefor the normal way the worker enjoys 'productivity' gains is by paying less for the items at the store.
The reason why we instead have inflation is (a) Central Banks cause inflation by expanding the money supply and (b) the Government NEEDS inflation to pay off it's T-bonds as well as municipals and their gawd awful bonds. In short, the Central Bank and Government work like hand in glove to maintain high inflation - because it benefits THEM.
Ask a Central Banker about deflation and they'll blabber on about how we 'need a magical 2% inflation' of no one would buy anything, which is asinine. Electronics have seen prices drop year after year and sell like hotcakes!
Anyway, as to your point about labor-hours. Labor-hours are just like anything else. If the supply is high, then the price is low. If the supply is low, then the price is high. To reduce the supply of labor-hours we need more entrepreneurs. But, thanks to 80 years of Progressive regulations and 100 years of Progressive Government Schools - all we have are laborers.
Just imagine, in the 1960s America was seen (from the outside) as a country of businessmen. Literally, EVERYONE wanted to open a business. THAT was the norm. Now everyone wants to get a 'good job' or a handout. Very few Americans want to start a business any longer. And I don't blame them. Who would? The better option is to get a 'good job' working for the Government - nice benefits, high pay, job security, holidays off, no weekends, etc... Not the way to a prosperous future.
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee RE: CEO's
Yes, I agree that CEO's are being overpaid. However, taxing CEO's wouldn't even cover a tiny amount of money spent by the State. As an example, the Koch brothers (a favorite target of the Progressive far Left) have about $100 billion following about 80 years of work from two generations. The DoED blows through $100 billion each and every year. The functional illiteracy rate of American high school graduates is 1 in 5. Each student costs around $250,000 to put through 12 years of education.
Yes, the CEO's are paid too much - tax them all you like. It isn't going to change the fact of failing American schools. All that will happen is the money will be taken from relatively productive people and given to relatively unproductive people, wasted, and nothing to show for it.
I'll give you an example from my own experience. The government gave a $10,000.000 grant to teach minorities at a medical school. I personally tutored the ONLY minority. I did so for free. That $10 million was spent refurbishing the administration building in about 3 months time. ZERO was spent on any minority students. Or how about the $120,000,000 spent on medical research - this equated to pretty much nothing. And those are small figures. Very small. The State can easily blow through $10 - 20 billion in a few months with absolutely zero to show for it. And get this, most of the time it makes the problems WORSE. That's a fact.
I noticed long ago that Progressives have a faith in the State that's only matched in belief by the far right conservatives. Which makes sense. History shows both the far right (Religious extremists) and far left (Communists) kill in the name of their faith at a rate pretty much not matched by any other ideology.
Progressive Socialists and Conservative fundamentalists are two sides of the same coin.
I don't think you have an idea as to how things really work in the real world. Yes, it's nice to blame the rich (and they do suck) but if you think the Government is any better, you have another thing coming. Public servants are much worse - and Government is a much bigger problem.
Bernie knows this to be the case. Yet he still peddles his bullshit. I find that somewhat interesting. And telling.
1
-
marisafari I like your idea on giving people a basic income. I'd like to see if giving an electronic coupon that had to be spent in 1 month (staggered randomly) wouldn't work a bit like a vote. As an experiment I'd like to see a lot of new currency devices tried.
As for the CEO being paid 300 times more - well, we have to assume yes, they are worth 300 times more. As an example, take Brad Pitt, he's paid 300x more than the stage hand and 3000x more than the extra. Is he worth all this extra pay? Yes. Which is why he's hired. Are ALL of the CEO's worth 300x more? Ask their employers, mostly the board. They'd say yes. Which is why they hired them as CEO. Is an Apple iWatch worth 300x more than a simple watch? Well, to the people who buy them it is.
I agree that the top 0.1% have too much power in society. The solution I put forward is to remove government from their grasp of power. If they didn't have governmental power, then in 2008 most of those 0.1% would be bankrupt. People like Warren Buffet would be part of the 99%, instead (thanks to Government) he's in the 0.00001%. Worse still, government distorts all aspects of society (see the Police State and the War on Terror).
No, what we need is LESS Government and then just let the rich fail, as they ALWAYS do without Government propping them up.
1
-
marisafari No one likes to see poor working day and night. But stop and think about this: Why are they working day and night? WHO is really at fault? When they offer their services to the public, no one wants to pay them more than a basic minimum amount. This is no different than you choosing to buy something like an apple instead of the banana. You're saying you favor the apple grower over the banana grower (as an example). Is ANYONE at fault? Is it your "fault" you prefer apples and not banana's? If the banana grower losses his job, is that your 'fault'?
In a free society people are free to buy and sell goods and services. This means people generally find something they are good at that people ALSO find of value. We don't live in a free society. We live in a regulated society. This means there's going to be a lot of poor that cannot find a regulated job. Reason TV had a really great interview with a man on the dole who WANTED to work, but didn't want to work at a FastFood Inc... so he opened a BBQ up in a parking lot in a run down part of town with a bunch of closed businesses. Within a year a saved 18,000! THAT is what happens when you allow for free trade. Of course, the State came in a destroyed his business because he didn't meet it's "Regulations" and get this, the Police actually STOLE his money. It took him 3 years in court and he only recovered $11,000.
The State IS evil. It can strangle you to death for selling a 0.50 cent cigarette. It wages trillion dollar wars against innocent people. It taxes you FOR working! By the hour! It just bailed out the top richest 0.01%. Anyway, the ONLY viable long term solution is a LIMITED government. Of course, people hate limited government because the State is the new religion. The POTUS is it's Pope and the Senators the Bishops. The people worship it. They love it. Thus, we'll all just have to get used to a lower standard of living, less personal freedom and a bloated evil State run by the rich for their benefit. I wouldn't be surprised to see a Dictator elected sometime in the next 40 years. Followed by a massive cull of the 'rich' as we shift far Left. I think a lot of Americans are going to be surprised to find out, they're part of the 'rich'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee I can see we agree on many points.
Okay, let me try this. It comes from Kant, and so it's not my opinion (more like a set of definitions). Kant was an Ethicist, he named four kinds of government:
1. Law and freedom without force (anarchy).
2. Law and force without freedom (despotism).
3. Force without freedom and law (barbarism).
4. Force with freedom and law (republic).
Notice that the most moral society, has a government without force - which is to say, has no government (anarchy). A republic is predicated on the use of force. While Kant believed Republic was the best suited for humans, he understood anarchy to be the most moral. Government is just a group of people no different than any other - including a corporation. With one exception, government can use force against innocent people. Corporations cannot.
Let's pick the largest corporation in the USA: Apple Inc. Compare Apple to the Government. Imagine if Apple calls you and says they want to talk to you. How do you feel? Maybe you don't mind the call? Maybe you tell them to piss off. Now, let's imagine the same person calls you, only they're from the IRS. How do you feel now?
Think about that.
Apple isn't harming you, it's serving you. Apple only survives IF it gives you things you want. The Government on the other hand couldn't give two craps about you. You will pay it, or you will be tossed in prison. You will do what it tells you to do. Your children will pledge themselves to it in it's Government schools. It will invade other nations, murder millions of people, and you will still pay for it. Like it or not. Not only this, but the Government controls the currency you must pay it in. That's insane amounts of power. Yet, you will support it. Why? I believe it is because you are (like me) an atheist. But almost everyone needs a superstition. It's built in the DNA.
Big God, Little State
Little God, Big State
Government must be limited, this is what the Framer's of the Constitution understood. Sadly, this was forgotten.
1
-
Rusty Mckee I've lived in four different countries: The USA and Japan being the two more similar and most dissimilar. I think all people have cognitive bias towards the tribe and they like to use the word 'we' when referring to it. I do it too. But, it's not true. There really isn't a 'we' per say.
I'd just reiterate, Anarchy has rule of law. Just no State. Anarchy would be your personal relationships with people. The rules in this case are often unwritten. Anarchy would also best describe your day to day shopping activities. You freely walk into a mall and buy and shop, but you're agreed to their rules upon entry of their private property. They themselves can employ secutiry and if you break their laws (shop lift, walk around without a shirt on, etc...) you can be forced off their property.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not an Anarchist, but I would be if I could be :) Who wouldn't? Anarchy is the end goal of a peaceful human civilization. We should be striving towards it.
Anyway, I'd just like to also point out, IMO the ingrediants for a prosperous society are:
Law (to protect private property and contract)
Sound Money (derived by a free market)
Free Market (this is to say free people)
Limited Government (mainly to ensure the law is upheld).
So, what would a society do with a corporation that's polluting it? Imagine you live down stream of a chemical company. Currently, regulations ensure that the 'regulated' amount of pollution can poison you and your family. I'm sure this is a reasonable amount. Even cars emit pollution. Well, in a free society, you'd probably already had a contract with the company ensuring the same. But, lets suppose you didn't. Then you'd sue. Your neighbors would be the jury. Guilt would be determined. IF truly guilty, then the company could be closed and the CEO jailed. Of course, maybe the company hired a lot of people in the town? Or, maybe the company is constantly being harassed by frivolous lawsuits making it hard to do business. In a free society, we'd have to deal with these issues in a civil manner. But, we decided not to do this. We went with 'regulations'. Which is to say we went with the Government and it's ability to use force against innocent people (recall that guilt could have been found without the use of regulation). Yeah, it's efficient - violence always is. But, in the end we pay the price for resorting to violence. At least that's how I see it. That price is the society we live in today.
What I'm saying is it isn't easy living freely, but it is possible. Corporations don't exist IF they don't produce things people want. And corporations WANT people to have money and be prosperous, because they only survive when people shop. I do agree some corporations are shitty (or appear so) but generally these go bankrupt in a free society because people (a) don't want their products or (b) don't want to work for them. It IS possible to deal with all of our problems with a limited government.
Currently our government is the largest most powerful (and IMO evil) entity to come into existence. It taxes us for working - by the hour! Did you know if government was the size it was in 1990 that NO ONE in the USA would have to pay an income tax on hourly wages? Did you know the USA government is the single largest polluter in the world? Just think of the trillions it wastes on it's wars. Or the trillions it spent bailing out the richest oligarchy in history - we're actually going to live through generational debt with a lower standard of living, on those two acts alone. ONLY the government has THAT kind of power. Which is why it needs to be limited.
But that's not going to happen. And it won't be for our benefit.
1
-
1
-
Rusty Mckee I'd also add, Kantian anarchy and republic, is how politicians define themselves. It's why it's legal for the State to pass a law making the sale of cigarettes illegal, and then hire a person to legally strangle you to death for selling a 0.50 cent cigarette without a State licence.
Actually, depending within which State you (through dumb luck) happen to have been born into and live in, you may or may not be able to legally drive a car, marry who you love, cut hair, sell BBQ chicken, smoke a weed, babysit, walk around with out a shirt on, send an email without it being intercepted and stored on a government computer for future use and etc...All of these actions may result in your being killed by the Police / militant arm of the State.
In 1919, Max Webter defined the State as having a monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force (monopoly on violence) in his book Politics as a Vocation. Weber describes the state as any organization of humans that succeeds in holding the exclusive right to use, threaten, or authorize physical force against residents of its territory (aka: a State).
So, while Dictionary.com may have a definition of what anarchy is, it's not the complete definition as used by social scientists and Ethicists for that last 300 years.
1
-
Rusty Mckee Kant defined lawless as Barbarism.
So, Anarchy isn't lawless. Anarchy simply doesn't have a Government to enforce the laws against innocent people. See, this is the key. Anarchy does have police, and those police will enforce the law, but not against innocent people.
As an example, you should (in theory) own your body, and as an adult should have the right to determine what you consume with your body. But, you can be murdered by the government for smoking a weed. However, you are a morally innocent human - given you own your body.
Another example would be people who are murdered for holding a belief. But, you own your body and your mind. Yet, if you are atheist, you may be murdered (by the Government of KSA or Iran) even though you are (morally) innocent as you own your body and mind. See? Government has the right to initiate violence - this can occur in a Republic or otherwise. It's simple the defining feature of a Government.
Anarchy has law and may actually (believe it or not) have MORE laws and less freedom (in some ways) than a Republic. Which is interesting. I know it's hard to imagine, however, there are many examples of various Anarchies written about.
You may find this of interest: 1000 Years of Irish Anarchy:
https://markstoval.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/1000-years-of-irish-anarchy/
Note: I'm in favor of a limited Government myself.
1
-
Rusty Mckee This is where we differ. The ONLY reason to have a government is because it can legally use violence against innocent people.
ALL governments share one common feature, the legal ability to initiate violence against innocent people. It doesn't matter if the government is run by a monarch, communist leader or president of a republic or a majority vote via direct democracy.
That's not a false dichotomy, it's THE defining feature of all governments since there was a concept called 'government'. It's what delineates governments from other groups of people.
Government is a group of people. In that sense it's not different from a corporation or small business or large business. It's just a group of people, except they can legally initiate violence against innocent people. Which is why it's best to limit their influence in society. Because a lot of sociopaths like to work in governments.
I'm not sure why you want government (a group of people with a monopoly on violence) to have anything to do with means of production? Or distribution of goods and services.
It should be noted Bernie Sanders has stated the free markets should always we used FIRST to produce any good or provide any service. That's something to concider.
Free trade with sound money is the most efficient means to distribute goods. Without a price mechanism its impossible to know what to produce and who to distribute anything to. Also, in a free society (free ability to trade / free trade), money acts as a 'real' vote. This ensures the goods and services are provided to the maximum number of people.
In a free society, each individual attempts to provide a good or service and 'sell' it to other free people around them who voluntarily to buy that good or service. The only reason anyone would want the government involved is if they wanted to force people to buy their good or service (this is what many corporations do, and banks I might add - if you consider money a good).
As for Ireland, I gave this as an example of a functioning anarchy. Of course we're never going to live like tribes (short of catastrophe). The point is there are all sorts of ways to organize people. Anarchy is the most moral. It may not be ideal, but it should be the goal. If these means completely destroying concepts we currently treasure, ideas like "America" or "Republic" or "The US Dollar" - then so be it.
Oh, and for the record, I don't believe humans are capable of living in an anarchy just yet. In the future, yes, this will happen. But, for now, we should aim for a limited government. And, most of the problems we have right now, have to do with money. Had we let the banks crash in 2008, we'd be living in a pretty equitable society right now. Much better than the one we have. Too bad we don't have a limited government - one that can't bail out the rich.
Oh well, people cherish stability over equality. Always have. Always will. Particularly as they get old.
1
-
Rusty Mckee RE: False Dichotomy.
** NOTE: By false dichotomy do you mean you think I'm suggesting it's either Government or corporations? I certainly agree corporations can be corrupt. However, with free markets, property laws and contract we can use sound money to put most out of business. Just look at GM. I'm not suggesting all people who work in Government are evil either.
If not then you'll have to clearly list the two choices you think I'm restricting you to. I didn't define government - the government itself legally defines itself as the one (and only) institution (group of humans) that have legally right to initiate violence against innocent humans within a geographical location.
This is a matter of legal definition.
I can give examples:
- Strangling someone for selling their own property (a cigarette) to a willing adult (here in our republic).
- Or, thinking the wrong thoughts (atheism in KSA).
- Or, offering political alternatives (North Korea).
I only list those examples to illustrate the defining characteristic.
Yes, I agree that people who work in both public AND private institutions can act and be sociopathic. BUT, I don't believe most people ARE sociopaths. I do think living in non-free societies (such as ours) can begin to bring out the worse in people. Even normal, otherwise good people, will when under duress act in uncivil manner. It's just being human. Most do. Which is why we celebrate heros as they are able to (somehow) act brave (normal) in times of duress.
I of course think Government should play a limited role in society - primarily upholding the law. But, maybe also play a role in property rights. I also think humans should be free to move anywhere on earth. We should eliminate States. We should trial all sorts of different forms of social organization. Even Communism (which might work well within a Religious Order - and I'm perfectly fine with that, so long as people are free to leave).
It's my opinion we should have allowed for the financial collapse in 2008. That was our 'reset'. It was what makes free markets worth having. Not allowing that to occur, will, (again, just my opinion) result in something 1000 times worse. What will that be? WW3? A dictator? Or just a slow slide into poverty like has happened in North Korea? I'm going with this last option. I'm fairly certain this is the path forward for us. We'll probably elect a POTUS from the far Left and then when that fails one from the far Right. But, neither is going to fix the problems we face.
What we need (again IMO) is a reset and then a return to sound money, law and free markets. I think that will bring about what we both want. I may be wrong. I am sure there's more than one path to prosperity. So, let's just see what happens.
1
-
Landorcan (A) There is not "X" amount of jobs.
(B) At one time 85% of all Americans worked on farms. Then came the cheap tractor and put all put 3% of them out of work. If you think Asians are cheap, try competing against a tractor! And, guess what? We became richer as a result of the loss of those jobs with the cheaper production of food. JUST like electronics today.
(C) We wouldn't have the internet, tech industry, Youtube, smart phones, large TVs, iPads, laptops or any of the other inexpensive electronics that characterize our modern world, without Chinese there making them.
Lastly, those jobs are NOT coming back. It's that simple. If tariffs go up, or minimum wages is raised, soon robots will do the work. Therefor, the key is sound money, law and the ability TO trade with one another freely. Freedom of movement would also be a huge help. Although, that said, it's pretty easy to move anywhere in the world.
1
-
1
-
Landorcan You seem to be stuck on the 'money' aspect. For example, you ask: "Who is going to pay for the private schools". Money is just a medium of exchange. It's the goods and services that are important. As an example, suppose in the next 10 years we have 3D printers that replace Chinese. AND there's no need to buy 90% of anything. Will having 3D printers make us 'poorer'? Of course not. Just as the tractor replaced the farm hand, the assembly line in the USA replaced the single worker, the Chinese replaced the assembly line in the USA. Each step we become more prosperous. Not less, more. The fact that Chinese are making electronics extremely cheaply, is a good thing. And when the 3D printer comes along, that will be even better.
What we need is free-markets INSIDE the USA. That, and sound money (derived though free trade) and laws - and we'll be fine. You asked WHO is going to buy the private schooling. What you should ask is WHO is going to TEACH inside a private school. And the answer is, now that we don't have to waste our time making cheap electronics, WE are FREE to put ourselves to this more interesting and productive use of our time.
We ARE more prosperous for it.
Now, the major problems in the USA are: We do not use sound money, we are taxes for our labor hours, we do not have free trade inside the USA and most laws are unjust and many more immoral.
1
-
Landorcan You seem to be hung up on money. Money is only a means of exchange.
The unemployment rate in the USA is around 6%. Hardly 'no jobs'. Secondly, as I mentioned earlier, tractors replaced 82% of the 'jobs' (farm hands) in the 1800s - and we became MORE prosperous. Not less. More. One day 3D printers will replace cheap made in China - and we'll be MORE prosperous.
Making cheap junk is one type of employment. Another type is producing high end products like designing a new software or made a new medicine or even performing an art and producing high quality handmade products (food or paintings or clothing, etc... ).
Because we don't need to waste our time making cheap junk, we can instead focus our energy on producing better education. Or, I should say we 'could' IF this is what Americans want. It's not, because Americans don't value education enough to pay people well for the service, but it could be.
One thing you miss in your analogy, IF we retained those jobs in the USA, we wouldn't be exporting electronics (because they would be too expensive and of relatively low quality) and most Americans wouldn't own a smart phone or probably have access to the internet. China OTOH would still produce cheap electronics and other countries like Japan and Germany would buy them. We'd be falling behind. Sure, there'd be a few factories making smart phones going out of business. Hardly a recipe for success.
The 'Digital Age' would not have had happened as it did.
Would YOU buy a Made In America smart phone that ran half as fast and cost $2500? Probably not.
I understand what you're suggesting regarding food coming in from overseas. I personally try to only buy local when possible. Although it's getting harder.
IMO that best option is free trade inside the USA. We need free trade amongst ourselves. For being 'free' America is one of the most regulated markets in the world. Those jobs you're talking about are ONLY coming about when Americans are allowed to create them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dr J Reefer
I have no problem with a private association of doctors, I have a big problem with the AMA forcing the market to take its, and only its, products. We do not NEED the AMA. IF the AMA actually offered value for money, they wouldn't need the State forcing everyone to accept AMA and ONLY AMA approved providers.
A great example is when the AMA tried to run a hit piece on midwives in an attempt to make midwifery illegal. Unfortunately for the AMA it didn't work out the way they had intended - midwifery is actually safer than an OBGYN. That was the LAST time JAMA ran any similar studies - since then it's become the hit piece it is.
So, YES, I think there's enough room for AMA but NO I do not think the State should FORCE a so-called 'Free' people into ONLY accepting AMA qualified doctors (some of whom are complete morons).
Oh, and in case you wondered, I train medical doctors and qualify them as AMA. If they don't get past me, they aren't AMA approved. So, I think I know a bit about how the system works.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ChannelMath
How are you going to prevent someone from taking a job?
Suppose you are a small fry regulator in the health department, you regulate healthcare. As night you get qualifications to work as a nurse, or MD or fMRI technician. So what? You can never have a job in the healthcare profession because you worked as a regulator? I suppose you can never open up your own business in healthcare either?
Is that your argument?
What if you transferred to four different departments (transport, healthcare, communication and water). So? Now you can never have a job in ANY of those fields?
Look, it doesn't matter. Government isn't going to limit itself. That's not going to happen. What will happen is we will lose more civil liberties, privacy, freedoms and normalize to being poorer and being ruled over by a much less limited government.
It's not maybe this will happen. It IS going to happen. Its happening every year - and will continue to happen.
Interestingly, I'm on the other side of the fence. See, I'm the one that's doing the regulating. The larger the Government grows, the more power that's given to people like me, to control people like you. We have meetings and we decide what you are allowed to do. In a sense, we're your rulers - although you may call us your regulators if that sounds better.
While I don't like this arrangement. It's unhealthy IMO. Many of you seem to (not you personally, but, many do - most in fact). And guess what? So too do most of the people I work with. They think you're a bunch of idiots. They put themselves in a quazi-Parent-Child relationship. They even refer to you as children. Which I found disturbing on day one.
Anyway, that's the way it is.
That's the way it will remain.
It what most people want - to be told what to do, how to do it, when to do it and if they can do it. Thinking for one's self never did suite the general public.
Oh, and no, I do not value democracy. I find it lacking in many of the ways the founding fathers did. Which is why back then they didn't allow the general public to vote for many of their representatives (ex: Senators) and ensured the Federal Government was limited in its ability to steal (tax) and pry into our private lives. Oh well, those days are long long gone. Not to return for a long time - if ever. I think no, never. It was a fluke of history due to the Age of Discovery. We're now settling back to the norm. A ruling class. A ruled class.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
TrueTacticia I've lived in both the USA and AU. I've also lived in Japan. Each country is unique in it's own way and so comparisons are difficult to make as in apples to apples. In the case of AU, there has been a 15 year mining boom due to China. Because of this, if you're referring to median at all ages, then you'll find those 30+ are making much more than those under 30 relative to when they themselves were 30. The taxes are high and everything is expensive. And you have to pay for everything. If you want a ketchup with your fries - pay 50 cents. Want soy? That'll be 80 more cents on your $5.50 cup of coffee. If you're young and don't already own a home, it'll be very hard to buy one. A small crappy home will run $450 - $800K. We're not talking SF here. In Japan the houses are 1/3rd and in the USA (depending on where you buy) they're about 1/2 in my experience. If you do start a family, it's going to be very very difficult without putting your child into daycare. The Government pays parents to start daycare at week 6. The boom just ended in AU too. The government is already cutting services and AU can expect a lower standard of living.
Yes, it'd be great if we could raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour and everyone lives happily ever after. But it doesn't work out that way.
Now, that said, there is a huge problem in the USA in terms of too much regulation making it difficult to start a small business. If it were easier to start a business, then people would hire more workers, then the price of labor would go up as supply went down. In this way you're going to build a sustainable economy. What you're talking about (raising wages) is a short term solution with long term problems.
I'd suggest moving to AU if you think it's a good place to live. I personally can't wait to leave. I'm paid 6 figures and we can barely make ends meet here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Phoenix540 I'll tell you what, IF you have some novel evidence that Trump is violating the US Constitution, then you go on and put forward a lawsuit, because if there is one thing we can agree on, millions of Americans would donate millions of dollars to support your claims. Heck, Stein scammed about 10 million off idiots trying to recount Michigan due to 'Russian Hackers' when we use a paper ballot - oh, and get this, when the big slummy Democrat votes were recounted (See: Detroit) they found all sorts of inappropriate violations, in Clinton's favor. That aside, I personally like Trumps relationship with Russia, and with Putin, see, unlike the War Hawks who supported Hillary, I'd prefer we not start WWIII. I mean, it was us, here in the USA, who made up lies about WMD and invaded 5 countries killing, and displacing 10s of millions of people. Not Russia. WE support the dictators who run the KSA, who murder gays, atheists, Christians - not Russia. So, I'd worry a little less about what Russians are going to do to you, and start worrying more about what our Politicians, the CIA, NSA / Police State is doing to us. Right now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rick's Channel
In Australia, all Australians have the right to free healthcare. Yet, there's a thriving private healthcare market. As a matter of fact, when given the choice, no one in their right mind would want to have surgery performed at a free public hospital.
Why do you suppose, when given the chance at 'free' state of the art healthcare, so many Australians would rather pay those 'greedy corporations' instead? Why choose to pay for something, when you can get it for free? Why pay those greedy healthcare corporations who only care about making money and couldn't care at all about you or your health when there's "free" government provided healthcare right next door?
In Australia, the government spends a lot of tax money on primary education. Yet, at the same time has a thriving private education industry. Private tuition for high-school in Australia is $25,000 per year (base funding, then you have to pay for uniforms, books, activities, etc...). So, why is it, do you think, that so many Australians pay? Many private schools have a $1000 retainer fee you must pay per year, for 10 years prior to having your application reviewed at grade 9. Why is that? Why not just get the 'free' education? Why pay those 'greedy corporate' private schools who only want to make as much money as they can and couldn't give two craps about kids education" when there's free government schools right next door?
1
-
Rick's Channel How is it, do you think, the poor are able to afford supercomputers that fit in their pocket and have access to nearly all information in the world? The free-market. See, the free-market [which is to say you and I agreeing to trade without using force against one another (aka: free people)] is the most efficient means of bringing prosperity to the poor.
Most poor attend Government schools and 1 in 5 will graduate as a functional illiterate. With little skills needed to secure a good job in today's markets.
Ever hear the phrase "Good enough for Government work"? Which is to say, over priced and half-arsed.
If you really cared about the poor, then you'd choose less government and more free-markets. A 1910 census found the Black Americans living in Chicago had an 85% literacy rate (this is without Government schooling). In 2010 this same neighbourhood had a literacy rate around 50%. This is what 'Good enough for Government work' is. Twice the cost, half the quality.
Medicine and Finance are HYPER-regulated by the Government. These Government-regulated markets are a total mess. Medicine continues to drop in quality year after year. Finance is more a scam than anything else.
Imagine if next year you paid twice as much for a computer only instead of 16 GB of RAM you got 2 GB of RAM. And it crashed all the time. That's Government regulated medicine. We pay more year after year, and the quality goes down year after year. The same holds for Government schooling, the never ending Wars, Finance, and etc....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
SilortheBlade SJW are well known for trying to use DOXing to silence people who disagree with their positions. Even full Professors have been terminated and/or had their careers ruined by SJW and their ilk for daring to disagree with the Narrative. You may believe that SJWs and censorship are miles apart, in reality, they fit together like hand in glove. And, in my opinion, it looks to me like the far Left SJW socialists are finally having their way. Thankfully, other platforms, even entirely different Internets offer alternative means by which to freely, and anomalously (which is why individual votes are private and why pamphletting was so common in the 1700s) express an unpopular opinion. But, make no mistake, SJW and others of their kind, are working tirelessly to undermine the right to free expression.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
SilortheBlade Firstly, I have not made an argument. I stated my opinion. Secondly, far left SJW are a supremacy group - this is a matter of definition. See, supremacy groups judge individuals based on arbitrary characteristics like skin tone, eye shape, gender, etc... Thirdly, if I were to make an argument, I would make an inductive argument based on statistical inferences, and while I'm not going to do that, it is reasonable to hypothesise that far-left SJW whom align politically with socialists, support censorship. Some certain do. The percent total is unknown. It should be noted, not all support censorship through outright banning speech, they also use intimidation and appeals to emotion and other fallacies to rally support against dissenting ideas - ideas such as this one: All people should be treated as individuals based on their individual characteristics of character and not arbitrarily.
If you want to disagree, feel free to. The only way you are going to alter my opinion is to find data on far left SJW socialists and their opinion on censorship. Find that published in a journal, I will read the article, then perhaps my opinion will be changed. Until then, I will maintain it based on the ample anecdotal evidence I have read.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Maybe you don't get? Our economy, and society, is in decline. I personally think this is due to 50 years of over-regulation and socialism started in the "Great Society" of the 1960s, but, whatever the cause - we are living in it. AND, do you know what small pea-brained politicians who make a living offering a functionally illiterate public free-shit (see: K-14) think is a good idea for "turning around the economy"? Well, the answer is: Murder. Our pea-brained con artist / supposed civil servants / politicians think War is how you get the economy moving again. So, when shills like David here con you into thinking we should bomb Russia, with NOT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE, make sure you do the right thing and volunteer to be first to go. You know, because some shill, somewhere, said something - or so you hear from a shill.
1
-
50 years of 'conservative economic failure'? LOL You are insane? You must be. Name one aspect of our economy that is 'conservative" (whatever you think that means). Are trillions of dollars in T-Bond sales 'conservative'? Is bailing out the Banks 'conservative'? Is making raw milk sales illegal - conservative? How about our generational welfare ghettos? Conservative? How about our broken government schools? Conservative? Give me a break. There is no 'conservative' economics class - almost all economic classes are based on Keynesian economic models. These are not 'conservative' or 'liberal'.
Anyway, I don't care. IMO I imagine we Americans will either elect a far-right dictator or a far-left dictator. And that's the way forward for us. My guess is, you and other Americans will be conned into believing Russian, Chinese, martians, (whomever) are the enemy and be frog marched off to die in another phony war defending "Liberty" and "Freedom" LOL You'll switch from left to right, to left again - because that's what you people do.
Anyway, as I said, I don't care. I do think 4 years of Trump will be hilarious to watch. Beginning with the Republican controlled Senate blocking all of his efforts to make any change happen. That's NOT how our system works. Which is why I imagine, one day, you'll eventually cheer for our Dictator.
In the meantime, feel free to believe in all the Fake News that is barfed onto you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tamás Szabó One more time, because you're obviously missing this part: NOT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE. As for the so-called 'intelligence' agencies, these liars told us there were WMD in Iraq just to invade to make money for the MIC.
AGAIN: Craig Murray. the Chancellor of the University of Dundee, wrote two days ago:
"As Julian Assange has made crystal clear, the leaks did not come from the Russians. As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks – there is a major difference between the two."
--
"I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things."
o
Sorry snowflake, but Trump is our next POTUS. Anyway, keep watching FAKE NEWS, keep confused. It isn't going to change this fact. Oh, and get this? Trump will probably win a second term - this means your next decade is a decade of Trump. All day, everyday, POTUS Trump. LOL :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In summery: There is not a SHRED OF EVIDENCE that Russia was in any way involved in our election. The sickest part of this FAKE NEWS, being promulgated by FAKE NEWS CASTERS/PROPAGANDISTS and other small fry nobody's (like David here) and then eaten hook-line-and-sinker by suckers who wish to overturn the election, is these same LIARS, lied us into the Iraq war with their FAKE NEWS about FAKE WMD. Believe me, there are lots of people in the US Government who'd LOVE nothing more than to send suckers like you two off to die in a proxy war against Russia. Sadly, you two would be waving our silly flag right up until your very real deaths over a very FAKE fantasy story. And why? Was the DNC going to give you some free-shit? Like Obama was going to give you free-healthcare? Or maybe Sanders was going to give you free K-14? You know, because the first 12 sucked, so why not 2 more free years.
LOL
So, suck it up snowflakes, our POTUS is Donald Trump. I personally find it utterly hilarious. Not that it matters, soon things will go back to business as usual. Why? Because THAT is our system. My guess is, you two have no idea how the government of the USA actually runs. As for me, I plan to to leave the USA. I'm done living side-by-side with you special snowflakes. Try not to be suckered into another never-ending FAKE war like the ones we're in right now.
1
-
The last people I would trust is the "intelligent community". They have not provided any actual evidence. In the example of the typhoon warning, suppose there is a warning. Okay, and then after the warning, we can go back and look at the evidence itself. We can see the seismometer recording, we can inspect the instrumentation.
Here we have zero. Nothing. Just hot air from government agencies well known for making up information cough WMD cough when it suites their needs and expands their powers. Again, provide evidence. The election is over, if the so called Russian Hacks were caught out, then they know it - so share the data with the public. They're not sharing the data, because there is no data. There is no evidence.
Worse still, WaPo's owner's company (Amazon) was given a $600,000,000 contract by the CIA, to build their cloud servers. And now we have WaPo pushing the CIA's bullshit. This is called nepotism. It's the natural product of fascism - which is what our nation has become. Little wonder to me we elected Trump. In time, we'll elect someone much more surprising - just wait and see. Think of this as a warning ;)
1
-
1
-
biscuithammer00 It's not complicated. I've worked in large governmental organizations, at the end of the day most of the 'professionals' running these institutions made their way up the public service ladder kissing arse, saying the right things, and making the right friends. If you think public 'servants' give two shits about the public - you are naive'. This narrative works for the CIA - that's why you think it's real. In reality though, it's not real. I know of someone right now, who spent 100s of millions 'curing' a disease, he's being given an award this year, he made everything up.
And that was at a small public institution.
While I've never worked in anything like the CIA, I have worked in institutions that spend billions each year (wasting most of it) - with little to nothing at all to show for it (like our war on terror, or war on drugs, or war on privacy, and etc....). Luckily for them, the public keeps paying their taxes - like the suckers we are.
I imagine, a big scary WMD does wonders for bottom line of the people in the MIC (who made trillions over this lie) and with the supposed Russia Hack (that never happened) this both helps the CIA's bottom line (those $600 million dollar cloud servers don't come cheap - and cost a lot to maintain and upgrade) and probably is payback for some favors along the way.
What better to get more money out of a stupid public, than to play on the public's fear of big scary Russians. A trick as old as time. Gaius Marius made good use of this trick to rule Rome as a Dictator for a time near the end of the Republic.
Anyway, the fact is, there is no evidence of a Russian hack. Just the lies of known liars. AND ALL of the evidence that there is, all suggests it was not a Hack, but a DNC insider who took data from a server he had legal access to because of the way Sanders was being railroaded by the corrupt DNC. The blood- sperm spirit soup being an accidental discovery, and one you'd expect from these creeps.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to leaving the USA, this ship and been sinking for years and is now taking on water like never before. Don't be surprized if you're not call upon to 'defend' the nation from Russians and sent to die in another phony war like the one's we waging today.
1
-
biscuithammer00 LOL I can see you have never worked in a large public institution and have little idea how things actually work. Your role in all of this, as far as your public servants are concerned, is to shut up, pull the magic voting lever right or left, and (importantly) keep paying your income taxes, state taxes, local taxes, etc... don't question the system itself, just play your part as tax chattel. And, if you don't think there's people who'd love nothing better than a war with Russia, think again. I've worked in both public and private and while both have good and bad people, I've only met true sociopaths in the public institutions. My guess is private corporations generally flush these types of people or restrict their movement simply because they cost money. A problem that governmental institutions don't have to worry as much about.
As for Trump having dealing in Russia - and? You could say the same of Apple, Microsoft, Boeing, GM, GE, IBM, etc... etc...
Lastly: One more time, there is ZERO evidence of Russian Hacks altering the election - let alone Putin himself. There's very good evidence of a DNC insider leaking emails. How do we know this? Because the person he/they/she leaked the emails to SAID THAT THE EMAILS CAME FROM A DNC INSIDER. Jesus H Christ. How much more do you need?!? You're going to take the work of the CIA - the same bullshitters who lied us into attacking Iraq? WMD ring any bells?
On the one hand you have ZERO evidence of Russian hackers and on the other you have an actual person saying yes, we received the emails from a DNC staffer who was pissed over how the corrupt Clinton Campaign was railroading Bernie Sanders. You can choose which you want to believe. It's not going to change what actually happened.
1
-
1
-
biscuithammer00 Unless we can look into a persons mind, then yes, I agree - we will never known what motivated the leaker, or anyone else, ever. In this case, the person said they were handing over the emails saved on the DNC computer they had access to specifically because the corrupt DNC (a private company by the way) was railroading Sanders.
As for why don't we look into the Russian hacks, we have, they didn't happen.
As for monitoring for hacking of actual governmental agencies - we do this now, for Russia, China, etc....
The DNC is a private company, they have to pay for their own security. I suggest they hire a better private security company then the one they had (assuming they even bothered). Perhaps if they spend more of their ill gotten money on tech security, and less on propaganda and railroading Sanders, Crooked Hillary would be POTUS.
Thank Gawds they're as incompetent as they are corrupt :)
1
-
biscuithammer00 And they did the same thing with WMD in Iraq. Culminating in Powell giving a speech to the UN and leading to our trillion dollar phony war. If you look into the start of the Vietnam war, you'll find the US Government lied about that too. So, sorry if I don't take the word of known liars. Not only that, but I KNOW how large governmental agencies work - they run on bullshit. As in, their fuel is bullshitting. Beginning with the politician who have to lie to a functionally illiterate public to get elected, to the millions of public 'servants' who'd say and/or do just about anything to secure more money as they boot-lick their way up the public service ladder. So, again, provide evidence - as it stands, there is ZERO evidence.
It should be noted, our jobs, as citizens, is NOT to trust government and to constantly work to limit it and restrain it. When it makes a claim like this, we demand evidence and it is presented or people should be fired.
Note; which programs do you want to cut to give more money to the CIA? Would you like to cur cancer research funding? Or do you want to cut SSI payment? Or is this just a case of magic happens? Also, when you grow an agency, it doesn't then shrink - it continues to grow. Forever. You want to give the CIA more money and resources - well, you're in good company, lots of employees at the CIA would love to waste your money on their lunches while selling you bullshit about Russians.
1
-
biscuithammer00 They say they already have the evidence - good, they can present what they have. It's not like they're going to stop investigating various means of hacking - there's entire agencies dedicated to doing just this. The NSA spends hundreds of millions / wastes hundreds of millions doing just this. So, either they can present their data, and if it's credible, continue to do the research (it's not like the supposed Hackers are STILL hacking, not that there were any to begin with). So, again, in conclusion, no evidence, then I'm not buying David's argument. He's simply towing the Government's line like a lapdog, without demanding proof. There is evidence that this was a pissed off DNC employee - which, in all likelihood, it was. Everything else, is just Government propaganda.
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/20/george_w_bushs_cia_briefer_admits_iraq_wmd_intelligence_was_a_lie/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
judyleasugar97 Decades ago the markets were much freer. Much freer. The period you're referring to was before the rise of the Welfare State. The 'livable wage' as a minimum wage was way back in the 1960s. That's half a century ago. Since LBJ's Great Society we have seen a drop in the living standard and a massive explosion in Regulations and huge drop in educational standards.
Here's an example: Drug laws. They came into effect in the 1970s. Now we're living with the largest non-violent prison population in history, massive drug problems (gangs, no-go zones, people hooked on drugs, welfare ghettos). There's no waving a magic wand and POOF everything goes back to 1963. Cause and effect.
Another example is the Department of Education. Started in the late 70s, now it chews through 80 billion a year with abysmal outcomes. Over 1 in 5 graduates from High School are functionally illiterate. Teacher Unions protect Bad Teachers and good teachers generally give up or quit.
The number of regulatory agencies and regulations themselves in the USA has exploded. You may find this hard to believe, but in the 1960s most Americans still wanted to open a business. That was (was) our culture. Now most Americans just want a job. Well, when everyone wants a job, there's too much labor on the market, the price of labor goes down. It's very simple law of supply and demand.
Have you ever started or attempted to start a business? You didn't find all the paperwork and regulations you needed to meet once you hired an employee and the licences you needed to obtain a huge hamper on your business? Imagine if you had a hard time reading and writing like the 1 in 5 Government school graduates. Not to mention, in the USA the average literacy grade is 6. That is to say, most Americans read at the level of a 12-13 year old.
Waving a magic wand is NOT going to fix this problem.
Even if we knew the answers, we're talking generational change that will take decades - which will never happen in the USA because Americans prefer magic thinking, free and now.
1
-
Rick's Channel 30 years of Reaganomics? Really? What? Is Reagan secretly Dr. Evil controlling all of US history from the grave?! Not to mention for 16 years we had Democratic POTUS including a time when both the POTUS and Congress where run by Democrats. Given Thom takes every and ANY opportunity to push this Boogeyman story of Reagan the POTUS who destroyed the middle class - I'm going to suggest you've been told this enough times that now you believe it.
It's not true.
Explain why the same economic reality is also true in Australia? In Australia there's even LESS mom-and-pop stores and even BIGGER monopolies (Westfields, Coles, Woolworths, etc...). The same is true in Canada. The same is (somewhat) true in Japan. Let me guess, Reagan was their POTUS too? OR... Or maybe, large monopolies always occur when given a State regulated market? Now, I mention that because in Japan I've noticed there actually ARE still a lot of mom and pop stores along side the big Box Top monopolies. Why? Because it's much easier to open a mom and pop type business in Japan. Like opening a bar that seat 3 people. AND, Japanese seem to support smaller niche businesses that provide higher quality whereas in the USA, most Americans want cheap and don't really care to support high quality (or so that's how I notice it).
So, no it was NOT because of Ronald Reagan we have large chains - this phenomenon has occurred EVERYWHERE in the modern world from Asia to Europe. And it's not inevitable, in Germany Aldi (a chain) put Walmart out of business. Why? Because Germans preferred Aldi as they had lower prices and higher quality.
There's no need to involk some 30 year conspiracy theory. It's basic economics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RiotKurhein
Firstly, we only had a somewhat free market following the end of the Civil War up until around 1910. Not very long.
So, we don't have much experience with a free market. However, that time period was an extremely prosperous time period in the USA and led to the second industrial revolution.
However, since 1949 things have gotten really really bad in the USA. Not only have the number of regulations exploded - so has the society's acceptance. Carter brought in massive numbers of agencies. Like the Department of Education, it costs us $80 billion each and every year, yet education is only getting worse, each and every year. A better solution is a free market - which is to say free people. Free people deciding for themselves how to solve problems.
Yes, there were a few con artists (mainly in New York) who sold bad food - very few. I'm sure we could have dealt with them through property rights laws. As we could now.
Anyway, Americans no longer value personal liberty and can no longer even imagine what it's like to live freely. So, we won't. And we'll be poorer for it too. Which is pretty sad, but, that's the stage in the cycle we seem to have found ourselves in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tyrone Thomson Africa is a large place. And, it's not important all people do so. Say, a country like Botswana, if enough people are capable, then they can make life better for themselves - they don't need to worry about some other country. It's not really their place, or responsibility. But, definitely, this excuse making is not helpful. And, to be honest, the IQ data may not be helpful either - though I do agree it is 80% genetic and correlates well with other aptitudes like delayed gratification and foresight with planning. That said, I wonder if spending time in a winter would make some sort of changes epigenetically? Perhaps colder areas of Africa could be worth researching - spending time in the snowy mountains for example. That aside, I know Africans that work hard, are very intelligent, and sadly, they have to deal with racism due to generalization - which must really suck. Therefor, in the end, I'd prefer everyone have an IQ test as part of their profile. Lastly, in 100 years, we'll be able to genetically manipulate the genome and most of these points won't matter. Then what will matter if parenting and culture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Gene Starwind I don't disagree a 'strong' (whatever this means) middle class is good for society. This is achieved by having more freedoms, not less. More.
If we want the price of labor to be higher, then we need to drive up the demand for labor by reducing the supply of labor. Competition for the remaining labor will push up the price naturally. Artificially pushing up the price, will simply drive up inflation (which is what happens - leaving the poor that didn't get a job stuck with the inflation but no job). Of course, since we're talking about money, this is a huge part of the problem. We need a new way to generate money such that there's different types of money.
To reduce the supply of labor we could
(1) Eliminate Government Schools (and their 1 in 5 functional illiterate graduation rate) and bring in pedagogy competition. Oh, but so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the children.
(2) Eliminate regulations that act as barriers to entry into the markets. But, but so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the safety.
(3) Eliminate licencing scams and rent-seeking, but so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the Government Unions et.al.
(4) End Income Tax / the tax on labor. But so-called Progressive's like David here would demagogue this saying we don't care about the Good of Society.
There's plenty of things we could do to enlarge the middle class and make labor more valuable. But, Progressives will never, ever, in a million years, allow us the freedom to do so.
I've lived in countries where the minimum wage is $15/hr. A 200 gram bag of chips cost $4.99, a can of Coke $2, and value meal at McDonald's would run about $12 and get this, the poor are still poor, the middle class is trapped paying ungodly tax and it's nearly impossible to do anything because everyone is working 80 hrs a week (mother's a fathers - leaving children in day care all week) just to scrap by.
But, don't worry, we're not going to become a freer society. We're going to become less free and more socialistic. We will lose more civil liberties, it will be harder to start a business, the poor will be poorer and we'll all get used to the NSA keeping an eye on the economy for us. Given this has already happened, it's just more of the same. So, expect more of the same for the next 3 - 4 decades.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
adamjsutto12
Firstly, you do not know my political position. I do not support 'tyranny' - suggesting I do, is creating a strawman fallacy.
Secondly, liberalism has two different meanings. Europeans use it to mean fiscally sound (I support). Americans use it to mean social acceptance of difference (I support).
Third "I don't see why people wouldn't like the idea of something actually getting done to help people"
This is not how a democratic republic functions. It's called checks and balances. Perhaps you'd prefer to live in a benevolent dictatorship? Raising he minimum wage of federal workers causes inflation and harms non-federal workers on a lower wage. So,if you cared about the poor, you would not support minimum wage you would instead support liberalizing the economy, ending the federal reserve and income tax and the creation of sound money through actions of the market and currency competition.
These little gimmicks like using executive power to bypass Congress is just that - a gimmick. But, sadly, the precedence is there so that the next POTUS can use executive order to end SSI - you know, for the good of the people, don't you care about people. See, this is the problem with dictators, they all think all of their actions are for the good of the people. I'm sure Obama thinks spying on Citizens is good for our safety. I'm sure Nixon thought a War on Drugs was for the good of the poeple.
I've found any time you use force against or spy on people, it's generally not for their good.
Lastly, you have no idea how profit functions in a free market. Profit is a good sign. If you have no profit, then your business (yes, including healthcare) is not being run for the benefit of the public. However, modern day healthcare is not a free market, therefore it's not called profit, in economics the word monetary gains in a hyper-regulated market like healthcare is called "RENT-SEEKING".
Sadly, you really have little idea what the words mean you are attempting to use in a conversation. I'd suggest beginning with syllogistic logic to help clarify your use of words - if not you will live your life drawing unsound conclusions and not deriving truth statements. While they say ignorance is bliss, not if you'e trying to use the words - then it seems to be frustration.
1
-
1
-
Are you asking me to explain why minimum wage of tax paid workers reduce the tax that can be spent on other public services? That's pretty easy, within a limited budget, if you pay more for labor hours, you have less to pay to obtain other goods or services for the public.
Are you asking me to explain why increases in minimum wage harms those that missed out on a raise? This is easy, those with more money are able to compete for limited goods and services raising their price and reducing their supply (in a world of limited resources, those with extra money reduce the supply of goods and services raising their price - we live in such a world). Those that were not paid a higher minimum wage (people working in the free market( are left with the inflation but not the wage.
Lastly, if raising the minimum wage was a 'positive bonus' for society - then all one would have to do is raise the minimum wage of everyone to $20 an hour, or $50 or $100 (and I'm sure some "Progressives" would love to see minimum wage raised to $25/hr). Unfortunately, math and empirical evidence shows all that happens is you end up with inflation
See: Australia as an example - they have a high minimum wage, do you see England, Japan, Canada or other country emulating this? No. Why? Because most economists agree all that happens is you end up with inflation and that people that are poor are harmed the most. AU is fortunate in that they have enough resources to mask the ill effects of their monetary policy - somewhat. Many Aussies (millennials) may never own a home and new mothers probably won't be able to stay at home and raise their children as they need to work to make rent.
Thus, what seemed like a good idea, in reality harms the poorest as those children will be put in day care (in AU the State pays mothers to put their 6 week old infant into daycare - which is sick). Children raised without a primary care giver do not develop a brain in the same way as children who are parented by their primary care giver. I only mention this as you don't seem to understand these short term gimmicks (like raising minimum wage) can have unforseen negative effects - some that won't show up for 15 years into the future.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Skippy Scourge
I do agree that the Government is the problem. However, using Government to solve a problem is not a solution - this will only cause more poor.
The reason WHY we have inflation is the Central Bank acts to monetize government debt. And politicians can not get elected without making promises they cannot keep. Thus the need for debt. In short, the problem is The People. The Government is only a reflection of the people who elect the politicians that make it up.
The People voted for Obama - he is now using the NSA and so-called Patriot Act to spy on them (even one of the authors of the Patriot Act said this was never the intent of that Act of Congress - yet the POTUS is doing it).
If you want to solve the problem of poor in American, then you want to eliminate the Central Bank and bring in competing currencies, which means eliminating Payroll and Income Taxes.
You were right about the entire system being broken, but we need to overhaul the US Constitution - to do that Americans are going to have to start learning to STOP voting to the demagogue who promises them something for nothing. Americans will never learn that lesson (see: This episode of TYT). Thus, we will unfortunately continue to become poorer. Which is a shame.
In the meantime, I'd suggest educating your own children (if and when you have them) to think logically, do not put them in day care and do not spank them. Also, hug them a lot and praise them - this helps develop their somatosensory cortex pre verbal language Oh, and for the sake of the gods, do not put them in public school if possible.
Then, hope they love you - because they'll be the ones looking after you, not the government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lightmane321
"that is protect the people through equal protection under the law,"
1) Equal protection under the law means you can not tax someone for, through voluntary trade, makes more money than you do. You must treat people equally, not 'progressively'.
2) It's your PURSUIT of happiness - not your happiness. No one can guarantee your 'happiness', that's asinine Progressive psycho-babble.
3) The one, and ONLY one manner in which groups of humans who are part of 'Government' (public) delineate themselves from other groups of groups of humans (private) is that the Public, Government groups, have the legal ability to initiate violence against other, innocent, groups of humans.
That's it.
A good example would be Drug War. Here we see perfectly innocent human ADULTS smoking a weed (although, given they are adults they should be free to do what they want to with their own bodies) and the State using it's militant arm to cage, even kill, these innocent people - creating the largest prison population of non-violent morally innocent people in history. The big scary Koch brothers can not do that - ONLY the State can. And if you let the State do it, then the rich simply USE the State (see TBTF bailouts)
Hell, your psychopath Progressive government legally strangled to death a morally innocent man for selling a 0.50 cent cigarette a month back. THAT is NOT equal. Equal means ANYONE can sell and trade beer, cigarettes, food, love, sex, shelter, money... etc... Oh, but not in the 'Land of the Free', no, we must ask permission from our Progressive Nanny State to sell a god damn cigarette.
Our Progressive Socialists have taken away that equality and now we all get to live in your Socialist Paradise where the TBTF aristocracy is bailed out by the PROGRESSIVE Central Bank (yes, started by a f*cking progressive POTUS) and we get stuck paying a PROGRESSIVE income tax for the 'freedom'/right just to f*cking work.
Our Progressive State just spent $600 BILLION out of $1.2 trillion on our Progressive Military Industrial Complex to fight phoney wars against women and children.
So, enjoy the progressive society we're stuck with - it isn't going anywhere any time too soon.
You'll see.
Yes, I do hope to the Gods some States start succeeding from the Union, and doing so soon.
1
-
1
-
Hi eyelashes look strange to me. Is that normal?
I don't think "Obama" has the time to worry about something so petty as a place card, he's too busy promising free stuff while paying for more drone attacks and spying on us via the NSA.
Note: USDA "Organic" is a great example of Government Oligarchy. There used to be plenty of private companies (ex: American Heart Association) that would work towards certifying food as heart safe or organic. The thugs over at the USDA used their legal means in their attempts to steal and to monopolize this market. Currently, as we speak, the thugs that run the USDA are hard at work putting actual organic certification business OUT of business. It's kind of hard to compete against 'free' / tax payer funded.
One day there will ONLY be the USDA as the will have used their Government monopoly to put ALL of their competitors out of businesses - at that time, the USDA "organic" certification will be turned over to Monsanto et.al. and we as a nation will continue our march to our Socialistic Progressive Utopia where the Government takes care of everything for us.
Enjoy the USDA "regulated" boiled in ammonia off cuts, snout, hooves, tail, hair, bone mixed with food coloring / Pink Slime that the USDA "regulates" is fit for human consumption. Only an IDIOT would think the USDA should be allowed to regulate what is classified as organic or all natural. Let the courts set a legal precedence as to how these terms are defined and then let private companies, people who actually care about organic foods, compete to apply their must more rigorous certifications.
1
-
1
-
1
-
movieman82us
You live 99.99% of your life Anarchically, that is, through free, voluntary relationships with others around you. The local shopping mall is Anarchic. Your personal relationships are Anarchic.
You're being naive if you think using force (The State) against innocent people, is going to create a peaceful prosperous society. It doesn't, didn't, and isn't.
Anyway, 200 years ago people thought it was 'incredibly naive" to think Slavery could be abolished given its 7000 year old history (oh, and it was in the Bible too - good enough for Baby Jesus, good enough for America).
So, maybe it will take 200 years, but, Government has a Used By Date stamped on it. Until then, I suggest raising children peacefully, and logically and if possible, keeping them out of Government Schooling / Obedience training. Rational thinking, is the first step to abolishing this superstitious-like belief in the State. Government Schooling is anything but rational.
Not that we have to worry about less State in the now. In the now, we'll be getting a lot more State.And be a lot poorer for it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh Goody, another shill saying we need to lose more civil liberties.
If we want affordable high quality healthcare then we need to deregulate healthcare and bring in competition. We need to REGAIN out civil liberties - not continue to lose them.
As an example I'd mention Practising Nurses. Some States it's legal, California it's illegal? Why? The MD's say we need to 'protect' the consumer by reducing their options to only MD/DO. This is total bullshit as the PN in the other States do as good or even better than the MD/DO. AGAIN, this is just to reduce competition, and keep prices high.
Another example is restricting the number of services, such as a city restricting a new hospital being built or preventing an fMRI service. AGAIN, this is just to reduce competition, and keep prices high.
As for Canada, a Canadian friend of mine was recently nearly killed by Canadian healthcare (his cancer was missed and he because he was tested he'd have to go to the back of the line). He went to the USA, paid out of pocket, was so happy he continued to pay out of pocket (private healthcare clinic) and was cured.
As for 'taking profit out' - this is incorrect thinking. "Profit" in a free-market signals to people running businesses - hey, people really want more of that service. What we need to do is NOT price controls - but to have a free-market. Next to finance, healthcare gives the second most political denotions and is the second most overpriced messed up market.
1
-
Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson
RE: What civil liberties would you lose? The only liberty you might lose is the liberty to go uncovered and die in the street.
Yes, I'd have the civil right to 'die in the street' - which I still have. What I'd lose is the right to NOT purchase a Privately owned good or healthcare product. I'd have the civil right to, as an gasp adult negotiate my own healthcare insurance (or lack thereof) or pay direct. In a free market - of which healthcare is FAR from, healthcare would be reasonably priced.
What do you mean 'education' shouldn't be profitable? Why? You don't think teachers that are much better than those that are shit deserve a monetary reward for being much better?
In California, one of the townships ran out of money, the crime rate sky-rocketed (it was already bad). The people hired private police - the crime came way WAY DOWN - much lower than before they only had public police AND it was cheaper AND the private police were profitable.
There's nothing wrong with profit in a free market. There's something hugely wrong with profit in a regulated market - where it's referred to as 'rent seeking'.
RE: The free markets you speak of are not perfect since the consumers are often ignorant and/or mislead and corporations (the almighty private sector) often collude, fix prices and rig bids.
No one said the free-markets were 'perfect' (this doesn't even make sense). Also, there ARE NO free-markets - anywhere. All markets are regulated. As for 'misleading' a customer - this is called fraud. It's against the law.
In short: The road to prosperity is not through the loss of MORE Civil Liberties. If FREE people really want a service or a good, then allow true free-market (voluntary trade within the law, sound money, and property rights) and competition to provide that service. Anything else will only bring crony-capitalism, over-priced goods and poor services while at the same time undermining the 'community' as there's then no NEED to provide value for money. This is the problem with the USSA as it stands today. You can't wipe your own arse without violating 10 or more regulations from the paper thickness to the toilet water level.
1
-
1
-
Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson
Firstly, all children are covered as they are not adults. So, we're ONLY discussing adults.
Secondly, as I said, catastrophic insurance is cheap - and it's the ideal insurance for someone young who's unlikely to even see a doctor in their entire 20s (particularly men, women do have a high maintenance and their insurance would reflect that).
Thirdly, there ARE easy non-violent non-State force means by which insurance could be voluntarily purchased. As part of a phone bill bundle, internet bundle, visa card membership (they do that in Japan), grocery store membership (where you get deals), etc... catastrophic insurance is pretty cheap and that would be a non-State Force way to ensure core facilities are accessed by everyone.
Fourthly, the problem with healthcare is much larger than ObamaCare - it's a symptom of the entire monetary and regulatory system we currently live in. Other symptoms include joblessness for youth, poor wage conditions, etc... IF we want to fix ALL of these problems then we need MORE freedom - NOT LESS. More. And yes, one of those civil liberties would be the right to die in the street, to marry someone who's the same sex, to smoke pot and do drugs, etc...
Poor healthcare is a problem of freedom and liberty - and this crank is talking about reducing our civil liberties even more, which will only make society (including healthcare) poorer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, this last half century has seen 100s of millions of humans lifted out of poverty. Primarily in 3rd world nations where they've become much more freer - as in, more legal liberty, particularly owning their bodies. We OTOH have had millions and millions and millions of licencing scams (hair cutters licence, $800,000 Taxi license, liquor licences, filing for bankruptcy licences) millions and millions of regulations (like the ones making pink slime legal food) millions and millions of NSA drones, Wars in Iraq, etc....
Well, you Progressives wanted to UN-Limit Government, it's is now filled with Sociopaths using the Government-run NSA / Commons to spy on us and is bailing out to the richest 0.01% richest humans in history. $600 BILLION is the Pentagons budget in 2015 under that wonderful Progressive O-blah-ma.
What the hell do you care if the richest Americans buy our so-called Commons? You made us their Slaves decades ago. Thanks to you Progressives we have a Progressive Labor Tax and a Progressive Central Bank and our Central Planners will send over some Progressive Police and strangle you if you and generations more of Americans don't keep paying off our bailing out the TBTF banks for the rest of this century. This is a simple fact.
You wanted Big Progressive Government - well it's never been bigger, more intrusive and more violence. The USA is a mirror image of the Socialist Worker's Party run Germany circa 1930s.
1
-
Gordon Bradley China. S. Korea. Taiwan. Vietnam. E. Germany. Russia. Much of Africa.
As we've hemorrhaged civil liberties the people of these nations across the last 50 years have gained personal civil liberties and the corresponding economic prosperity.
Don't worry, we're getting more Progressive taxation, more progressive regulations, more progressive licencing and we will become poorer. Oh, and to make sure everyone pays their 'fair share' for the 'good of society' we all get to lose our personal privacy and live in a Police State.
I grew up in the USA and I've lived in many countries and I'll tell you now, I've only experienced the Police presence like in the USSA in a few Communist countries I've visited. I was only in the USSA for a day and I drove past 15 State police on the highway and was almost run off the road by one within 5 minutes of leaving the airport in a rental car. Literally, I looked into my mirror and was so startled to see a State Police car, on a country road (teeny airport), nearly a foot off my back bumper I nearly swerved into a ditch.
See, you don't get to redistribute wealth without a Police State. And when you try, it's going to be the poor and middle class who are the one's having their wealthy redistributed to the richest most well connected in society. All your regulations only make it nearly impossible for the poor to start a business, while at the same time making it easy for franchises to corner the market. Thus the poor are stuck as workers in low end jobs instead of owners of their own businesses.
Your good intentions are destroying, and will eventually destroy, society. The more you turn to the Government to fix problems - the worse you make those very same problems. Example: Progressives wanted 'free' education. Now we pay more than most nations for Government Schooling and 1 in 5 Government School graduates are functionally illiterate. Literacy rates among Blacks is lower NOW (in come areas) than it was 105 years ago. A century of "FREE" education has nearly destroyed education.
The Road to HELL is paved with Good Intentions.
You'll see. This is going to be playing out for decades to come. Life in the USA is going to get worse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1 Let me repeat myself: In Australia there's a Public Healthcare system where ANYONE can go to for FREE. And there's a Private Healthcare network where everyone WANTS to go.
Why is that? Ohhhh.... .that's right, because when you're going in for surgery, you really don't give two shits about the interpersonal disposition of your surgeon and her/his personal motivation. What you care about, the ONLY THING, you care about - is competence. Can they do the surgery.
Guess what? When given the choice, people are more than happy to pay for private healthcare to ensure they get treated by a competent doctor rather than take a chance with a FREE Public Healthcare provided doctor.
These are the facts.
I personally find Japanese private doctors to be both of high quality, competent, and of a reasonable price. We paid $5400 for 3.5 week stay in a PRIVATE hospital in Japan PLUS the actual procedure. The procedure alone would have cost $12,500 in the USA and in Australia it would cost $15,500. That's not counting the full 3.5 weeks in hospital bed hooked up to IV.
Of course, Japan trains the most doctors per population, builds the technology use in the hospitals (fMRI etc...) and develops pretty much all of their own pharmaceuticals - all of which massively lower costs of healthcare.
Anyway, the fact is Australia has FREE healthcare. All citizens are covered. Yet, when offered a choice, almost everyone who can afford to, goes to Private hospitals.
See, much like our over-budget expensive Government Schools with the 1 in 5 functional illiteracy graduate rate, subpar may be good enough for Government Work, but when it comes to health, most people want a bit better.
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1
The first thing I'd ask is if Noraway is multicultureal? Do you have no-go zones in your cities? You know, full-on ghettos where the police don't go to unless in riot gear? DO you have 5 generation single mother farms? Where one mother has had children by 5 different men and many children don't know their fathers?
Is your nation one that makes up phony reasons to invade other nations? You know, pretend to be attacked and then invade Vietnam. Wait a generation and rinse and repeat with the middle east?
Is is possible in your nation to ride a bicycle without a helmet? Are teens allowed to snowball fight without being shot by a cop? If a man was selling a $0.20 cent cigarette would he be strangled to death by the police?
Do Government School GRADUATES pass without being able to read and write? In the USA, Government School graduates have a functional illiteracy rate of 1 in 5. Oh, and the general population reads (and thinks) at the 8th grade level. Oh, and 1 in 6 are totally illiterate and cannot read or write.
I'll tell you what. Why don't we agree that what works in oil-rich (nearly monocultureal) Norway probably isn't going to work in pop-culture USA.
You want to know what the American dream is? Getting on disability and playing video games while watching pop culture on your smart phone.
Yes, I agree that healthcare doesn't work in the USA. NOT because it's not Public Healthcare, but because it's Fascistic Healthcare where a small cartel control the numbers of healthcare providers, hospitals, etc... and use their State-given monopoly to rent-seek and regulatory capture the hyper-regulated healthcare markets.
How about this? We open up the flood gates and let all these functional illiterate thieves move to Norway? Then you you can see how well Norway' system works at providing healthcare and other benefits to lying, cheating, scamming Americans who will say and do anything to take as much as possible from the "Commons" without giving anything in return. Yeah, I'm all for it. Is tomorrow good for you? Because, we can send over 10s of millions of functional illiterate Americans. I promise, your 'free' healthcare will collapse within a month.
What works in Norway works in Norway because most Norwegians are hardworking honest people who probably care for one another. Don't make the mistake of thinking other's think like this. Your culture didn't just POOF into existence. The same is true of monocultureal Japan - it's pretty good. But, as I've lived in both (as well as others) I can tell you right now, it will NOT WORK IN THE USA. What works in the USA is freedom and free markets. This is the ONLY way to keep Americans honest. The day you let the Government provide a service, is the day you embark on becoming a neo-Fascist warmongering State that we actually ARE today. Again, the USA government is spending $600 BILLION losing the Wars for another year. THIS is what Americans want - kill people, take their resources, and consume pop-culture.
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1
I actually think we agree on many things. Although I'd choose Finland over Norway in terms of Government structured education.
That said, currently Norway is no where near a multicultural country - at least not relative to the USA, Australia or England. According to a 2012 survey 86.2% of the total population have at least one parent who is born in Norway and of the immigrants most come from Europe or other western nations.
I've been in no-go zones in England as well as Australia and both of these countries are structured quite similar to Norway with Government provided healthcare and education (of course, the education is crap compared with Norway, but that's down to Norwegians themselves and how they value education).
Talk to me when 50% of Norway is immigrants. Or when Norway has no-go zones where you're likely to be shot at night for walking around in areas you do not belong. Just wait until you have multi-generational welfare ghettos. Then you'll see the system you enjoy no longer functions cost-effectively. Then you will need to either raise taxes higher, until a point where you cannot afford to raise them any higher, or you'll have to cut services. It's that simple. There's no 'magic' way of doing things - IMO. Things are done by people, you just happen to have a lot of good honest hard-working ones. Society must have built in bullshit detectors that shut down the bad apples (this happens in Japan quite effectively via shaming and shunning).
Not to mention, Norway's oil-fund is an added bonus. When that's defunct, then you'll have a harder time paying for the social services you enjoy. Include healthcare and education.
UAE and KSA also offer a lot of social services - I remember when Kuwait used to give everyone that was a citizen a ton of money. I knew people who were paid $35,000 a year just for being born in UAE. So? Why don't you do that they'd say? I mean, it seemed to work for them. Maybe the USA would work better with a Sultan? Of course, they were all as lazy as could be - and just had the good fortune of living on top of an oil supply. Dumb luck. But, if you asked them, it was insert some irrational post-hoc justification.
Norway works because of geographical location and resources, but most importantly because it has a lot of Norwegians. When that changes, then it will not longer function. I've seen it many many times, over and over, again and again. When its done, its done. I'm very happy Japan has politely resisted too much immigration - although there certainly is immigration. Just a small amount. And people are expected to integrate, NOT retain their own culture. If they want they're own culture, they can just as easily leave.
Note: Everyone wants a society that has good inexpensive healthcare, good education and is safe. Everyone wants to live where they have lots of opportunity. This comes by maximizing personal civil liberty. Not by more regulation, but by more freedom.
1
-
bohemianwriter1
I certainly do not disagree that religious fundamentalists are a nuisance. But that's it. They cannot use the State against other's who are atheist. This is not true when it comes to another religious Theocracy: Progressive Socialists. See, the Progressive CAN use the State to murder me if I attempt to live a life, as an adult, in a manner that does not harm others, but runs counter to their superstitious ideas about what's 'good for society'.
As an example, suppose I wanted to open a eatery where people can smoke? Well well. The Progressive says this is bad for society and thus is illegal. See? They're the new Morality Police. The other side of the Theocracy coin, but still the same coin. If I attempted to open a smoking eatery I'd be put in jail - maybe even killed if I resisted being put in a State-run cage. So, I like everyone else just shuts up and never opens a smoking eatery. Of course, I don't smoke, but that's my example.
Big State, Little God
Big God, Little State
- People need their superstition, one way or the other.
Life in the USA is going to probably get worse on many levels. I think technology will advance, and those will high-level skills will do well, but most will be poorer. They'll work longer and for a lot less. It's pretty sad. Particularly when everything we needed was laid out and working well by the middle-late 1800s. But, much like everything else, people just can't leave well enough enough and will violate any and every moral rule for the "Good of Society".
The Road straight into Hell is clearly paved with good intentions
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1
I'm not "demonizing" immigrants. I'm saying that when you live in a monoculture, you can enjoy some level of the Commons due to the monoculture. When you don't - you can't.
This means, when you live in a multicultureal society, it's structure must be different. History shows quite clearly that multicultureal societies are best run when people who live in them are free to trade with one another with limited, very limited, government interference. This forces the people in these societies to deal with the inherent problems that arise when living in such a society.
Example: In Japan it's common to have beer vending machines - all around town. You can walk over to a vending machine and buy a beer pretty much any time you'd like. You're free to do that. You can also drink it right there on the street. No one does, because in a monocultural there's pressure not to. And young people rarely buy beer. Why? Because in a monoculture this is shameful. Oh, and they're never pilfered. Why? Because Japanese just don't do that sort of thing.
Now, just how long do you think vending machines with beer would last in the USA before kids where buying beer and criminals where breaking into them and stealing? A day maybe - at best. So in the USA the government simply outlaws these machines. This means society never has to deal with the underlying issues. Are you seeing my point yet? I'm saying that in multicultreal societies we need LESS government and we need to deal with these issues. That can ONLY happen through free markets - which is to say, free people. Sure, maybe the vending machines disappear from the market. Or maybe they don't. But it's up to free people to decide. NOT a Police State.
I hope I made myself clearer. I've been an immigrant in 5 countries, I have no problem with immigration. I also have no problem with the lack of it either.
1
-
bohemianwriter1
Oh, I should mention, my family is not white. You seem to have come to the conclusion my family is European in origin, half of it is Japanese. The other half is mixed Irish, German, Jewish, Christian, etc.... some people in my immediate family do not speak English. Or, very limited at best.
I don't disagree that poverty is linked to violence. And free-markets create prosperity thus, we should maximize freedom if we want to live in a less violent world. The USA is NOT a free-market. Did you know in some states you need a liscence to fix a PC, or to cut hair, or even to go out of business? The USA is a Fascist State with Progressive written all over it. We're war mongers too. We have a central banking cartel that just bailed out those richest 1%.
IF we lived in a true free-market, many of those richest 1% would be totally wiped out. Broke. But this isn't what happened. The State everyone loves bailed them out. That's Fascism, not free-markets.
The oil was luck, not a virtue. Yes, your oil fund can be spent wisely. But it doesn't have to be spent wisely. If could just as easily be squandered. Now, here I note you used the word "We" - as in we Norwegians.
That's interesting, give the other half of your post. Suppose most of the immigrants would like to spend all of that oil money here and now. I know many Americans would. We blow through $100 billion a year just in our Government run education system - only to produce a 1 in 5 functionally illiterate graduating class each year. Oh, and we blow through $600 billion a year losing the War and have done so for over a decade.
Must be nice to live in a society where everyone is on the same page regarding how to save and invest - I bet you like that, huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1 Again, I don't think you understand my position. Also, you're confounding culture with race. A "white" person can 'be' Japanese culturally. And an Asian can be Americans likewise. Or Norwegian.
Mono-cultures could, therefor, be composed of people of different phenotypes (asian, white, black, etc...).
My personal opinion is people should be allowed to migrate anywhere on Earth with no boarders. However, if this is to be true, then we should also practice pananarchy (different forms of government and let people choose). Also, most land would need to be privatized.
That said, monocultures have inbuilt bullshit detectors and private means of enforcing cultural norms that make or break those societies. In societies without these, multicultural societies, these are missing and therefor we NEED free-markets to perform these functions in society. Therefore, less Government, more freedom.
1
-
1
-
1
-
silat13
How does a 50+ year old end up talking in the sorts of babble you're using? I mean "Bubba"? Really?
I suggest you buy Hurley P. text titled "Logic" and don't waste the last of your life with these nonsensical thoughts. I'd literally pull my hair out stuck inside your head.
Let me guess, the Koch brothers are to blame for the fall of Roma, the collapse of the USSR and any other event you want to causally link to them. And, at the same time, somehow this 'All Powerful' Koch Cartel couldn't unseat Obama in the last election?...right. Did they also cause the Great Depression? Are they the reason why GM went bankrupt?
Look, "sonnyboy", you're wasting whatever is left of your brain and life with this Left/Right dichotomy. Take that as the best advise you've been given - ever.
Our societies functions better when we maximize freedoms, not minimize them. We want and need to return to LIMITED government with the right to liberty returned to the individual. It's not that hard of a concept, I promise. More freedom. Less Government.
Anyway, none of this matters. We will have less freedom, more war, more spying, more debt, more regulations, less prosperity, more taxes, less opportunity. And that's the way forward for the USA.
You'll see.
1
-
bohemianwriter1
Corporations do not 'own' Government. This simply is not factually true. No one 'owns' the Government. To be clear, what you meant to say was the people hired for the Government, often make policy decisions in the favour of Corporations and/or Businesses and/or other Private groups of individuals.
YES! This is why we need to LIMIT government's ability to interfere in our lives - particularly around the ability to trade.
But, this is the thing, you support Government doing this. For example, one hundred and twenty years ago most people were educated at home and by private schools and private tutors. Interestingly enough, Black Americans living in Chicago in 1910 had a hire literacy rate THEN compared with NOW. But, people want "Free" - right? And, whenever people want something but don't want to pay for it, they simply ask the Government to provide it and call it "Progressive". This may be Schooling, it may be War, it may be Water - pretty much anything.
Well, guess what? When the Government stepped into the education-market, it put a lot of private businesses OUT of business. This means, as a School, you either became a Public School or you could try desperately to remain Private and compete against 'Free' education (and some did, but most went bankrupt or they lobbied Government to ensure they were funded too). Worse still, we haven't seen hardly any innovation in education - if anything it's getting worse with 1 in 5 Government Schools graduates functionally illiterate.
So? IS this an example of 'Corporations' (in this case schools) buying off Government? Or, now that Government Schooling seems 'normal' is it just a 'public service'?
The same is true of the American Medical Association. This is a private fraternity of medical doctors who now, through the Government, have the legal right to bar entry into their market. The AMA uses the Government to ensure they regulatory-capture the once-upon-a-time-free markets (this is called rent-seeking by way). However, I'm sure you support having the AMA decide for you, who can be a State licensed doctor. Well, given this actually IS part of what I do - I can safely tell you, it's not ideal. It's both unfair to many more than capable students and it's also immoral as it leave the decision up to a handful of people who, most of time, don't HAVE the time to properly ensure the best are 'chosen'. As a matter of fact - this is an impossible task. It's unknowable who will make a good doctor. The only sound method is a free-market. But, again, you prefer we decide. You do know Universities are run like Corporations - right? So, here we have yet another example where you probably support "Corporations".
And I could list many many many MANY examples of where this occurs. And, I will tell you right now, the ONLY (and I mean ONLY) way to eliminate corporations, be they a net gain or net loss to society, from using Government is by LIMITING government.
Limiting government is the ONLY way.
Oh, and as for medicine, you have a 1 in 12 chance of being misdiagnosed, 1 in 23 chance of seeing someone incompetent and a 1 in 76 chance of seeing someone who chose medicine because they, seem to, enjoy when people die - possibly even outright misdiagnosing and purposefully killing people. Preventable Death caused by medicine (unintentional) was 90,000 in 1990, in 2010 it jumped to 480,000 EACH YEAR. Add an additional 3 - 5 MILLION seriously harmed for life. EACH YEAR.
Yet, I bet you like having 'free' healthcare? I bet you like the idea of affordable safe medicine. Well, sorry, but the ONLY way to provide that is a free-market. Likewise with education. Likewise with internet, electronics, automation, pharmaceuticals, relationships, everything.
The answer is MORE freedom - NOT LESS.
1
-
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1
You're simply not correct. Corporations do not 'own' anyone. That's called slavery and does not exist.
Yes, corporations do write laws and regulations for the EPA and FDA. Which is why we need LESS government so that we can conduct business using simple laws that protect property rights equally.
If there was an oil spill, then it happened while being regulated by the government. Almost every aspect of our lives is regulated. Thus, again, if there was an oil spill, then this oil spill happened while being regulated. Which just shows you, that regulations cannot prevent oil spills. But what regulations do is protect companies, like the Koch brothers, from being sued by people who have oil on their property. See how it works? All the corporations have to do is say "This is all regulated and all legal".
While you do not have these problems yet, as your culture is changed (and it will change) due to different ideas from different people on how to do things, then you will suffer from the exact same problems. At that point, your social institutions will be inefficient and you'll end up exactly in the same boat as us. Maybe then, maybe, you'll get it.
1
-
silat13 First of all, you're using the word "logic" incorrectly. I hate to be pedantic, but I actually enjoy studying and developing logical sentences - you may want to look up Categorical Syllogism to start you out on what logic actually is.
And secondly, no, property rights are one of the main laws that must be respected. I'd even argue, given the manner in which children play, private property is inherent, even genetic. Our body is our private property - and this should be protect by law. Thus, murder is property damage and punishable as society sees fit. Oh course, not, our bodies are property of the State - public property. Part of the Commons.
Note: Currently we lost ownership of our bodies. Our government owns out bodies. It can tax a portion of our labor (income tax) and it can determine who we can marry and it can determine what we eat, what drugs we use, who we have sex with, pretty much everything - even our death is in the the hands of the State you love so much.
1
-
bohemianwriter1
My employer does not 'own' me. I own my body and I sell my body's labor. We freely attempt to sell our labor IF we are laborers and then it's up to someone to freely decide if they do or do not want to buy that labor.
If you have a highly marketable skill, and you're honest, and you work productively, then you'll have no difficulty selling your labor hours into the market making an easy 6 figures a year. My cousin recently graduated from University with a computer programming degree (only girl to graduate with actual computer programming skills that year - most do webdesign etc...) and yes, it took her about 8 months to find a job. Yes, she was depressed. But guess what, 1 year later and she's offered jobs at a rate of one a month. She's known a hard worker, speaks fluent Japanese, and is very productive and efficient at her job. She also scored the highest score on the companies logic test in it's history (based in London).
See, she's not a slave. AND in free-markets people like her are free to quit and go start up their own competing company. This means that the labor pool shrinks and the price of labor goes up due to limited supply. But, in our Progressive hyper-Regulated Social paradise, millions and millions and millions of regualtions, unsound fiat currency, high minimum labor price and a zillion other laws prevent people from even bothering to try to open up a business. And why would you bother? All you'd get is accused that you 'OWN' people - this is how you opened your post. Thus, labor supply is over-supplied and the price of labor is low (particuarly if you don't have a high skill set) and this is actually what we do see in our society.
If you think it's so easy being an owner - go start a business. I've had to manage people who were so lazy I paid them for 8 months NOT to come into work just to finish off their contract. At my level, I pay people for the job they do, some like to come in at 6am and leave at 1 pm, others like to come in at 11am and leave at 6 pm. I really don't care.
Let's not pretend I 'own' them. They own me, I depend on them. I work much harder and much longer than they do. I also worry about their futures because I know times are tight and soon they won't be working for me. I work hard FOR them so that they are able to do well for themselves.
People spend 12-30 years just preparing the skills to sell their labor. AND you pretend the corporations 'owns' them?! Come off it. Anyone can quite and go try their luck at starting a company. See how quickly you finf life on the 'Owners' side of the fence a lot more work, effort and risk, with a lot less reward. There's no 'free' time either. You work to keep the business going 7 days a week, 12-14 hours a day. No vacation time off. At least, not mentally.
When you walk past a Starbucks and choose not buy a coffee - YOU may be putting a barista our of business because you chose not to buy from them that day. Does this mean you OWN them? No, it doesn't. It means you do not want to buy what they are selling. And guess what? They don't have to sell to you. If you BOTH agree, then this is the free-markets. Win-Win. Value for Value. The exact same principle holds true for labor and corporations.
1
-
bohemianwriter1
Provide evidence that non-regulations is why BP bosses went free. It's not because of non-regulations. (A) There's millions of regulations around energy, oil and the environment. The USA has some of the most strict in the world. (B) If there were NO regulations then the laws that protect Private Property could have been used in court by the land owners to privately sue BP. The reason why the owners walked away freely was due TO regulation. Regulations are their to PROTECT the business owners from litigation. NOT to protect property owners. Property owners ALWAYS had the right to sue for damaged. Now, thanks to the State and Unlimited Government, regulation usurp property rights and owns who's land is damaged can not seek compensation.
Of course, no one wants to see companies stuck with millions of frivolous litigations. And, no one wants to see corporations pollute. When we had a free-market one could argue their were too many frivolous litigations. What could have solved this problem is contract laws. But, we never developed that part of society because people ALWAYS when given the option, chose the lazy route, which is the State's use of violence. This is WHY we always start with limited government, then it grows like a cancer, twists society into an ugly reflection of itself, and the body politic collapses. Rinse/Repeat.
1
-
silat13 Still with the strawman? Don't you get tired of your fallacious reasoning? Doesn't unreasonable babble-thinking give you a headache?
Anyway, limited government is what works and limited government enforced common law, property rights and contract law. As for corporations 'buying' their way out of the law. This simply doesn't happen when a random jury is used. If Steve Jobs were to stab someone, and it went to jury, he'd most likely be sent to prison (if her were alive) - regardless of if he was CEO of the world's largest corporation.
Further, quite frankly I think you'd have to be paranoid to think you need to give up your personal privacy (NSA spying) and civil liberties (Drug War) and pay the State a tax on labor (Income Tax) all because you're scared big scary Apply Inc, Microsoft, Toyota, Sony, etc... and going to somehow harm you.
Frankly, I'd suggest growing a pair of balls and manning up. I mean Jesus f*cking Christ. Your mama still spoon feeding you too? I think, as adults, I can negotiate the big scary Honda without having to live in a Police State.
Which is why, one day, hopefully, States within the USA will succeed from the Union. That way, you can go live with the Progressive Socialists and Warmongers who will keep you safe from yourself with millions and millions of regulations and those of use who are competent adults will use limited Law and Limited Government together with sound money to create prosperity.
In the meantime, enjoy the Police State, it's never going away in your life time, so, you don't need to worry about it.
1
-
silat13 I just wrote you a basic, very very very basic, conditional clause argument. I've addressed your questions and you return with 'LOL'.
'LOL' is the level of your reasoning - which is to say you do not reason. You do not understand how to reason. You do not know the differences between types of reason, say deduction vs induction. You definitely don't know what a sound valid argument is. Nor do you understand what cogent arguments are. I don't blame you for your stupidity. You were probably Government schooled and thus you're a functional illiterate.
So, take pride in the fact you can "LOL" and feel like you've made a sound, valid argument. In reality, you're just babbling. I'd personally find such babble-thoughts irritating and seek to change this. But, hey, each to their own.
Note: I'm paid a decent 6 figure salary to write cogent arguments. Most of which you probably would be lost within two sentences. So, let's agree you lack the skill set sufficient to understand an argument let alone create one.
Please continue with your babble-thoughts, go pray to Obama or whatever you do, and we'll call it a day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Cenk: "We've gone away from Democracy...."
A couple points, few, if any, of the so-called "Founding Fathers" trusted in "Democracy" and Hamilton outright wanted an American "English" Aristocracy.
John: "Longest running Democracy in the world..."
Originally, only land or business owning white men were allowed to vote. Which is ironic, as this is antithesis to Cenk's first point of an Oligarchy. Maybe someone at TYT needs to read our history - we were founded AS an Oligarchy. Therefor, if we're talking about the type of "Democracy" where the ignorant masses vote for their direct representative based on what goodies they can redistribute from the rich to themselves - then the USA has one of the youngest Democracies in the world. About 60 years or so. A single generation really.
The nice thing about the old way, was the government was GASP LIMITED and so the rich were allowed to stay rich AND allowed to fail. To stay rich they needed to continue to deliver value. Now that their wealth is redistributed to the so-called "voting" public, they can NEVER fail because the State has become dependent on redistributing this wealth to the voter in order to buy votes. Thus, the rich will always be bailed out, up until the State itself fails. Lets hope soon.
In full bloom, Social Progressivism only lasts 3 generations at most.I suspect the USA will begin to fail by 2050-ish. Probably sooner.
Originally, only white male Citizens voted - and as far as the Federal Government, they did so only for the House of Representatives.
(1) The POTUS (still not voted on directly) was chosen by state legislature (and still is although slightly differently).
(2) The SCOTUS has never been directly voted on.
(3) Senators were originally chosen by state legislatures.
(4) House Representatives were the ONLY public 'servants' directly elected. And back then there were a LOT more of them (their numbers were capped).
Also, the Federal Government was LIMITED!!! It really didn't matter so much on who you voted on, as they didn't effect your life much. Most Americans, aside from the USPO had NO direct contact with the Federal Government AT ALL.
To be so lucky!!!
The first 10 Amendments are all about protecting US from THEM. See, Americans back then actually understood the inherent immorality of government, how dangerous it IS and how horrible it is to live under it's tyranny - as we do now.
There's another form of Democracy the USA used to practice - it's called the FREE market. Where free people are free to interact and trade with one another using LAW and SOUND MONEY. In that way money was used to vote for the things people wanted. And as a FREE people, they could use whatever currency they wanted - even making their own. Of course, now we have to obtain permission from the State through STATE licencing (instead of private), we have to pay the State a labor tax to work and the labor tax must be paid in United States Central Banking Notes. Of course, they can print as many of these as they like - and do when it comes to bailing out their criminal banking buddies are starting illegal wars in the ME or Asia. The role of the so-called "Free" Citizen is now as hyper-regulated tax chattel.
How did it come to this?
Social Progressives of the 1860s wanted to make things 'fairer' by 'redistributing' the wealth from one group to another and so they loosened the chains from around Government and slowly put them around themselves - a story as old as time.
American Democracy was a short lived fluke of history that occurs from time to time. Ours lasted from the end of the Civil War up until 1913.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
mehrshadvr4 Sorry, but you're wrong. Regulations are in place to prevent litigation. Prior to regulations, litigation was pretty common and, with the wrong jury, many business owning Americans were unfairly sued and lost their fortunes. This, together with the legal concept of 'corporation;, led to the the early 'regulations' - which legally protected corporations from litigation. So long as regulations were met, there can be no law suit (or it's someone difficult). Further, now regulations are used to lock out competition (examples include: licence requirement to make coffee, sell flowers, practice medicine, etc... ). Regulatory capture is why Uber was invented - because it goes around regulations and allows free Americans to work freely. You know "free markets' / free people.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MindEFX
These numbers can be misleading. For example, Clinton deregulated the banks, this meant a huge number of people went into finance who would have otherwise went into other professional careers. For example, a large number of mathematicians went into making algos for banks instead of developing algos for medicine. Further, at the same time that puke Greenspan lowered interest rates WAY below market price until they were negative (we could call this 'fascism' or 'progressive socialism', take your pick).
Thus, because of these two idiots, our entire economy shifted into finance and housing. Culminating in a bubble in both that destroyed our way of life and possibly the nation. Now there's no jobs. Why? Because all our resources were put into these two moronic ventures of finance and housing.
So, you may think Clinton was the best thing since sliced bread - however, he wasn't. He was another pea-brained moron (no different from Bush Jr) who meddled with the markets and caused much more misery than good. If you recall, the market took a dive, literally, just after he left.
This is the thing about macroeconomics, no one can 'redo' and run the experiment again. So, we can't know IF Clinton did a great job or was a moron (as I contend he was - so was Bush Jr and so is Obama).
But, I'll say this about Clinton, any man who takes advantage of his powerful position and uses his influence over others and get kicks shoving a cigar in a girl's vagina is a person sick in the head.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MindEFX wrote:
"Regulation: Milk must be removed after its expiration date.
Law: Milk was not removed and the law was broke, people may get sick and you get sued by the sick people.
Can you give me any bad regulation, just name one?"
Yes, THIS is an example of 'Bad' regulation. Or, to be more precise, an immoral regulation. Why? Well, you'd first have to study Ethics and learn what morality is and is not. I'll condense this 2500 year old field into a shortened version here. The Law is there to ensure a contract is upheld (unwritten and written). The Law also 'protects' your Property (your body). Therefor, if you bought milk and it was assumed to be for eating - you could go to a court if you bought some milk and it was off. If you got sick, you could sue for damages. If the milk had accidentally gone off, most shop owners will replace it. If they did not, you would use the Law to ensure you received compensation. If the shop owner was pretending to sell 'milk' but in reality it was white colored water - this is fraud. Again, no need of regulation as the Law makes this illegal. If the milk had a protein in it that made you sick. Again, no need of regulation as this is property damage (your body was damaged).
The FACT when one lives in a country with sound Law there is NO NEED of regulation. So? You must be wondering why we have regulation. This is what is interesting. The Regulation is NOT there to protect YOU. It's there to protect the milk producer FROM YOU. You see, the Law protects YOU. But who protects the producer from YOU and your fraudulent claims? Regulation. See, when you claim the milk made you sick, the producer will say "I make milk according to regulation, I am inspected, the FSA approves my farm, etc... and I have papers to prove I have met every inspection satisfactory".
In this way, you will receive nothing in compensation EVEN IF YOU WERE SICK.
I'm pretty sure you haven't the slightest idea how any of this stuff works.
You're what is commonly referred to as a Statheist. Someone who blindly follows the State and believes it's media arm without really understanding much of anything. You 'think' you understand history, law, ethics, logic, etc... but, you are clueless as to all of these subjects.
Example, do you know how a logical argument is structured? Do you know what a major premise is? Do you know what a truth statement is?
Anyway, why is this regulation immoral? Because IF a farmer were to sell perfectly fine raw milk to a customer and that customer wanted to and bought it, it would be in violation of a 'regulation' and the State would initiate violence against innocent (implicit not explicit) people. The initiation of violence against innocent people is immoral.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
You are not legally allowed to serve food out of your home. You can buy and prepare food for a helpless infant at home, you can buy food and prepare food for friends. You can not sell that prepared food. Charge $1 and you've suddenly broken a million food and business and safetly etc... regulations.
That's an example.
You're not even allowed to sell stuff like soda, chips or candy bars out of your own property. Even though these are made elsewhere and would obviously be as safe to buy from you as at 7-11. You have to get permission from your betters in government - and then pay them, then if you pay to turn your house into a carbon copy of all other business - then, maybe. To be safe, just by a franchise and add to the bland homogenization that is called America. Or better, give up, and work as a cog.
As for rent-seeking, can you sell alcohol from you house without a licence? Can you offer your services as a taxi without a licence.
Then there's idiotic laws were nurses can act as general practitioners in Michigan but not in California. The AMA even tried to outlaw midwifery, but accidentally found it was safer than their MD certified OBGYN (this was published in JAMA - funny enough, last study JAMA sponsored).
The US is a hyper-regulated market with fiat currency. You are it's tax cattle.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
See this is what I think is the problem with Statist types. They think they live in a world where people are so great and outstanding. Oh we'll self govern. oh the free people will handle ....
RE: Without regulation the people who don't want to go looking through certification are going to be eating what is basically poison, just as they have over a century ago.
Actually, most people were NOT poisoned over 100 years ago or over 1000 or even 5000 years ago. A few people? Yes, and that still happens today. But hey. you don't have to worry, we're not going to deregulate and we're going to get more State and more control, less civil liberties and less personal privacy.
I find it funny you worry about a couple people, somewhere, you never heard of, maybe might have been poisoned and the person who did the poisoning go away with it.... BUT, here our State just spent $8.5 TRILLION lying about and then losing due to incompetence two phony wars and you want MORE State!?!? Our State is now spending BILLIONS to spying on Americans - AND lied about that too.... but you want more State. Oh, and by the by, most cases of 'flu' that resolve overnight are mild cases of food poisoning. Thank the Gods the State is there to 'keep us safe from poor quality food'
(inspections happen, what? Maybe once every couple years - if that?)
Thanks to hyper-regulations, most Americans are stuck being workers instead of owners. So, I do you like working at a chain-store, because only a McDonald's or Walmart have the ability to economize to all the regulations and will afford to maintain their rent-seeking by donating to political parties.
When given a choice between a maybe/one time/once/100 years ago.... someone eat some bad food - versus a present day $8.5 trillion dollar warmongering spying State, I'll take my chances with the food vendor and strong civil law.
Lastly, I don't think most people are wonderful. I think most people are simple and somewhat selfish and like to take without paying. This is the reason WHY we NEED free-markets. Because people take more than their fair share when given half a chance. And will cheat the other half of time.
Losing Civil Liberties isn't going to bring prosperity. Being LESS free is NOT the answer. This will become more evident to you over the next 30-40 years. IMO anyway.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
1) Without an FDA we'd have safer food. They call well ahead of when they arrive to inspect.
2) If you ever ate ANY food not prepared by you, it may have rat shit in it. I used to work a one of the most popular restaurants in the USA, I can tell you some pretty shitty food was served on order of the GM. FDA isn't going to stop rat shit from being in your food. BUT, maybe companies that privately inspected food and did so 'spontaneous' and who had a great incentive to do a good job would have. Oh well, we instead get to eat rat shit and think it's FDA inspected even though the FDA rarely if ever makes a random inspection (usually just to put a competitor out of business due to a bribe).
3) FedEx is only one of a few companies that took the USPS monopoly on and won. They won because the managers at USPS stated it was impossible to do next day delivery (and, being a public service it probably was for them). FedEx showed it was possible and finally brought some decent service to the shitty service that IS the USPS.
4) We do not NEED the Government. If you want a service, this means there's a market for the service.
5) Healthcare is now #3rd on the list of 'you'll probably die of_____". Why? Because it's rent-seeking and therefore low quality as is all monopolies.
6) I said we need more people to become (or want to become) business owners instead of workers. This will reduce the labor supply and like all services in short supply the price of labor hours will increase. This is basic economics.
7) Almost all economists agree raising the minimum wage hurts the poor the most.
Lastly, I find it funny I want us to return to a time when we had privacy rights and strong laws that protected civil liberties - yet, most want to give up both their privacy and freedom for some illusion of safety, which is just that - an illusion. Well, I'm sorry to have to say, losing freedom is not the path to prosperity. Something I think you'll find rings true in the coming years. We do not NEED government provide a service, if it's actually wanted - people will pay for it, and should pay for it. Each and every 'service' the Government 'provides' is just one less for the private workforce.
People spend 12 - 18 years trying to 'get a job' providing the public with goods and services yet thanks to Federal Regulations, Rent Seeking and next to useless Fiat Currency, they're stuck in dead end jobs (if they can even get that) with no hope of ever starting their own business. Oh well, hope you like a job at a chain store, because all these regulations will ensure that's the only jobs left.
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
1) Yes, I do want to get rid of regulations. I do not want to get rid of law that protects private property rights or laws that protect against fraud.
2) Child labor is illegal because a child is not an adult and therefore cannot enter into a legal agreement (cannot sell labor). That said, I have no problem with children raking lawns if they do so voluntarily. Notice Child labor is a legal issue, not a regulatory issue.
3) I worked for GM, most of my family retired from GM I know all about why GM went bust. The Union was a big part of the problem but so too was the attitude of the Union workers. The manage sucked too. I think GM cars are pretty crap, they feel like you're driving a poorly made plastic toy from Kmart IMO.
4) Lastly, if people really do care about the regulations, then private companies will deliver those services. It's that simple. I don't need the USDA certifying organic food as organic, a private company can do that job (and do a better job) and then it's up to me to choose what to buy.
But, you needn't worry. Those million and millions of regulations that don't do anything to make you safer except lock competition out of the market (rent-seeking) and together with State mandated licences (more rent-seeking) like the liscence you need to arrange flowers (to keep you safe) will grow and grow and grow and ensure that there's an over supply of labor and an under supply of job and businesses. Take a good look around at the sickeningly homogeneous society of chain stores - if you want to be a Working Cog - you're in luck.
If you want labor wages to INCREASE then you need to reduce the supply of labor hours. This means you need MORE businesses. But, thanks to regulation, which you want, that isn't going to happen.
Thanks to Government a hopeless life as a Worker Cog is the New American Dream.
Do you think you can buy food and prepare it for your totally helpless infant without a licence but not for an adult and charge for it. (yeah, that's makes good sense).
One wonders how the USA ever managed to grow the balls to fight a revolutionary war and overturn centuries of aristocracy given we're too shit scared to buy a hamburger without our State nanny giving us permission. How sad.
What a pathetic nation of spineless tax cattle we've become. Lick our banking farmers hand in the top 0.01% - maybe they'll pat us on the head.
Pathetic.
1
-
Well, I've lived in 5 different counties, so I have a certain perspective relative to what is or is not a aesthetically preferable vis-a-vie the homogenization of Chain-Store-America.
I don't have a problem with 'chain stores' in the sense they generally protect human capital (what little there is in a chain-store) in a way a small businesses doesn't. My problem is with the regulations, licencing, minimum wage and other restrictions that make it difficult competing against a chain-store. Not only do I not like the homogenizing effect, I also don't like the effect it has on reducing the number of jobs available for workers driving down the competition for labor-hours and thus wages.
Rent-seeking is literally destroying the fabric of the nation. To the point where people like me (I'm a research doctor) look forward to the day the States succeed and the Union dissolves. Better that my children grow up in a free State than as tax-cattle in the USA. Why should they be forced to pay for wars their idiotic parents wasted $8.5 trillion losing? Why should they be forced to pay for NFL stadiums built in the 60s and demolished in the 90s? The answer is they shouldn't.
If we actually lived in a 'free' society, and a chain store or product became popular, then they must be doing something virtuous - however, it's next to impossible to grow to the size they are without sever competition limiting growth. The reason why we see chain-store America is because these stores have successfully found a market AS WELL AS been able to negotiate all of the millions of regulations that prevent competition from taking place.
Of course, the type of American born today doesn't want to live in a free society and would much rather live in a regulatory-cage. You know, because once, 150 years ago, someone somewhere in some city new a friend who's dog died eating a sausage.
As for how would it be different if you worked at a TGI Fridays vs a small family owned restaurant? It may not be different. But, in a free society, with small amount of sound money, you'd be able to take those skills and open your own restaurant quite easily. Imagine a society where a waiter could earn enough in a couple years to open a small restaurant (maybe a hot dog stand in your yard?) and then it was up to FREE people to decide if they valued your business or not. If so, you stay and grow, if not, you go bust.
Anyway, if you like life in a small little tax-farm, you're in luck.
1
-
yourkie1921
1) I agree it's difficult to compete against a chain, however, in the case of Coke, it's not that hard to make a soda that's better - you're could be 'organic' or 'cheaper' or 'hand-made'; lots of micro-breweries take on big beer and carve out a market. My problem is with regulations being used to prevent competition. The government should have NO, NONE, ZILCH role in business except to ensure the law is upheld - no 'business licences' no 'qualification' nothing. The Government is not meant to have a role in our lives outside of a very VERY limited role.
2) Imagine if you needed a licence to write code. Imagine how different the internet would be. Imagine if you were told it was for your 'safety'. Imagine if, when you balked, everyone thought you were 'nuts' for not wanting the Government to 'keep you safe' because once, one time, someone, somewhere had a virus and it ruined his business files - therefor we're all too stupid to mind out own computers and must get a licences and be approved to enter and post on the internet or write code etc....
Maybe you want to live in that world, I certainly do not desire to do so. But, most people do. Most people want to be told what to do and how to do it. They want the illusion of being free, but being free is the very LAST thing they want.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
Firstly, when you think of 'people reading' labels - just who are you thinking about? Which people? the shopper?!? I agree, THEY aren't the brightest bunch - I'm not referring to them. Most shoppers don't buy dead animals and carve off their own meat. Most people buy ALL of their food from a grocery store or a restaurant. Therefor it'll be the grocery store owner will will hire someone who's specific job is to 'read the labels' and ensure the grocery store is buying and selling quality products because in a free-market people don't want to go bankrupt and so they offer the highest quality at the lowest price. If someone bought food at the grocery store, and got sick, then it would be the grocery store owner who would be liable. Also, if the grocery store owner sold something that 'looked' like it was something it wasn't - then this is a case of fraud and can be dealt with in the courts. But, the fact is, at the end of the day, the grocery store owners wants to keep people happy and will work hard to deliver a quality product.
Secondly, there's the role of insurance. Thus, the insurance has a lot to lose if they are insuring stores that sell un- or miss- labeled food. Therefor insurance rates go up on stores that sell foods that are not 'certified'.
Thirdly, certification can come through the private market. Thus, the price of certification remains low and is included in the price of the item. I pay a little more for organic milk. But, I don't buy organic chicken. See how it works? I'm an adult, I can make these choices myself.
At the end of the day, we don't live like people did 100 years ago. A hundred years is more than enough time to taking the 'training wheels off' (aka: eliminate the FDA).
Living in a free society means taking responsibility for one's choices within the law. In a free-market, meaning FREE people, if there's a service truly wanted, then people will deliver that service. Thus, I'm not just talking about removing the FDA. We need to remove almost ALL of the regulatory agencies of the federal government. We also need to end the federal reserve and allow for currency competition. This can only happen when we end income tax (a tax on workers). Therefor, that's the first and foremost goal - to end the labor tax.
I personally find it a little disconcerting you'll argue in favor of using force (FDA) against innocent people and yet claim to want to do right by these same people? You also seem to think the role of the State is as our Nanny. It's not. The role of the State is to ensure the US Constitution is upheld. That's it. The rest of 'society' is up to free people to decide. The more of a role the State takes (FDA) that's less of a role for free people to have. Thus society becomes weaker with each and every governmental agency. It also becomes more violent because the role of the State is violence. It's why the State can put you in prison for smoking a weed but a multi-billionaire would go to prison if he tried to put you in cage. The State therefor must be LIMITED. That's made explicitly clear time and time again in the US Constitution. The whole document is about controlling and chaining up government. Limiting it's influence in our lives.
This is the sad story of all civilizations. The greatest start out free with little government, freedom/free-trade leads prosperity/capital which is used to fund a large government that takes on generational debt and society collapses. It has happened time and time again. We are indeed doomed to repeat this aspect of History. What kept the USA going was the People's innate distaste for government sticking it's nose into their lives. That aspect of our culture is well and truly gone.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Vote in police and fireman.
Actually, yes, we do. As a matter of fact, we voted to eliminate our police force - they were THAT corrupt. However, yes, I see you point.
I'd say this, at the local level public servants somewhat work - not as good as private, but a bit better. Which is why need to attempt to privatize as much as possible. See, people do 'vote' with their money. If we have a society with 'sound' money - then that is itself a vote. Only it's better than a normal vote as it can be expressed by degree (more or less) per person. Thus the real issue is to ensure no one person has 'all the money' which is why I suggest currency competition. See, if you 'hoard' too much money - then people will use an alternative. If you don't hoard any, then it has no value. So, there's a balance within the currency and between currencies. Thus, we must eliminate the worker's tax (income tax) so that the USD can go the way of the dodo and we can stop selling bonds on children born 30 years in the future.
Freedom is hard won. It's not "easy" living in a free society. It takes dedication. Which is why, we don't live in one. Americans don't want the responsibility. Freedom and personal responsibility is the furthermost thing from most Americans to-do list.
1
-
yourkie1921
1) RE "Also the role of the state is for the people to decide, it's why the constitution is so open to change"
I think (maybe) you're confusing Government with State. The State has a specific legal definition and it's the monopoly on legitimate (legal) violence. This is an important aspect of this conversation and so I'll link the legal definition the United STATE'S government uses to define itself.
See Princeton University legal definition here: https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Monopoly_on_the_legitimate_use_of_physical_force.html
I'd note, because of the nature of the State, the very LAST thing you want is It's Government to use the monopoly of force against the citizens to a great extent. The ONLY thing the makes a groups of humans in the public sphere (government) different from a group of humans in the private sphere (home, family, community and business) is the public groups of humans can use the State's special ability to initiate violence against those in the private sphere.
It's for this reason that it must be limited. There is nothing at all that public servants can do, that private citizens can't. At the end of the day, they're both just groups of humans after all. The only different is violence. Public groups can legally initiate violence against innocent humans. Private groups can legally defend with violence.against guilty humans.
Very different groups.
2) All children in the USA could have access to education - 1 in 5 'poor' have air conditioning! Anyone can access internet. Not to mention, in 1910 African Americans (without public education) had a literacy rate of 85%. In 2010, many African communities graduate public school with a 50% functional illiteracy rate.
Something to think about. It only takes chalk and board and books to learn to read - all of which easily accessible to any American let alone those attending multimillion dollar public schools for 12 YEARS!
3) I've worked in three Australian medical schools. I know the medical system well. To say there's a lot left to be desired, is an understatement.
During the middle ages, when Christianity was shovelled down societies throat - society still advanced. Even with such superstitions tied like blocks around the legs of humanity, society still crawled forward - slowly. That superstition, those blocks, are now Government. Instead of 'infidel' we have 'traitor'. Instead of defining ourselves as "Christians" we're now "Citizens" (ex: American, Japanese, German). The Bishops are now Senators. The Pope is now a President. The robes, the pomp, the ceremony, the violence - that's all pretty much the same. Oh, and now the State can steal with fiat currency - a hidden tax. That one generally doesn't work out well for us.
Just something else you may be inclined to think about.....
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: State vs Government
Firstly, we agree that a "State" is the geographical location and it differs from Government in that within that area, Governments can come and go. Communist Government can become a Republic without the State changing.
As for the groups of people. Those that work in the "Government" have use of the State's special monopoly on violence and are considered Public. If they didn't have access to this, they'd be a Private group of humans. As an example, the Shopping Mall cannot pass a law that says it can steal your private property (you hat and glasses for example) and then send it's militant arm (the mall security) to tackle you and steal those items. As a matter of fact, that's why we have the word 'steal' as opposed to 'donate'. The State on the other hand can and does steal. It enforces it's theft through it's militant arm, the Police. As an example, your property is rented from the State until you can not longer afford your property State tax. At that point it is taken from you and you will be violently expelled off your 'property'. Another is your labor. When you sell it, you must pay a transaction tax to the State. It's Government will collect a tax on your labor via violence if need be.
Stop and think about this last bit. Imagine if you were an apple farmer. You own your apples. You sell your apples. The buyer of your apples pays a tax when they purchase your apples. You, being the owner, do not pay a tax on something you own. But, if you sell your labor hours. YOU pay the tax to the State. Who owns you? Well, given you're paying the tax to work - certainly not you. You are a "Citizen" OF the State. Owned by the State. This becomes evident if you attempt to smoke a weed not approved by your owner. You are seen to damage the property of the State - formally known as your body. It can send Police over and collect it's property.
As they say, liberty dies not with a bang, but a whimper. I'd say more like a whisper. So soft, we didn't even notice it. 101 years later - and here we are.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
While it's great you did learn to type (I did as well) what you don't know is all the things you didn't learn at public school. Or how you were held back in your potential in the topics you were especially good at so that the slower students could catch up and visa versa for the topics you were bad at, you held someone up. The problems with public schools are structural. It's not possible to put kids into 'classes' and have any other outcome (which is why HS is mixed by the way).
As for air-conditioning, I only mention it to illustrate that what we consider 'poor' is always changing. The 'poor' in the USA have a larger living space than the middle class in France (as I once read). No one starves to death in the USA. Poor in 2014 is better than many Kings lives in 1414.
But, I'm not hear to pick on the poor - I want to help the poor. The best way to help them is to eliminate the green fog of poisonous public services they are suffocating within. I believe, when given a chance, the poor will outcompete the rich most days of the week - they work harder and want it more. Sadly, the middle class (mainly) uses the State to pass regulations preventing competition and locking the poor OUT of the markets. They also use inflation via fiat currency to steal what little capital the poor may want to save. Basically, leaving them wards of the State.
The live in public housing, ride on public buses, along public roads, to a public school, protected by public security, graduate functionally illiterate into a highly regulated market unable to conduct free-trade .... and just like any other communist State, die poor. Most poor never experience private anything other than a liquor store.
Life in the USSA.
1
-
yourkie1921
I agree, the fascistic medical system in the USA, is probably as bad if not worse than in AU. But, in AU life is a bit different. If you remove the poor horrid inner cities in the USA, I think you'll find it's much better than AU. Private in AU is much much better than Public. Do NOT go to Public if possible. The thing about AU is they don't have the inner city rot that we do in the USA. Though, Sydney is getting there. In the future, I think they will have this problem as well - it's an inevitable outcome of multiculturalism and socialism. Multiculturalism has a lot of good effect - but this seems to be a bad outcome. I never see city rot when I'm in Japan, even though there are a lot of poor-ish Japanese (and the country is getting poor by the year). AU is just starting to move in that direction. Also, AU is more capitalistic than you think, it ranks higher than the USSA. Also, AU has a LOT of mineral wealth. And people in AU generally shut up and do what they're told - not saying this is good, but with a lot of mineral wealth and a compliant society, it's possible to mask some major problems, at least for a little while.
TBH, my experiences have led me to believe it's the society that must resist the sirens call that all politicians use to get elected. The tighter the embrace, the quicker you will be pulled to the ocean depths. The USA is in a near death-grip. One so tight, I'm not altogether sure we'll make it our of this alive.
(sorry for the melodrama :)
1
-
yourkie1921
I'd like to revisit the apple analogy. The farmer takes a seed, plants it, cares for it, grows an apple. The farmer owns that apple. The apple is the farmers property. When the farmer sell the apple, the buyer pays the tax. Why would the farmer pay a tax? He/she already owns the apple.
A person has a body. They care for their body. They feed it. They water it. This body can can perform actions. Those actions should be owned by the owner of the body. If the body commits a murder, then the owner of the body goes to jail. But, notice what happens when the body does a different action: labor. Well, in a free society, people own their bodies and their body's actions. If you sell labor, then you are paid. Why would YOU, the owner of your body, pay TO work? You own your body - of course you don't pay to work. But, if you're not the owner of your body - then you do pay to work. You pay your owner. In this case, the State. You pay a labor-tax. To the framers of the original US Constitution, this was self-evident. It's why Slaves couldn't be 'people'. Because if they were, then they'd own their labor. In 1913 the US Constitution was amended so that the State became the owner of our labor. We pay the State for the privilege of working. Incidentally, the same year the Federal Reserve came into existence. Of course the two go hand in glove. Threat of violence against the laborer is what gives the USD much of it's value to Bond buyers.
Stop and think about what the Chinese buy when they buy a 30 year Bond. They bond the labor of Children who will be working in the next 30 years. The State ensures the Chinese will be paid by using force against anyone who refuses to pay a labor tax. Thus the Chinese are safe knowing the US State can and will initiate violence against It's future Citizens to ensure the Chinese are paid.
One could think of the State as a Farm. And the Government servants as the Farmers. And us as the Apples.
1
-
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
There's different types of taxes. Those that are paid voluntarily (example: entry fee to a farmers markets, a toll at a bridge, a tax on gasoline when you freely choose to buy the gasoline). Then there are taxes that are paid by someone holding a gun to your head and telling you pay me or I shoot you (example: income tax, property tax, mandated licencing fees, etc..).
Replace the word "Government" with "Gang" and they're pretty much inter-exchangeable. You didn't 'vote' for a football stadium built in 1963 and demolished in 1990 - but you're going to pay (via income tax) for it.
Our entire US Constitution was written specifically to LIMIT Government (aka: Limit violence). But, people do what people do - and against every word of caution from the framers Americans in 1913 allowed for the Amendment of the US Constitutions and for a National/Central Bank (which promptly ushered in the Great Depression) and we now live in a society where the State taxes the worker. Or put another way, the State owns a percentage of the workers productive labor. Or put still another way, the State owns the worker and It's government will exact the meat and milk from the worker / tax cattle in the same way a Farmer does his cattle.
Imagine if you lived in a small geographical area, and there were people who had taken on debt 30 years ago - and they pointed a gun at your head and told you to pay. They also wouldn't allow you to leave without proper paperwork and they could reject those papers any time they liked. That's our society. This one. We live in an immoral society. Only ending income tax will we begin to return to a free society. I personally don't think this will happen for many decades.
Yes government 'needs' our tax money to continue to metastasize, but, we do not need it. We can form groups of non-violent people and these groups can use law and sound money to deliver the same services. The only difference between groups of people in the government and groups of people in the freemarket is the groups of people in the free market can't point a gun at your head and say pay.
1
-
yourkie1921
"The farmer pays the tax because the government needs money, not because the government owns the apple or the transaction. Because that's the price you pay to live in a society where the government does X and Y."
I don't disagree with this statement. The government is the gang, it needs the money - it charges the farmer/worker a tax on something the farmer/worker owns - their body/labor. The government is a group of thugs. It's the price we pay for living in "THIS" society - not society. This society. Before 1913 it was illegal for the government to tax laborer's and the USA was doing just fine. We had railroads, industry, farms, roads, doctors, cities, film, electricity, lighting, etc...
Imagine if we were talking to a Slave and the Slave complained about being a Slave - and your response was "the government needs your productive labor and your slavery is the price you pay to live in society". What kind of way of thinking is this?!
We are forced to pay 30% of your productive labor as a tax. OK, what if it were 50% - is that immoral? What if it were 80%? Is that immoral? What if it were 100%? Is that immoral?
The answer is ANY % is immoral - we know this because someone had to bring a gun and point it at our collective heads and say pay.
Now, this is interesting, given we teach children not to hit, not to steal and to use their words. Then we turn around and create a society not based on words (free market and law) but on hitting (guns) and stealing (income tax). I maintain that the only reason you think that THIS society is acceptable is because you've been normalized to it. For 1000s of years Slaves truly accepted Slavery was normal. Well, it may have been normal - but it was immoral. Ask any American 200 years ago what they thought of Slavery - they'll tell you it was normal. Ask any American today - they'll tell you it's immoral. Ask any American today 100 years ago what they thought of income tax, they'd tell you it was immoral. Ask any American today - they'll tell you it's normal.
Why the discrepancy? Because people don't think and people don't understand basic logic nor Ethics.
Using force against innocent people is by definition immoral. Income tax is therefor immoral. We know it's wrong because force is being used. We know when force is used to take something it's called stealing. Any child could explain this to any adult. Yet, those children will grow up into adults normalized to this violence - and then they'll wonder why society has all the problems it has. They'll be told it's because insert Right/Left paradigm but the truth is we live in a society based on violence because the government needs money - that's the price we pay to live in a society where the government does X and Y.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Money vs Currency
Both money and currency are imaginary. But, money is created and currency is printed.
RE: Healthcare
The AMA lobbied the government to make it illegal for anyone other than AMA certified to Rx (write a prescription) as a means of rent-seeking the healthcare market. Also, the government entered the healthcare market through medicare. This decreased the supply of doctors and increased the demand - thus the price has sky rocketed.
Free markets are the most efficient at delivering goods and services - if the government hadn't placed limits on medicine, by being bought off by the AMA, then we'd have better, cheaper, higher quality healthcare.
If the government had made it illegal for anyone other than General Motors to make and sell cars and trucks AND at the same time started giving people money to buy cars and trucks - what do you think would have happened to the quality and price of cars? What about the innovation to invent new technologies (like airbags or power steering)? Do you really think GM would innovate with a captured (rent-seeking) market? Of course not. That's what DID happen to healthcare.
RE: Inflation
Since 1913 the USD has lost >95% of it's value. It's a hidden tax.
Explain to me why in 1950 a single working father could raise a family of 5 and in 1910 both parents working full time can barely afford to have a couple children (if any). Where have the 60 years of productivity gains gone? Those free governmental services (like $8.5 trillion wasted losing two MORE wars), all the millions of public servants - all of that has to be paid for, it's paid for by printing currency. Soon those two children will be required to work right along with their parents, we're literally going in reverse. Worse, is the daycare is destroying the next generation of children. Also, public schools are ruining their education.
This is the price we must pay for Government. You are correct, if we want Government to provide X and Y then we must sacrifice to the State our children's live. We sell their future prosperity (steal) to give ourselves public services today. Then we hire thugs with guns and collect from our children who never get to use those services. I find it sickening.
Babyboomers are expect to see a $300,000 gain in public services across their life times. Millennials are expected to LOSE $450,000 in public services. I can tell you, I see it. I personally see how much harder Millennials work and how much less they get. Their parents essentially stole from their children and grandchildren and then even had the audacity to rent-seek them out of the markets!
We'll just have to see how this story ends.
1
-
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: The difference between choosing to work or choosing to buy gasoline is who owns what. That's why I used the apple example. You don't own the gasoline so you pay the tax. You do own your body, and you own it's actions, why would you pay the tax?
The buyer pays the tax - if there's indeed any tax.
Secondly, the ownership of your body is the ownership of it's actions. If you murder someone, the State doesn't' claim 30% ownership of THOSE actions. But if you dig a hole, make a coffee, etc... now it want's to claim ownership of those actions. Which is why it says income tax is actually a 'transaction' tax. In essence - you have to pay your State for the privilege of working. That is not a free society. A free society provides goods and services freely between free people within the law and without fraud using sound money. We don't live in a free society any longer.
And, the truth is, it's not so much about your income tax, given the currency is fiat and can be created at will by the State at any time and in any amount it so desired - it's about being able to add value to that currency and then selling it off to other people like any other commodity. You will be forced to produce for the State and this is what will add value to the 'fiat' currency. This then means that the State can sell it's currency/you to other people in exchange for goods and services.
What are the Chinese really buying when they buy a 30 year T bill? A piece of paper? No. They're buying your children's future prosperity - a piece of their labor. They know they'll get their money's worth because they know, at the end of the day, the militant arm of the State's government, the police, will put your child in jail if he/she doesn't pay them their pound of flesh. This run counter to the very idea of "America". The very idea of 'freedom'. We are the opposite of everything the framers of the US Constitution founded the republic on.
One could think of it as the inevitable tyranny of the mediocrity. Plato makes it explicitly clear in The Republic that this is what happens to all Republics. He was right. It does. It has. It will happen to the USA too.
Another thing to note, Income Tax actually required an amendment to the US Constitution to make legal. It became legal in 1913 - the same year our Central Banksters opened shop. There's a highly likelihood that it was not done legally as there's some reasonable evidence the State quorums needed to amend the US Constitution were not met. But, it doesn't matter. We also not a nation ruled by Law do screw it. Accept your lot as tax cattle and live with it. That's all that can be done now.
I do find it interesting that I'm arguing for your freedom and you're arguing for your enslavement. As I can see it. I'm arguing for less force to be initiated against you. You're arguing to have more force initiated against you. That's interesting to me.
Again, if a service is desired by people in society, then they will provide it. As soon as the State is required (force is initiated against innocent people) then we know implicitly, people don't actually want that service. Because, if they did, there'd be no need to use force against them.
Not that it matters, we are born Citizens of a State. We will give birth to Citizens of a State. We will die property of the State. And that's just the way it's going to be. So, I suggest having as little to do with the State as is possible and try to work within your community (freely) and hope to have as little 'public' service as possible shoveled in your lap.
I for one am thinking of starting a private alternative school that's immersion Japanese with a colleague - although this won't be for years down the road. But, we'll see.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: First National Bank
It was started by Hamilton (thank the Gods he was not legally allowed to be a POTUS) and it did what all national banks did, caused inflation, and was eventually ended. Greenback was a derogatory term. Continental went belly up. Not worth the paper it was printed on.
All fiat currency eventually go to their natural value - zero. ALL of them.
RE: The magic button
Really? Come on! Ethics uses Logic, but Logic is not 100% "complete" per say. Thus, ether is Ethics. If anything, Ethics is somewhat a failure given the 2500 years it's been around as a discipline. So? Why talk about such an abstraction as button that will never exist. When here in the real world, we really do have a State initiation force against innocent people. The USA has the large prison population in the world. The US Government is the largest polluter in the world. It wastes the most energy. It's a monstrosity. We started two more wars, have killed uncounted numbers of children, polluted the soil with radioactive particular from our shells, borrowed $8.5 trillion in prosperity from our future to indulge in blood lust after 911. It's disgusting. A true reflection of what IS America now. I personally blame public schooling.
IMO Ethics must start with the premise violence against an innocent person is immoral. If we don't agree to that, then there is no such field of the study of morals called Ethics (as you can see, I'm no relativist on this point :) You're not going to convince me Slavery was moral 200 years ago. It wasn't then. It isn't now. It won't be in the future.
RE: Inflation
In the late 1800s we had deflation. You can't use the post-1913 and refer to inflation as anything natural. It's not because the currency is manipulated by the Central Bank/Central Planners. You'll have to talk about pre-1913 and, as I stated, in the late 1800s prices went down as productivity increased.
Just like your smart phone - only everything was like that.
RE: Money vs Currency
See: http://mises.org/books/Theory_Money_Credit/Contents.aspx
Also, we need some sort of term to deliniate between natural money and fiat currency. They're two different things, so we need words to describe these two different things. You can't print potatoes, gold, salt, etc... You can paint a zero on your 1 trillion dollar Zimbabwe fiat bank note.
RE: Chartered Schools vs Public Schools.
You're mistaken here. Chartered schools do better than most public schools (not all - but most). And they do so for 1/10th the price. And given they are chartered - they are 'free' (or I should say they are paid for via the State's currency with is taken from everyone in society through inflation tax).
I'm not talking only about 'Charter' - I'm talking about alternative schools such as Montessori or Unschools etc... Public education is helping to destroy our society. It wrings the love of learning our of a child - no small feat.
It should be noted having LESS money is many times equated with HIGHER quality. Also, 'free' suggests 'valueless'. Do you think a 'valueless' education is worth more than one that costs money? Do you think maybe parents would scrutinize public schools close IF they had to pony up $18-29,000 per year? That money comes from somewhere - it don't magically pop out of the either. Having to pay means taking a stake. Sadly, we all do end up paying - one way or another.
RE: Lost prosperity
This is hard to explain.
Maybe this is a good start: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-16/chart-day-what-generational-theft-looks
In short, babyboomers borrowed a lot, lived a good life, gave themselves good paying jobs, retired early and left their grandchildren the bill.
RE: Healthcare Insurance
No, they can't let people 'die' because 1) that's breaking their contract and they'll be sued and 2) in a free market no one will buy their insurance. That's the whole point in buying insurance. In a free market Insurance companies actually HELP patients by fighting for lower costs. They have the power and money behind them. Our problem is we have a hyper-regulated healthcare industry that government has totally screwed up by increasing demand and limiting supply the costs have gone through the roof.
Maybe this will explain a bit better: How Government Solved the Health Care Crisis - read by Stefan Molyneux
RE: Krugman
You appealing to him having a Nobel Prize is a logical fallacy (Appealing to Authority). I'm a doctor, I certainly don't use my degree as an argument for being right. I'm either drawing truthful conclusions or I'm not. The argument is made and a conclusion is drawn - who makes the argument is besides the point.
Krugman Insanity:
Krugman calls for space aliens to fix U.S. economy.
(it should be noted we've been borrowing $80 billion a month for years, trillions further in debt....)
Spending isn't 'good' for the economy any more than 'saving' is. Which is why we need a free market (including in currency).
In addition to taking on trillions of 'spending' to bail out the rich, we also spent $8.5 trillion losing two more wars. Anyway.... Economics isn't called The Dismal Science for nothing.
OK, I have a couple questions:
1) What happens to the price of blueberries when they come into season?
2) Why is interest rate offered by a bank in a free market 2% for 6 months at one time and 8% for 1 year at other times?
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Tax and who pays whom.
This is why I mentioned Ethics and the study of morals. It's immoral to initiate force against an innocent person. There's good empirical data that suggests this is true. You can go to any human society in the world, across time and space, and if you randomly grab a small innocent child out of a crowd and start punching them, other human adults will run to that child's rescue.
The difference between the words 'rape' and 'love' hinge not on the act (sex) but on whether sex was voluntary or innovatory. The same is true of 'charity' vs 'theft'. If I volunteer to give you my wallet/money, it's charity. If you point a gun at me and take it by force, it's theft. The same is true of punching someone in self-defense vs attacking someone randomly by punching them in the head. The same is true of 'profit'. When it's a free-market we call extra capital a "profit" and this is virtuous. When it's a regulated market extra capital is called "rent-seeking" and is called vice.
So, all we need to know about 'income tax' is there's one group of humans (government) using force against another group of humans (laborers). It is therefor immoral.
As to ownership. If I own 100% of your labor (you must pay a 100% tax to me). You are my Slave. If I force you to pay 30% of your labor to me. You are still my Slave. I just allow you to keep a bit more of your labor. Yeah, even the Farmer opens up the ranch in terms of space to give his Cattle some room to 'freely' move withing its confinement. But, make no mistake, those are the Farmer's cattle. We, similarly are cattle. We're tax cattle. We have a branding at birth called out Citizenship (US Citizen). We have our ranch called our State (USA).
So, if you were to buy and apple. The farmer owns the apple. You exchange the apple for money. Done. IF anyone is going to pay a tax - it will be you. The farmer owns the apple. He's certainly not going to pay you to buy it from him! If you want it, you have to offer something in exchange for it. Usually money.
Let's suppose we had a farmer's market. The farmer now has to pay to use the market to sell. This could be thought of as a 'tax'. But, it's not a tax. The farmers buying the legal rights to sell on someone's property (the market owners). You may pay an entry fee. This could be thought of as a tax. It's not. You are paying someone the right to enter their private property.
Gasoline tax as an example. You use the roads. Someone must pay for the roads. The easiest means of paying for their upkeep, that is thought of as the most fair, is a tax on fuel. The gas seller isn't going to pay the tax. Why would they? They aren't driving onto the roads. You are. Which is why you pay. But, just like the apple seller, the owner doesn't have to pay a tax to sell. Of course, the most fair way to pay for the roads would be to privatize all roads. Then everyone pays tolls as they drive. Not only would we have much better roads - they'd be much fairer too. It's not fair a big truck pays the same 'tax' as a little car. The big truck does more damage to the roads relatively speaking. Now that we have technology to track all cars - I think the next logical step is to sell off the roads.
This then raises the question of public land or the commons. What is and is not private property. That is an interesting question. It doesn't have a definitive answer. But, we can agree to this much: YOU own your body. Not the State. Not this delusion called 'Society'. No one owns you other than you.
1
-
yourkie1921
The US Constitution actually had to be amended to allow the State to place a transaction tax on workers. This happened in the exact same year as the State taking over the money - again, in direct violation of the US Constitution. Everything the State does is wrapped in a some patriotic non-sense. But make no mistake - the State IS by definition a legal geopolitical entity that has the legal ability to initiate force against innocent people. The entire foundation of our nation was to limit this monstrosity. But, slowly, one foot in front of the other, it got loose.
Think about this. If the State can print as much money as it needs to pay for all the public services needed by society: schools, hospitals, roads, healthcare, aged care, handicapped care, education, research, etc.... and can legally do so by fiat. Why does anyone pay income tax? The is not limited in it's ability to generate currency. It can print as much as is needed to pay for all of those wonderful things. AND everyone wants all those things. So? Why no eliminate income tax and generate the currency as needed?
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Chartered schools vs Public vs Alternative
I've done more than a cursory glance at these schools. I'm considering opening one in the future. Maybe Japanese immersion. Firstly, public schools have WAY more funding then alternative schools. Secondly, the metrics used to measure schools may miss a lot of what's so great about Montessori or Unschools. The LOVE that children have for going to school. The love that those children have for learning. That's not something the State is going to measure because the State is antithesis to love. The State doesn't have a Love on Literacy. It has a War on Illiteracy. It doesn't have a Love on Happiness it has a War on Drugs. The State doesn't have a Love of Enemies it has a War on Terror.
The State IS force. The State defines itself as force. The State uses the language of War even when it's 'educating' children. So, yes, you may find Chartered and Alternative schools don't perform as well or come in equal with State metrics. But, they offers many immeasurable values not picked up in a metric. Anecdotal evidence of children crying when they miss a day of school because they love going THAT much is common in a well run Montessori. A badly run one? Yes, those do exist too. In a free market the goods ones stay, the bad ones leave.
As for 'Free' and value. There's a concept in society that "non-profit' is good. In reality profit is a virtue. People need to be paid for working. There's nothing wrong with profit. If you played a game you loved for free and didn't donate. Then those developers will not have the capital needed to trade with other humans to create the next game you love. They have lives, children, hopes, dreams, etc... they NEED to make a profit.
Now, rent-seeking (which I call spoils) is a vise. When people say non-profit, what they should instead say is non-spoils. :)
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Trusting parents to teach their kids.
I'm curious you don't trust those parents to raise their own kids, but you do trust them to vote on people who can point a gun in your face? That's odd....
I maintain that in a free market voluntary based society, where people must use free-trade to get along with one another, that such people will over time be more moral in their actions. Thus, even if parents were a bit off (or religious) it wouldn't really matter because their children would have to be moral and offer value to society. Thus, they'd learn to teach their children to be virtuous regardless. If not, they'd have a very very hard time getting along in a free market based society.
That said, I'll take my chances with religious fundies over Stathiests any day. Most religious people are good natured and honest. Most of the Public servants I know are deviant to say the least. They are ruthless. AND I know quite a few. Due to the violent nature of what IS public - it selects the worse of the lot and rewards them. It's about as bad as rent-seeking industries.
Oh, I'd also mention this. Because we use fiat currency and not sound money - all of society is poisoned by it because 1/2 of every trade requires a force-backed currency. This poison spreads into every single nook and cranny of society unbeknownst to most people. Including our Central Planners. Thus, much of the problems of society would be solved by simply eliminating the violence of income tax as then the USD would need to stand on it's merits as a currency. See, that's the real reason we pay income tax. It's to force us to access USD. Therefor the people who control USD, control us - at a literal point of a gun.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: The magic button
There's nothing wrong with using abstract illustrations. I do think they can be useful. But, there are real-world Ethical problems and plenty of straight forward examples of immorality doing a lot of damage to society (War on Terror, War on Privacy, Patriot Act, Income Tax, War on Drugs, etc...).
As for the magic button. If you are under duress, then your moral obligation is removed from you. For example, we must pay our income tax. Even though this is being used to murder innocent women and children on an almost weekly basis all across the world. We have a gun to our head, thus, there is no choice.
You may be interested in reading Wiki's page on The Trolley Problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: In reality profit is motivated by self interest and thus is not virtuous.
What does it matter what the internal motivation of a person is? A person may hate people, yet be a wonderful surgeon and save countless lives. Another person may love people, yet be a horrid surgeon and kill countless people. The actions are what make a person virtuous not the internal motivation. Also, the interaction with other people - does it involve the initiation of force or is it voluntary? An greedy surgeon may be the only person in the world who is competent to do a surgery to save your life. Suppose she charges you $1 million dollars for her services. Is this 'profit' not virtuous? Or, is your life not worth $1 million dollars? I think being alive is worth more to me than money and I'd personally be grateful there was one person in the world who took the time to develop the cure I needed. To me, that person saved my life. They are virtuous. If not - I'd not borrow the money to be saved. Of course, in a free market this never happens. And a person never would charge more than they could command from the market.
Also, maybe you are looking at things from the worker's point of view - or someone just starting their career and has no skills to sell except those at low prices?
It's not just the owner who sells. The worker is also selling something - labor hours. Suppose an IT programmer demands $80,000 a year to work for Apple. Is this 'motivation' to make money a factor in weather or not the person is virtuous? Or is their actions virtuous be being voluntary? Suppose they say they will only work for $8 million a year AND suppose Apple agrees to the price. Is this not virtuous? It's a voluntary agreement - Apple wins, the Programmer wins.
You'll find many North Korean dictators do things they 'think' are for the 'good of the nation' - so, you could say their internal motivation is meant to be virtuous. But, their actions are immoral and would be described as vice.
No one can look into the mind of another person and no why they do something (although we like to think we can: this assumption is called Theory of Mind). What is important is the actions.
One last note, if you want to increase the price of labor hours, then you NEED to deregulate the markets in order to increase the number of owners and decrease the number of workers selling hours. Therefor the price of workers goes up as supply goes down and demand for labor goes up. Also, you'll need to get rid of public schools as these were specifically designed to create workers (for factories a 100 years ago - that no longer exist). Public schools increase the supply of laborer's into the market and drive down price. Regulations lock out competition and drive down businesses that hire laborer's.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
1) Link here to Paul Krugman (since you mentioned him earlier, I recalled reading this article and thought it'd post it).
Krugman: Fiat Money…Backed By Men With Guns
http://mises.ca/posts/blog/krugman-fiat-money-backed-by-men-with-guns/
2) But, more than just US Citizens use the USD. So, while (1) held true from 1913 - 1945. Post WWII the US Dollar has become the reserve currency and is backed by US military might and ensuring overseas oil trade is denominated in USD. All Central Banks across the entire world must buy USD and hold those dollars in reserve. In exchange, we use that money to maintain military bases all across the world. I personally find it sick, but, maybe that's just my natural aversion to murder? Iraq wasn't invaded (twice) for the fun of it. That's the nice thing about having the reserve currency - when you invade a country, all you have to do is set up that countries Central Bank and before you know it, those citizens will be paying an income tax on their labor - some of which will be used to buy more USD.
3) I think this link will do a better job of explaining early monetary systems in the USA:
Encyclopedia of American History: Revolution and New Nation, 1761 to 1812, Revised Edition, vol. III.
http://www.fofweb.com/History/MainPrintPage.asp?iPin=EAHIII263&DataType=AmericanHistory&WinType=Free
4) I wasn't quite sure as to if we agree that the initiation of force by one group of people against another group of innocent people is immoral?
5) I have no problem with people using USD so long as that use if done voluntarily. That fact that a gun has to be pointed at one's head, suggests we don't actually 'want' to use USD. See, that's the underlying assumption when violence is used. If a person is raped, it's assumed that violence was necessary to ensure the action (sex) occurred and that without the initiation of force, the action (sex) would never have happened. Phrases like "social good" or "go live in Somalia" or "You use the roads" or "good of society" will never turn rape into love. If people actually 'want' a good or service, then with Law, Private Property Rights and Sound Money - they will freely trade with one another to provide that good or service.
Sadly, a lot of people want the good or service - but they want it for free. I don't even think it's possible to be elected in the USA without promising to give your electorate something for 'free'. And government does a horrible job of providing value for money because there's no market to determine the correct price.
While the sad state of the union didn't happen overnight, what made it possible was income tax and fiat currency. By poisoning our society with fiat/force currency, each and every trade made is itself subject to a small bit of that violence. Little by little. Decade by decade. And, here we are. Spending $8.5 trillion murdering women and children in Iraq, poisoning some of their cities in a way that one UN report state "absolutely destroyed the genetic integrity of the population of Iraq" due to radioactive dust that will never leave this earth in human-kind's lifetime. $50 billion wasted each and every year on the Department of Education and math and reading comprehension are worse than before the Dept was formed (1979). In some schools 2/3rd drop out and of the 1/3 that graduate 50% are functionally illiterate.
Here's some facts:
- The US Government wastes more energy than any other entity in human existence.
- The US Government imprisons a larger percent of "Its" population than any other country (including North Korea).
- The US Government is the largest polluter in the history of humanity.
- The US Government started out LIMITED - and thanks to amending the US Constitution to make both income tax legal and bringing in a central bank, is now the LARGEST government ever.
- The US Government spy's on, us, "It's" citizens - in direct violation to its own constitution (thanks to the Orwellian named "Patriot Act").
The US Government regulates almost all aspects of our lives.
It rewards the upper middle class with rent-seeking licencing, limits, quotas, tax breaks, regulations - you name it, all of these harm the poorest. Which is why we've seen both poverty rise with productivy when it should be decreasing. Before the US Government waged a "War" against poverty, poverty was on course to be eliminated. Within a few years of trying to prevent poverty, and the declined stopped. See, this is the politicians do. They look for a natural trend (reduction in poverty due to the free market, then they pretend like there's a problem and that government is going to 'help' by waging a 'war' against it. They enjoy a couple election cycles as the previous trend continues (but slows) and then leave the mess to the next generation as poverty reverses thanks to government help and increases. Oh, that's great - for a bureaucrat, more money, power and influence in his/her department.
Believe me, I know exactly how these system work.
Anyway, there's nothing that can be done. The American people want to live in a delusion where rape is love. So, we simply have to wait for the inevitable to happen as history, once again, repeats itself.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
I'm still not sure what you're getting at.
Premise: Initiation of force against innocent people is immoral.
Question: Is killing people immoral? Well, if it's in true self-defense, suppose someone is attacking you with a knife and you shoot them. Well, that person is violating your private property rights (damaging your body) and therefor is no longer 'innocent' and thus it is perfectly moral for YOU to kill them. And it was perfectly immoral for THEM to kill you.
When you say 'vacuum' you're using an analogy. There is no real vacuum here. If we're going to have a field called "Ethics" then we have to agree to some basic definitions - such as what is and is not moral behavior. Notice here I explicitly stated behavior, meaning that 'thoughts' are themselves amoral. Perhaps a question for aesthetics? The point being, we're must have concrete agreed upon definitions or there is no Ethics and thus no way to study morality. Well, that's no good - to me anyway.
RE: monopolies and the State
This is quite interesting! Given the State IS a monopoly. It has a monopoly on violence. Not to mention the State 'runs' all sorts of monopolies - for the great benefit of those 'public servants' who run them (often poorly). The fact is, in a free market, monopolies are nearly impossible to maintain and to maintain a monopoly the person running it has to keep prices extremely low. This may be bad for competition, but it's actually great for the buyer. The only true monopoly in the USA was aluminium. However, other near 'monopolies' (like oil) did exist. In each instance, when the 'monopoly' was busted up - the price went UP. Not down. Up. Something interesting about free markets.
We do not need a State. People can choose to do business with a small competitor and pay the higher price. But, most people don't. Walmart sells stuff cheap. They service the poor. Something to think about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Multiple types of currencies.
I have money in USD, when I'm in Japan and buy something in a Japanese convenient store - they want JPY, not USD. The credit card I use, effortlessly does the conversion at the point of transaction. It's pretty easy with today's technology - and could even be done freely (crypocurrencies).
RE: No money to buy goods and services.
In a free society, with a free market, people are prosperous and they are able to buy insurance against loss of employment or healthcare or as a homeowner. BUT, yes, charity could be an option. As a matter of fact, if we truly live in a representative democracy, then it must be that most people want the poor cared for. If not, then a republic would never afford to do so via a public institution. Right? Therefor, let's cut out the over-priced middle man and spend our money directly helping the poor.
As an example, most people buy groceries (as opposed to growing their own food). If the grocery store required everyone to purchase membership to buy food, and some of that was used for charity, this is then a voluntary way for society to provide money to help the poor. The difference being violence is not initiated against the public. Instead, if you have no membership, then you must shop elsewhere.
No one said freedom was easy - but I'm confident we can Ethically come up with solutions.
RE: Inflation
I have no problem with someone inflating their currencies value to 1/2 or even to zero. So long as we are not forced to use it. It's really that simple. But, of course, no one would use a State currency because they're so poorly managed. Which is why the State must use the gun to force us to pay a tax when we work.
There is no free lunch.
RE: Big State in the future
Because governments are so inefficient and deliver an inferior product (good or service) at a bloated price, I think people will want less and less to do with them. Also, I assume society will become less violent as time progresses and will thus, have an innate revulsion of government. That's assuming the State doesn't bankrupt itself and collapse to be replaced by something far worse. Governments can deal with low complex system, such as an agricultural society, but not with highly complex interconnect societies - such as ours. By the time government figures out what to do with MySpace, no one even uses it. And no one needs no wants Government screwing thing up more than it already does. Or so I think anyway.
Like I said: We'll see.
RE: Automation
I think automation will make more jobs, not less. Stop and think about sunlight and atmosphere. Imagine if these were made by people - as in, people were employed making light and air. Are we less well off because sunlight and air are free? Is there less work to do? Or do we enjoy those free resources and go on to create work for other desires we have? Humans will IMO have endless desire - thus, there will always be work to be done. And so long as resources are limited, we're need a market to distribute them. Free markets are not only moral, but do this the most efficiently.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Competing currencies
If the small price we have to pay to live free is to bring a smart phone as a calculator - then it's a price worth paying. The fact is fiat is force. This IS what the word means. By decree. IOWs, the barrel of a gun. If you don;t like crypto, that's fine, use gold, silver, donuts, USD, whatever - just don't point a gun at someone and say pay.
RE: Charity
We can construct society to make it difficult to diffuse responsibility. Will that take a bit of work? Sure, a bit. Not that much. Even a grocery card requirement to enter a store would be enough for most people to pay. Publishing names of tight arses could be another. The point is we CAN structure society without a gun.
RE: Medicine
I personally know how the system works. The most successful people who work for public institutions are successful because they focus on climbing the ladder and couldn't give two shits about their jobs. It's also endemic at very very large private companies (like MS or GM). I understand why your 3rd most likely reason to die is by healthcare - it's because of rent-seeking. Plain and simple. Once the AMA took control of Rx, the die was cast then and there.
I'm a research doctor, we work long hours and are not paid that much - relatively speaking, given the time commitment. Speaking of which, I'll start putting in 60+ hour weeks from yesterday forward, so, I may not be able to write much in a reply.
RE: Violence
Statistically we are less violent. Compare with the last 100 years and the deaths are dramatically lower. Compare across 200 years and again, much much lower. But yes, people are still easily led to war. Most people are actually quite primate like in many (if not most) of their actions. Most people have no idea what logic is, let alone how to think with it - or accept it's conclusions. Most people just live life on a sort of autopilot - not thinking at all.
RE: Automation
In a sense we've come back to sound money. With sound money, as productivity gains are made, we need less money to buy things. Thus, we need to work less hours. Which is actually true even now (well, not for me, but for most people). It used to be people got up at 5am and worked till dusk. Now we have time for leisure - even weekend off. If we continued to enjoy the gains in productivity, then we'd work less and less and less. Sadly, we work more than we have to and only enjoy a fraction of our productivity gains as there's a huge unproductive class of people who control our money and steal our productive gains from us. They'd be public servants. They just spend $8.5 trillion losing two more wars.
With sound money (only achievable by currency competition) maybe we'd be working 10 hours a week by now and envying the rest of the time with family. So, automation may indeed destroy our society as the federal government expands to consume all that extra productivity gains while leaving anyone not a public servant out in the cold - or, more likely, as cannon fodder. I mean, there's a job a bureaucrat would come up with to 'help' the public.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Currency
No, you'd swipe your phone or CC across an electronic scanner at the checkout and the currency would be transacted then and there. It'd actually be faster than using paper. And, I'm not saying you can not use paper. Use it if you want to. I'm only saying no more income tax giving the USD an unfair advantage.
RE: Tax is force
The Whiskey Rebellion was a horrible horrible incident, Washington greatly regretted it and Hamilton was a jerk-off no one listened to. It was he that wanted a Central Bank. He's the one that wanted the POTUS to be for life (and Senators). Hamilton basically wanted to recreate the English aristocracy in the USA. Not a single FF supported him following his 6 hour speech. So he signed the US constitution and left to NY.
IS all tax force? Is a toll a tax? Is an entry fee a tax? I suppose it depends on how you use the word tax. But, if it requires force against innocent people, then it is immoral.
RE: Medicine
Ladder climbing versus wanting to do a good job. Well, if you spend all of your energy ladder climbing, then you'll likely make it up higher on the ladder than some poor schmuck trying to do a good job and hoping to be rewarded for it. In a private world you could see a sales report and promote based on that - this doesn't happen much in rent-seeking industries as the market is captive (medicine). The Government is one big rent-seeking enterprise/gang.
RE: wage growth
That's a complicated topic. It takes a long time for things to work through the system. What happens in 1980 had its roots far far back in time.
For example, privately schooled kids was the norm, but public schools would have enjoyed the skill base from privately weeded-out tested high quality private schooled teachers when they first opened up. It'd then take up to 40 years before the private school teachers left (retired) and they would have hand picked the public schooled teachers and slowly slowly a hundred years creeps by and you're left with some lousy public school teachers. It that so happens on Clinton or Bush or X's watch as POTUS, it obviously had nothing at all to do with them.
The USA enjoyed the riches of the country (natural resources) and the free markets for a long long time. It takes a LOT of screwing up the markets to destroy all that wealth. Also, WWII created an artificial situation whereby the USA was the only one left unscathed.
Anyway, it's estimated that had regulated only remained at the level of 1949, we'd all be earning the equivalent of $380,000 a year. I don't think you realize how much rent-seeking has taken place during the lifetime of the babyboomers. Not to mention that they sold massive numbers of bonds on their children's labor, grandchildren and great great grandchildren's labor. Of course, life was pretty good for them. They're the richest generation of people to have graced the earth.
1
-
yourkie1921
That's why I said, you're free to use USD (heck, that may even be the price on the label) and in that way you'd be perfectly accommodated in depreciating USD up until another more valued currency displaces it. The price in USD will be adjusted just as it currently is, where you'll lose 2-9% of your labor through a hidden inflation tax each year. I'm certainly not saying you cannot use USD. Only that you'd also have the option to point your smart phone at an item and have it translated into the price while walking in along the aisles in the store.
This is the nice thing about 'freedom' you get lots of options, and if you're in the majority, then free people will work very hard to serve you by offering you whatever services you desire (at a fair price in sound money).
As for force and tax.
If force is required to pay a tax, then the solution is not to tax. It's that simple. It means we need to work on other ways to service those needs. Which will mean a LOT of restructuring society (I don't' think it's going to happen any time too soon - people prefer violence and they're normalized not to see it - just like during Slavery. Then, 99% of everyone thought Slavery was 'normal' and not as violent).
If you drive past a toll both, you're violating someone's private property and they have every right to morally use force to protect their property - at the point you drove onto their property, you were no longer innocent. That same would be true of your body. If someone just reaching into your pants, you'd have every right to use force to stop them. You own you body. You own your toll road.
RE: Teachers
No, I'm saying that in a free-market (say 100 years ago) education was a service you paid for - thus you demanded a high quality product. Now it's a public service and (like public housing or public anything) there is no competition and no price mechanism to determine value. Thus, there's a lot of unionization, rent-seeking, and box-ticking. Thus, we have an extremely harmful public school system that produces pretty low value for what it costs and is damaging generation after generation of children - actually, our entire society is distorted due to this very unnatural harmful process.
I was thinking today, it must have seemed like a good idea 100 years ago, when someone said, hey look at this "new" assembly line making cars, lets combine that with public schools militaristic foundations and apply that 'assembly line' process to education.
A child's education is the one thing you actually DO want custom hand-made and do NOT want mass produced. I personally think something like Montessori or Unschooling would be the best way to go (or even homeschooling if you could find secular resources).
Here's a link to a commentary (they have the link to the Journal of Economic growth if you'd like to read the primary literature).
http://reason.com/archives/2013/06/21/federal-regulations-have-made-you-75-per
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: 2-9%
It depends on what's your buying. Home prices used to be 1/3rd of 1 years wage (1950s). University was easily covered by a summer job. Ect...
RE: Smart phone
Maybe? It'd depend on the business. Again, this is the thing about living in a 'free' society - if there are enough people, or you are willing to pay a lot, the service you desire will be provided to you within the law, with sound money and ensuring private property is protected. Do I "know" what a society not based on sticking a gun in someone's face would look like? Nope. I'm not saying I do. I'm simply saying such a society would be (by definition) moral and more prosperous (time + civil liberty) relative to the one we live in that is founded on violence, fiat money, loss of self-ownership and now personal privacy.
You certainly don't have to worry about a moral society based on voluntarism arriving any time too soon - it's not.
While I appreciate your concerns over not needing a smart phone, but, again, that's not my argument. I'm only arguing that a society based on voluntary (freedom) interaction using sound money (derived through competition) within the law that protects private property (self-ownership) is preferable to the current one based on a foundation of violence. "I" didn't come up with this idea, the first time I had read about it was when reading Immanuel Kant. But, the idea of freedom being preferable to force and the role of the State as that force has been discussed for thousands of years (Socrates drinking hemlock comes to mind).
People like violence - so, violence we have, and violence we will continue to have. While this is disappointing, it's part and parcel of living in a primate society at this current level of social development.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Unionization
I have no problem with 'private' unions. I have a huge problem with 'public'/violence-based unions.
Did you know the New York city major is preventing three new Charter Schools from opening even though thousands and thousands of 'Citizens' want to voluntarily send their children there? Why? Public teachers unions. Many public schools need to force children to attend in NY - that's how horrid the education has become. So, schools in NY city will not be determined by real democracy (parents choosing where to send their offspring to be educated), but instead by the decision of one single bureaucrat as enforced by real guns, with real bullets carting people away to real cages if they don't do what this "Civil Servant of the People" tell them to do.
Worse still, once you get enough special interests - like Public School Union-ed Teachers, they can support the election of people to the State and turn it's violence against other 'Citizens' as well as their children. That's exactly what has and is happening right here and now - today.
Only the State has the power to remove even this choice from the parent. Public Unions are very very very different from Private Unions. They are abominations to the entire ideal of freedom and democracy.
Not that it matters, people like violence, and so more violence we will get. Of course, violence must be called something other than what it is. I know, let's call it "The Will of The People" and appeal to "Democracy".
sigh what a travesty. Oh, well, just history repeating itself - again.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Toll road
Yes, this is true. You are not allowed to cut across your neighbors yard/property on your way to work.
Would there ever come a day when someone somehow bought up all this land to put in a toll road and then charged everyone a ridiculous amount? I don't think it's possible in a free society. Firstly, they'd have a shit-storm of a public relations campaign. Secondly, their investors would be pissed as this project would hemorrhage money as people elected to drive via alternate routes. If worse came to worse, people would move away as well as switch to a currency not owned by the person who built the road, then they'd refuse to do business in any other currency - thereby driving the entire 'capital' of that person to zero.
No one said living freely was simple - but, I am willing to give it a try.
Would it be possible to buy up all the land around you to make one big toll road? Maybe. Maybe not. Try and remember that all roads that are public, would have been owned years and years ago by private people - including you when you bought your home. I'm sure road ownership would have been one of your concerns and so when you bought your home you'd have made sure it came with toll-ownership and long-term arrangements ensuring if ever a magical toll road was built around you, you'd be compensated 10 times the value of your property.
See how nice it is to live with contract law and self-ownership?
Now, I thought of that in 10 seconds, my guess is, given hundreds and hundreds of years, someone could come up with something even better.
Yes, living in our current violence based society, freedom must seem pretty scary. And, you needn't worry, it isn't coming anytime too soon - exactly the opposite is my guess.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Homeschooling
Have you ever met kids who were home-schooled? These kids are some of the most honest nicest kids you'll meet. Also, they're often very well educated. With the internet, they actually access to much more variety of information rather than just the lowest common denominator of a public school teacher (many of whom weren't exactly the brightest kids at university - hence the desire for a 'cushy' public job with good benefits and summers off).
Homeschooled kids do suffer from a over brainwashing of superstitious non-sense, much the same way public schooled kids suffer from brainwashing of belief in the State.
Up until the last 100 years, kids were mainly educated at home - you'll find society did just find whether in the USA, Europe, China, India or Japan. If anything, IMO, public schooling is destroying society as it give kids the idea they're learning, when in reality they're just passing assessment items.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Charter Schools
I agree, these are funded through bond sales and other taxes. I only gave chartered schools as an example of the state picking winners and losers based on public unionization and it's ability to mobilize enough people to turn the state against the very citizens these public 'servants' are meant to 'serve'. You had asked me vis-a-vie unionization.
RE: What if a voluntary society is worse? That's a good question. Maybe this is true. Or maybe it depends on the cycle society finds itself in at the time. Certainly, selling bonds on their children and grandchildren greatly enriched the silents/babyboomer generations. Of course, now those children have to repay those bonds. So, for the generation with the gun, life was good. For the generation with the gun to the head, not as good. As a matter of fact, X/Y and millennial generations will be the first generations to be less prosperous than their parents. One could argue, that had a person with a bigger gun been in charge, perhaps he/she could have used that gun to prevent the babyboomer's from selling out their children to the State and it's bankers. It's also true that they could somewhat enslave a generation of children through private property legislation. Yes, an immoral despicable group of people will not make a very good society to live in - free or otherwise.
I'm of the mind that in a voluntary society, mechanism evolve that reinforce the 'good' aspects of human 'society' because the only way (and ONLY way) to make money is through voluntarism - so you actually have to offer value for money. If someone is 'cheating' then society will work to create peaceful means of dealing with this person. Even if it means resorting to a new currency and cutting the person out of free-trade.
Anyway, this isn't something we need to worry about too soon.
RE: Service if you're willing to pay a lot.
Yes, this is how it works. What do you care if there's a few services you can't afford?! Believe it or not, most people make much more money servicing the masses - not the elite (at least in a free society with a large middle class). Walmart serves the poor. Starbucks serves the poor. McDonld's serves the poor. Google serves the poor. The goal is to serve as many people as possible making a small amount on each trade that adds up.
If a new product comes out that only the rich can afford (the first personal computers) that's wonderful, because with each sale to a rich person capital is reinvested to eventually make this product available to the masses. With no 'rich' person - then there'd be no high-end products.
RE: Passing a test
The hippocampus can store short-term (erasable) memory for a month or so. More than enough time to pass a test and never had actually learned (made an engram in the cortex) anything. MCQ make it even worse as you only need to sort of 'guess' an answer.
I'm sure you do learn a little in public school - just not much, and certainly not $20-30,000 a year worth of learning and worse still, not only is the quality low, but the environment is horribly unsuitable for human social interaction. It's extremely artificial, unhealthy and is perpetuating many of the problems we already see in society.
Public schools were sold to the masses as a 'free' means to get an education - in reality they are propaganda machines that pump out worker cogs, over-supplying the market with labor-hours driving down the price per hour and helping to further perpetuate our hyper-regulated rent-seeking markets and destroy what little's left of civil society (not much).
RE: "Free" roads.
We pay much much more for 'free' roads than if roads were privately owned. As an example, think of the mall. Some malls you pay a minor parking fee. Other's it's a free service. The mall overs you free food samples, free airconditioning, free wi-fi, free roads (lanes to walk along), free free free. BUT, it's not really 'free' persay, it's paid for out of rent which is paid for out of sales. Yet, through all this voluntarism, you get a decently run mall that's relatively accommodating. The free roads the State owns actually cost a ton of money and kill about 60,000 people a year. Not to mention in many "Public" housing 'services' the roads are so dangerous even the police don't venture down them.
Will you be 'trapped' in your house not able to enter a road? Well? Do you feel trapped? Because you are trapped. You're paying for those roads - and if you don't pay, you will be taken off those roads. You may not feel trapped, but you are. And you are paying. You're paying in property tax, state tax, federal tax, local tax, inflation tax, bond "tax', etc... and you're pay way way way more than if those roads were private.
RE: Regulation
I agree we can not know. That's the thing about human society - there is no way to rewind the clock on do a repeat. Thus, I suggest when given a choice, we error on the side of more, not less, civil liberty and personal freedom. My reading of history suggests more freedom, as opposed to less freedom, leads to more prosperity.
Prosperity is defined as free-time (leisure) + personal freedoms (civil liberties). We lose both of these on an almost daily bases. The fact is, people don't want to be free. I blame the public school system for creating this way of thinking. Instead of creating independent free people, we're creating a dependent people who abhor freedom. Worse still, in order to perpetuate this top-down gun-in-the-face society, we must give up more and more privacy in order for the State to better model (and it does a crap job) of our subjective experiences. Only sound money, law, private property and freedom will give us prosperity. We use fiat currency, are lawless, lost self-ownership and live in a very very very hyper-regulated rent-seeking market.
I read that since the State bailed out it's banks, America is now a nation of renters. Exactly what could have been predicted the day the State said it was going to 'help' the poor with housing. This is what happens when we resort to the gun-in-the-face. The State always produces the opposite. Since starting the "War on Drugs" to "Help" the poor - we've become the nation with the largest prison population in history and drug use is unaffected. Since starting the "War on Literacy" we now graduate functional illiterates from public "High" schools. Since starting the War on Terror - we lost our person privacy and the Orwellian named "Patriot" Act has overturned the 4th amendment.
Notice the State loves the use of the word "War".
War on Terror ($8.5 trillion and we lost),
War on Cancer ($X trillion, lost)
War on Literacy ($X trillion, lost)
War on Drugs ($X trillion, lost)
This is no accident - the State knows what the State is and what the State does. Violence. As our mother's taught us, don't hit, don't steal, use your words - violence doesn't solve anything.
She was right - and that was meant to be a life long lesson.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Elaborate on your problems with the schooling environment.
I think the book "Free to Learn" by Prof Peter Gray may explain schooling 'environment' better than I could.
RE: Roads
You seem to think you live in a world where you get to 'freely' leave your home. You do not. You pay a group of humans quite a lot of money to live in your house and even more to leave it and use their roads.
Many of the roads in Japan are private and tolled. Many parking lots are tolled. It's fine. People who own roads want you to be happy and use them. They certainly are not going to start 'trapping' people in their houses as this is a sure fire way to go bust in short order.
RE: Public vs Private
The government only differentiates itself from private in that it can initiate force against innocent people. That's it. A group of humans outside of government (e.g. a company) that charges exorbitant prices, has horrible PR will also find that this greatly matters as you stop 'voting' with your dollars. AND if we had sound-money (instead of fiat currency) your 'vote' would sink in deep and they'd work their arse off to please you. As for government, if you wanted what they are selling, they wouldn't NEED the force. Thus, they couldn't care less what you think or want - that's the reason they ARE government. If they cared, they'd be private. That's the whole thing we being public - it means you get to use force against innocent people, which is why we know they don't want it, because you're using force against them.
RE: Regulation
The Public school system is doing a great job of teaching children how to take unquestioningly take order, regurgitate useless facts, how to normalize to raising their hands to ask for permission from their 'educators' to go pee and how not to think logically or rationally. The very last thing a public school teacher wants is a highly educated child that is skeptical of people in positions of authority - ie, the teacher.
An e.g. of the outcome of our lousy public "education" is how easily it was for our incompetent public "servants' - the public 'officials' and 'lawmakers' who make up our mediocre 'government' tricked our docile ignorant public educated 'Citizens' into a $8.5 trillion dollar phony never-ending war - that it promptly lost. Or bailing out the richest 0.01% with generational debt.
Just to reiterate, the moral position I take is: Initiation of force against innocent people is immoral. It's really pretty straight forward. Yet, it upends our entire society, because we live in a fascist state whereby the State's government uses fiat currency, has a deranged legal system that deprives ITS Citizens of self-ownership and punishes adults for wanting to freely interact with one another (free markets). Whatever 'America' was 120 years ago - is not what it is now.
But, hey, at least some unknown unelected bureaucrat somewhere gets to waste $50 billion dollars per year (Bill Gates lifetime fortune) running the "Dept of Education". Year after year. That unknown unelected worse-than-useless bureaucrat is the difference between public and private. They did NOTHING to earn what it took Bill Gates a lifetime of hardwork to make - yet they effortless spend it each and every year.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Roads
You can only leave your house because you've paid the State Its property tax and a tax on any income you've earned.
Which is pretty funny given this is exactly what you were originally worried about (being forced to pay to leave your house). Well, it's worse, you have to pay JUST to live IN your house AND to leave it. You will not be using the State owned roads via leaving your house, because you will not have a house if you don't pay the State (it will work out to at least 50% of your productive income - or more)..
Also, you STILL have to pay for use of the State roads in rego, gasoline tax and sometimes tolls.
I'm only suggesting we transfer ownership of the roads from the State back to the Citizens. That way YOU own a portion of the roads. Of course, roads require some upkeep, and so you, along with everyone else, will need to negotiate how best to perform that without sticking a gun in one another's face. Is that possible? Maybe? Maybe not.
I personally suggest e-tolling, gasoline tax and private registration. Given public road accidents exceed half a million a year, just think how much better (and safer) they will be once returned the people.
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Slave
There is a similarity (not identical). Someone uses force against an innocent person to steal their labor. Even a Slave had some ownership rights.
The point is it's immoral to initiate force against innocent people. If we define Slavery as stealing a person's labor by force - then we are part Slave to the State. Which is why we are called Citizens OF the State.
If taxes were raised to 100%, this would become evident. But, even at 1% that's still part ownership.
RE: Japanese roads
Many toll roads are shortcuts under mountains. For example, you could drive around the mountain and take 40 min or through for $5 toll and it takes 12 min. There's private roads all over Japan. They also have lots of small businesses that'd never be 'legal' in the USA.
Not that Japan isn't totally messed up thanks to their State. But, being homogenous, they're able to make ti work better as most people are 'equal' you don't see ultra rich (even though there are plenty) due to social pressures. Japanese are excellent at voluntarily ostracizing members of society that don't work 'with' and 'for' the betterment of everyone (or are seen to be). All of that requires social cohesion that comes from being monocultureal - IMO. Which has it's downsides as well.
RE: Monopoly
(1) Have you actually read about monopolies? Only one private monopoly has existed in the USA and that was for aluminium.
(2) The USA government has a monopoly on force - the initiate of it against you. Yet, you seem to think this is fine?!? The State is literally taking 50% (probably higher) from you at the point of a gun, and you let this violence wash of you like water off a duck. I find that interesting.
You DO have to pay to leave your house - 50%+ of your income. It goes to the State. Don't pay, and you lose your house. Resist the State, you go to a cage.
I'd prefer to take my chances with private voluntarism personally, but, that isn't about to happen any time too soon.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Is a necessary evil impossible?
This sounds like an "Is vs Ought" question.
When I say 'Freedom' I'm referring to "Civil Liberties" and yes, with strong protected civil liberties you generally find you will have more free choices as well. Free markets with sound money generally maximize choice.
Yes, no one is sitting at home feeling like a slave. I'm sure you could make the same argument about North Koreans. They probably think they live in a great nation (maybe the greatest). They probably think they are 'free'. But, they are not free. Neither are we.
The US Constitution had to be amended to tax the labor of the worker. It runs counter to our entire system of government - which was supposed to be LIMITED.
Anyway, it doesn't matter now. The State regulated all markets, controls our currency by fiat, rules our lives in ways kings could only dream of. We are now at one of the lowest points in US history in terms of civil liberties. Thanks to the "Patriot" Act, the State even spies on us (again, against the US Constitution).
Yes, Americans truly hate freedom. So, that's the way things will be for a long time. You needn't worry at all about voluntarism. This nation isnt' going to become more free. We will become less free. As I said, Americans hate civil liberty. Hate it with a passion.
1
-
*****
You're making the argument again and again that you'd happily trade away some of your civil liberties for more 'choices'. This is what I mean by 'hating' freedom.
See, I would rather keep hold of my personal freedoms and hope that a society that granted such liberty was a fair minded people. Because, it really makes no sense that a violent people would (at the same time) be violent AND want to allow everyone to be free. They wouldn't. We live in that violent society - one that doesn't want people to live freely (maximize civil liberty) which make sense.
Americans hate liberty.
That IS America.
A freedom hating people at their worse. And that's just the way things are and will remain for a long long time. We will lose more civil liberty and become less prosperous at the same time. Expect to live in a much poorer America as time moves forward - one without any personal privacy where the State can come to take you away for other, newer, non-violent crimes (if drugs alter mental state - maybe we can make thinking illegal, I mean, isn't that why ant-drug laws are really about? Making mental states illegal?).
Yes, expect less personal privacy and less personal liberty. As for Taxes, we pay about 3 times more tax now than when living under a king. I expect that to move up to 5 times soon enough. If you think 30% of your labor can be taken by the State, how about 60% or 80% or maybe 100%. You know, for the 'good of society'.
I'd say America really only had some semblance of freedom from after the Civil War until 1913. Not very much if you stop think about it. We've never had a culture of being free, and so we're just reverting to our natural unfree ruled state, which is exactly how most Americans (and people) like to live.
American's much prefer to be owned as tax cattle by a ruling elite class than to dare live as a free people. Freedom requires to much work and is scary. Whereas being property is easy and not as scary.
1
-
1
-
*****
RE: Prosperity
Prosperity is defined as civil liberty (freedom) + free time.
Your argument is that we will gain more free time if we give up civil liberty. My argument is we will gain prosperity by gaining both free time AND civil liberty.
I will concede that under some circumstances you may be correct - in the short run. But, in the long run, distortions caused by using force will lead to a loss of both freedom and free time and that this is what we are seeing now, today.
Which is why babyboomers enjoyed a lot of wealth - but, that wealth came at the expenses of their children, grandchild and great grand children's prosperity.
So, yes, in the short run, I agree force (income tax) and a loss of civil liberty will create free time and seemingly create more prosperity, but this is not sustainable. As a matter of fact, this is the rise and fall of greatr nations throughout history, IMO.
1
-
1
-
Michael Gallo
(1)
Who said you'd have to go to prison for debt? I didn't say that. It'd be in your contract what the outcome would be (it may just be you don't get offered a loan and your name goes on a list of people not credit worthy).
(2)
Why wouldn't you donate to charity? Don't you tip?! Even if you don't. A lot of people actually do. In a prosperous society, one based on sound money, law, property rights (self ownership) and freedom, people become wealthy and do generally donate (or enough of them do). The government spends much much more on killing people than helping them. AND when it does "help" people, it's often poor quality and over priced (see: Public Housing).
(3)
I get this feeling you have a very poor picture of society. My feeling is this is your experience with the people around you. I'd suggest to you, that those people are the way they are due to progressive socialism. Free people generally value free trade and make for a better people.
In a free society, only free trades occur. Yes, if you volunteer to use a road - then that is a free trade, even if the road is just outside your home. If you don't own the property, then it isn't yours to access. The same is true of my body. No one has the right to use it for the public good. It's mine. If they vote to make it legal to use my body (say they take my kidney) then this may be legal, but it will be immoral. I maintain that a moral society is composed of better people than a society structured around violence. Can we know for sure? No. We'd need a society at our current technology to experiment with, we don't have one to do so. We only have ours.
IMO our fascistic society is getting worse, not better. As it get's worse, it becomes more progressive and more social and this leads to a downward spiral as we lose more and more civil liberty and become less and less prosperous. We also tend to lose free-time (as can be seen by the need of both parents to work instead of only one). We're going backwards. That's now I see it anyhow.
And, I don't think anything is going to change this. It's just the way things are and will be.
(4)
Income tax and the debt.
I'll have to do more research when I have time.
1
-
1
-
Sound money is an important aspect of a free society because (A) trading is based on a subjective mental construct of value and therefor to determine value for value you need to have a reliable trading devise (aka: money). If you've ever been to a different country, you'll suddenly realize you don't know if you're being ripped off or not when you're trading in 10 million of X currency for a coke-a-cola (B) Purposeful inflation is stealing. Stealing is immoral.
Take the example of the NFL stadium. Built in 1965 at a cost of $20 million, demolished in 1990, remaining debt to the children whose parents enjoyed that 'Free' NFL stadium? $40 million in remaining outstanding debt.
That is stealing. That is how one generation lives better than the next. By sticking their children with their debt. Thus, for the generation that got a free NFL stadium, they had money to spare and spent it on things that were unsustainable. Their children OTOH will go with out. They will work much long and for a lot less.
As for the pharmacist vs the drug dealer. Well, you may be surprised to know, prescription drugs kill more people than illegal drugs. Also, WHY should a 'free' person be forced to get a licence? Why? It's between the drug seller and the drug buyer. What right do you or I have to stand between two adults conducting a trade? The answer is we have no moral foot to stand on. The USA now houses more non-violent prisoners than the USSR did. It's sickening. You may also be surprised to know the AMA is working very hard to restrict Rx from even more people. It's called rent-seeking, and the AMA is loath to give up their Rx rent-seeking monopoly. You may also be surprised to know that medical 'care' is now your #3 likely reason to die. I'm certainly not surprised - given medicine is the most highly State 'regulated' industry. It cost way too much and the value is very low.
Stop and think about this one minute. Theoretically the AMA (a private group of MD professionals) would CARE about people in society. Yet, these same people are more than happy to see millions and millions of their 'fellow citizens' jailed for non-violent drug use in order to retain Rx rent-seeking opportunity. If 'doctors' are THAT immoral - just how do you expect other people to be? Well, take a look at Teachers Unions that strike when confronted with Charter Schools even attempting to offer a service/compete value for value. They threaten to shut down entire districts and stop teaching to keep their rent-seeking monopoly on "State" largess - that comes from unsound money. It literally brings out the very very worse in society. The worse of the worse. AND these supposed 'teachers' will stare you in the face and say they do it "For the Children".
Yes, indeed, they restrict education opportunity FOR the Children.
Believe me, giving the State the power to sell debt on the labor of the unborn is sick. Truly disgusting. It's no wonder we wage war for "Freedom" in places like Vietnam killing women and children and poisoning them with chemicals. Or wage war on "Terror" by terrorizing women and children in the ME. We are led by an immoral institution that used to be limited and is now, as history said it would be, the most powerful corrupt institution in the history of the humanity. With the power to wipe human life off this planet.
As they say, the fish rots from the head down. If you notice a smell emanating from outside - that's society.... rotting away.
The solution?
End Income Tax, the State will have no more ability to sell debt on children and slowly the Federal Reserve will crumble under the weight of it's own irrationality. Until then, expect the fish to continue to rot.... and there's plenty left to rot, so expect it to continue to do so for years and decades or more.
1
-
1
-
yourkie1921
RE: Free market medicine
In a free market, it would be up to gasp free people to determine whether or not they wanted to trade with someone who is 'certified' or not. That 'certification' would be the same as the ones we have today (an MD is a private certification - the AMA is a private organization/union membership). The only difference is that living in a free society people would be 'free' to determine who they went to see.
Suppose you cut yourself as a child. Should your mother be legally allowed to bandage that cut? What if you have a headach? Should your mother be legally allowed to give you pain medicine (aspirin)? If the AMA had their way, the answer would be no. And they'd use the State's security apparatus to enforce this 'law' as a part of their rent-seeking. Why? Certainly not to 'help the children' (although that's what they'd say).
The fact is, most MDs cannot remember most of their basic human physiology and when assessed most forget 85% of what they supposedly 'learned' within 5 years of leaving school. In short, they're just learning on the job. Many students of mine will go home and ask their parents about human physiology and then tell me "Why do I need to know any of this? My dad/mom can't remember anything and they run a successful practice".
Of course, I remind them, your #3 reason to die will be your healthcare itself.
In a free market/free society other certifications, pedagogues, etc... would arise IF this is something people wanted. AND health insurance would hire those that provided the most value. This can only be found in a free market. And yes, that means allowing even uncertified pharmacists into the market. It's that whole being 'free' that the USA was founded on. Sure, it's totally gone now, but - at one time Rx was free-market.
We live in a world were it's illegal to buy and prepare and sell food to adults without State certification/permission. And yet, we can for infants and children. Any thinking person can see how illogical this is. Yet, once normalized to this illogical law, most Americans will argue in favor of it. If anything, they'd argue to remove the right's of parents to prepare food and feed it to their children. Seriously, if the TV told them a parent once, somewhere, they overheard someone say the someone might have killed their children by not preparing food properly, I bet you most Americans would vote to make food preparation by parents without State certification illegal.
Most Americans hate freedom afterall. And most Americans will only think what their TV tells them to think. And, that's it. IOWs they don't think. Combine not liking to think with hating freedom and you get modern day America.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** And Australia had a 15-25 year mining boom that happens once every thousand years or so. No other country has benefited to the degree of AU during China's socialist collapsed economy of starving farmers on State farms to massive capitalistic industrialization. That boom STILL left poverty rates in AU around 20%. As a matter of fact, many economists suggest AU was the worse managed economy of ALL comparable resource based economies. Come back to AU in 10 years AFTER the boom has ended (which it just ended last year).
As I said, I have family in AU. I've lived in AU. I know all about AU and what its like to live there. Almost everyone I know are desperate to move to the USA.
Look, no one wants people to be poor. Artificially raising the price of labor isn't going to change anything in the long run. What we need is a return to civil liberties, massive downsizing of the government, more free-markets and in this way businesses will compete for labor-hours and thus labor will rise in value as its supply is limited. Raising the price to $15 or $25 an hour just raises the prices of everything else. Most Australians I know are living week-to-week trying to make rent with ZERO hopes of ever owning a home. A small little dump in AU will run $350,000 - 500,000. And I'm talking dump.
Anyway, as I said, I don't care if private people want to unionize, just don't FORCE everyone to join and let free people make other free choices as to where they want to work and where they want to shop.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Leland Somers Reich Winger. Nice, did you make that up? Here, let me give you a clue: National Socialist German Workers' Party.
I've lived in 5 different countries and I've seen the media pander to people like you in all 5. Slightly different in many ways, but always some sort of right vs left paradigm.
It makes simpletons like you easy to predict and control. Either they feed into your religious superstitious nonsense or they tell you you're special and being oppressed. Or something similar. Whatever your cognitive biases are, they feed you. AND you eat it up. Just as you are now.
So, do like you're expected to do and vote Hilary once the Progressive party picks her over Bernie The Progressive Fascist. Then whine in 8 years when things are worse of a mess than even Bush or Junior O-blah-ma made. Oh, and make sure you blame the GOP or Libertarians or whomever.
Rinse.
Repeat.
As for the babyboomers, I don't blame 'them'. They're not a person, they're a generation. However, that generation took more than it's fair share though T bonds, tax scams and etc... Now they're even shafting their grand kids with the medical bills. They have, collectively, about 18 trillion in assets. Well, they invented Public Welfare, you know, to 'take care of people', so, it's only reasonable they enjoy the fruits of their labor.
Not the ideal solution, but THEY have the wealth. Millennials are actually negative in terms of equity. Most Gen X/Y have next to nothing. Or, we can sink into 3rd world status. Which is probably the more likely.
1
-
Leland Somers This isn't about 'You". It's a statistical empirical FACT that babyboomers own most assets. In total, they own over 80% of everything. Further, babyboomers sold trillions and trillions of dollars in T bonds (30 year) and municipal bonds (some up to 50 years) to pay for all the services they consumed without every paying back. Now they (as a generation) have the gall to bailout their 401K and pension funds on the backs of their grandchildren by selling even more T bonds, a lot of which will be used to pay for their medical and healthcare expenses. Not to mention many work in highly paid (by tax dollars) public institutions where they gave themselves great benefits.
Most of those billionaire parasite are also babyboomers and many got rich selling cheap made in China crap to other parasitic babyboomers. If there is a fault in Capitalism it's the it allows the bottom feeders to express their bottom of the barrel will on the entirety of society. The call it pop culture for a reason. If you're not paid much, then this is because society doesn't value when you are selling. You needn't blame some abstract concept like Capitalism for why people around you don't want to pay you much - the answer is much closer to home.
If you think the billionaire under 55 age class has the money to pay for all this, you're living in la la land. Thus, IF we're going to tax anyone, it's going to be over 55. It's called Progressive income tax for a reason, and our Progressive central bank, given to us by Progressives, is meant to do just this - redistribute from those that have the most (over 55) to those that have the lease. Those under 55.
So suck it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lee Douglas How is her living in the same house, vs a house across the street going to prevent her from working on "white house policy' (incidentally, the role of the POTUS is fairly detailed in the US Constitution, I'm not sure where 'white house policy' is listed - I haven't seen it, it's not there as a matter of fact). CONgress writes a law, he approves it or does not approve it. Well, now that POTUS has assumed a bunch of other powers, not granted to him/her, yes, there could be more on his plate. Too bad we didn't have the LIMITED government we started with. Anyway, other than sticking the tax payer with more bills, again, I fail to see what his daughter living in the same house or across the street is going to matter? As AMOF it won't. Funny how the Clintons, a couple broke hillbillies from LItttle Rock ended up running for office and made 1.2 billion for their 'charity' and not a peep from the left. Talk about hypocrisy. At least Trump actually made his money.
1
-
1
-
Actually, the term "The Government" is often used in a ways it doesn't exist. One of the biggest problems I have with this channel, is ideas like 'free university' or 'free healthcare'. I've heard these phrases right on this channel, coming right out of your mouth.
I'd also note, Government only delineates itself from other groups of humans within our Nation State, by having the legal right to initiate violence against morally innocent humans, mostly citizens of the nation state. Taxation is a very inefficient means of relocating resources (money is only the tool of account, we actually use fiat currency). Finally, there is no 'social contract'. Do you have a copy of this contract? Jesus, 'social contract' is the Atheists equivalent of a Theists concept of Religious Tenants with Government playing the role of God. Complete with Bishops replaced with Senators and the Pope played by POTUS.
This is the trend: Big God, Little Government. Little God, Big Government. Essentially, "The Government" fills the same need as "The God" does, only for atheists. And I'm a strong Atheist, the data shows this quite clearly to be the case and is why most Communist States were secular.
1
-
I understand your argument, and it's an example of equivocation. You're redefining what free means, to mean something other than the manner in which it is used by politicians to garnish votes. It's actually more expensive when Government provides the service because you also have to pay for the means of redistribution. The Government masks this by selling T-bonds. In our case, 20 trillion and counting. This requires an ever expanding tax base - which is why European socialistic programs are failing and why they are attempting to use migration to replace their tax base. Which, is not going to work for t
If politicians were honest, they would say, taxpayer funded university. They don't normally say this. They instead say 'free University' and 'free Healthcare' or 'Universal Healthcare'. They also don't explain to voters how, over time, the costs will go up, and the quality will go down. They also don't explain to voters, that countries with homogeneous societies (like Japan, where my daughter was born) have private hospitals - which is the option we chose. In a privately owned hospital, with 1 month stay, and delivery, the total cost was $5500. In Australia, another country with a public option (that I have also used - and believe me, the last place you want to find yourself is in an Australian public hospital) the cost was $12,500 just for the delivery alone. There is no way the 1 month stay would have happened. They would never pay for that, probably my daughter would have died. Not only is the quality relatively low in AU, the costs are skyrocketing, and the tax payer is expected to pick up more and more of the bills. Because the tax payer is running out of money, AU has a decently large immigration program and also has a much low quality education. Resources are diverted from higher education and other social services, to pay for the 'free' university.
Why do you suppose the costs are lower in Japan for a private hospital, than a public Australian hospital? Any ideas?
Also, education was 'free' in Australia, and it's relatively shit compared to the USA. Very low quality. Why do you suppose that is the case? I know, because I have worked in the USA and in AU - as well as China, New Zealand and Japan. For many years I have lived in a few of these countries and I understand their systems and ours very well. Ours if broken, primarily, due to Government regulation - which has led to a large amount of rent-seeking on the part of service providers. I see no way to back the train out of that tunnel.
That said, we're the leader in biotechnology. Far far ahead of everyone except Germany and Japan. Where we still dominate them.
Lastly, there is no 'social contract'. Again, this is the Atheist's version of Religious Tenants. With the Government playing the role of God. Many studies have shown atheists overwhelmingly support governmental programs, more so than the general population - probably for the same psychological reasons why theists believe in God. 'The Government' fills that physiological need. Which is why we'll (unfortunately) have large government long into the future. Probably making all of our lives for the worse through promises of free stuff (Santa Claus effect) when in reality it comes at a huge cost.
Anyway, you appear to have all the answers. So, there's no point rehashing these arguments.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Remon Damen It may be that the private sector is less efficient, but, the problem is, the private sector isn't a free market. And the more likely answer is the private sector is engaged in rent-seeking. In Japan, the Government deals with this by naming and shaming the rent-seekers scamming the consumer and then punish them with drastically lower legal prices the following year. Of course, Japan isn't a free market either, and I only mention this as evidence of rent-seeking, even in Japan; where your family name carries a lot of weight. The solution is to reduce regulation, eliminate forced licencing, and allow the private sector to qualify and licence and then leave it up to the consumer to determine who to buy goods and services from through their insurance company. This will reduce costs while raising quality.
As for black and white. I do not think the the free market is 'perfect'. I'm not sure what you mean by that? A free market is free people forming relationships (in this case trading). Suppose we were talking about marriages. Free people forming relationships ending in divorces is >50%. Well, that's life. I certainly don't want the Government to determine who I can marry. Also, I wouldn't say this isn't or is perfect. The adjective 'perfect' doesn't really fit. Nor does it when referring to 'the market' (which is just an analogy for free people trading).
1
-
beyondathought
Have you read any further analysis of the actual data? As far as I have read, the full data is available for anyone to analyse. As a matter of fact, once data is published the authors agree to make the data available to anyone else for analysize. The data that supposedly was left out, wasn't really left out. It was combined for an average. It has subsequently been analyzed and appears that, with the exception of a small window in the age of male African american children, there doesn't appear to be an effect of the vaccine on population increase or decrease in autism.
Is it possible? Yes. It's possible fertilizer, day care, food coloring, shampoo, etc.... could have an effect on children becoming autistic.
You suggest that this is to save money? Why would that be the case? The company owns the patent. The company would simply pass an additional costs on to the buyer. So, no, this isn't being done to save company's money. It's be done to save the public money though.
I think this scientist is possibly a crack pot, possibly seeking revenge, possibly going to sell something (book, stocks, who knows) or maybe really believes what he says.
If all of these other scientists who were on the paper were aware of this falsification, why haven't they come forward?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** "unfettered capitalism"
LOL... the USA adds millions and millions and millions of lines of regulation every single year. As a matter of fact, there's so many lines of regulation no one can tell you how many laws and regulations there are - let alone how many lines of regulation there are.
Depending on the State you live in, you can't even sell arranged flowers without a licence, you can't cut hair, you can't fix computers, and onward it goes. The USA has hyper-regulated markets. NOT 'unfettered'. Not to mention, the State issues our currency - as it's fiat. It requires it's citizens (us) to pay it in it's fiat currency a transaction tax on our labor.
Unfettered capitalism - get real. I'll tell you what, you go out to your front yard, put up a BBQ and start grilling and selling organic hotdogs without the million State licensees and permits and health and safety regulations you'll be in violation of - watch how quickly your ideas of 'unfettered capitalism' come to an end. Oh, but buy a franchise and you can easily sell FDA approved boiled ammonia washed HFCS infused pink-slime off cuts ground with bone meal and food coloring. You know, because the State worries about your health and wants to make sure you're looked after real well - as well as taking it's cut.
The FACT is the Progressives of the late 1800s brought the Central Bank into existence as well as Labor Tax. The problems of the USA's economy IS directly due to hyper-regulation and the central bank. But, don't worry, we're getting more central planning, more regulation, less privacy and less liberty. So, enjoy the Progressive Sociapathy. It's here to stay.
1
-
1
-
*****
Who said anything about a pure free-market?
We had a tradition of LIMITED government, sound money and law. Now we have massive Government, one that is spying on us, hyper-regulating all aspects of our lives, taxing laborers when they work and the accompanying Progressive Sociopathic 'Utopian' society that is inevitably derived from using force against innocent people.
The irony, the USA Government preaches all the free-market principles needed to lift the poor out of poverty - only to other nations. AND guess what, it works pretty well. They get wealthier. We get poorer.
The only fantasy here is the Progressive's magic-thinking that using State violence against free people is 'Good for Society'. Aside from the jingoistic tone of "Progressive Socialism" there's the fact it's predicated on violence against innocent people. It's an oxymoron.
Only an irrational boob or religious crank thinks it's "Progressive" to use the initiation of force against innocent humans is good for society.
The Progressives gave us our Central Banking cartel. The Progressives gave us our Progressive Income Tax. We are living in the inevitable outcome of their fantasy thinking. From their Progressive welfare slums to 'help the poor', to their Teacher Unions whose Government Schools graduate functional illiterates, to their never-ending-moral-wars. War on Poverty. War on Drugs. War on Privacy. And now a never ending War on Terror.
Our Founders of our State ensured it was LIMITED for a reason. The first 10 amendments protect us from the State. Not the rich - and there were plenty of rich then. But from the State. Why? Because the State is inherently immoral. It's legalized legitimate violence perpetrated against innocent humnans within a geographical area. The 'OF" in the phrase, Citizens of the United States denoted ownership.
Don't worry, we're getting more regulations and more State - do, you should be happy. Less free association/free-trade, hyper-regulated lives. Lets see how that works for us.
1
-
*****
The best option is Panarchism. I have no problem at all with Syndicalists attempting to get people to voluntarily create any society they like, so long as force is not used against anyone innocent and people are free to leave.
I feel most Anarchists who also espouse Socialism have never had the displeasure of hiring and dealing with loafers, thieves, slackers and incompetence. Have you ever had to fire someone because they didn't have the aptitude - they were simply inept? While it'd be nice to think anyone and everyone does their best, the fact is most don't. Or maybe they do, but it's not good enough.
That's the interesting aspect to these socialistic societies. Because inevitably, its the loafers, not the idealists, who end up running them. Loafers do have one skill - getting others to do their work for them and taking credit for it. And while I do think "loafing" is a good idea in the sense of working hard upfront to create something to save time later. But most loafers don't do this. They just loaf. They rise to the top - and destroy the institution they run.
The only option is to allow those institutions to collapse - and most socialist societies are loath to do this. Thus, society itself collapses.
Interestingly, most mediocrity don't think of themselves as being mediocre. They think they're, well.... damn good. But, in reality - they're mostly not that good. It's why we need a free market, sound money, and law. So that the impartial hand of the free-market can signal to these people letting them know, they're not good enough by putting them out of business. And while this may seem harsh, it's a fact of reality and it must be allowed to occur. Again, I don't think most socialists have had the required experience dealing with enough people of a wide enough variety to really see things as they truly are.
I've worked with hundreds of people, across multiple nations and cultures, at the highest levels of expertise - I can tell you, most people simply don't have what it takes, and most people over-value their own worth to the market. Most people think they're worth double (or more) what they're actually worth to the market. They're not the unique snow flake they think they are. And they're not that clever. Some are (and ironically they often under value themselves), but most aren't. I don't think socialists deal with this aspect of society very well as they want and think everyone will work as hard as they. Well, they won't. Not by a long shot.
1
-
*****
OK, suppose you have two people who want to work as surgeons.
- Person A is an incompetent idiot, lazy, and while they like the idea of working as a doctor they do not do well under stress and often make mistakes when under time pressure - they do not have mental aptitude to be a good surgeon.
- Person B is competent works hard and shows all the mental aptitude to deal with the stress and be a high functioning surgeon.
BOTH person A and B want to be doctors. However, there are only enough resources and time to permit the training of one of them. It's up to you to determine the value of each person's potential. What do you do?
I didn't say people do not have value - but not everyone produces the same amount of value to society. People are different and the value they offer to society is not the same. A computer programmer, medical research, surgeon or nuclear physicist is paid more relative to someone who rakes leaves, makes coffee or carries bricks because their labor, service or produce is valued MORE by society.
Again, I didn't say people have zero value. So don't put words in my mouth. But to pretend everyone's labor is of equal value is naive at best and grossly negligent at worse.
And don't pretend you don't make value judgements (or as you say "Price People"). You most certainly do. You didn't randomly choose the people you are close to and formed relationships with. You determined, based on your set of value-criteria, a value in a person and perused a friendship by investing your time and emotion. This doesn't mean you think the other's you neglected or refused befriend had no value - just not enough for you to take your limited time and effort to invest it in them.
You probably have a favored place to drink coffee/food/etc.. - you're not treating people 'equal', you are making value judgments all day every day (as you say: "pricing people"). While you can pretend you're not, that's simply being childish.
1
-
*****
I do admire that you discovered anarchism, given it's inherent moral structure. However, you have some misconceptions regarding value and society. You confuse working hard with providing value. You can labor all day raking leaves in the woods - but that labor is not valued by anyone. So, while it is true you are working hard, no one cares. Also, 'society' doesn't anything, it's not a thing. It's a meta concept and has little, if any, meaning. While a useful shortcut, I wouldn't frame anything actually important using it. People are not equal. Some are good at running, others are not. Some are good at mathematics, others are not. Some like to paint and are good at it, others are not. Some can hear perfect pitch, other can not.
I do not agree with how you use the word Capitalists - given you are one yourself. But, I understand your sentiment. Yes, the fascist Statists have done what they always do and the best course of action is pacifism. I for one plan to open a school sometime in the future. Maybe in the USA, but maybe Japan would be better. Japanese people are a bit more inclined towards anarchism in many ways. Whereas Americans prefer State-worship.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Blacks were actually doing BETTER than whites in some respects during the 1930-60s. For example, Blacks were more likely to have a job. Yes, that's true. Before minimum wage Blacks were often employed because they worked cheaper than whites. Also, Blacks had a lower divorce rate.
The entire reason we HAVE a minimum wage was so that poor whites could force poor blacks out of the work force.
Here's a QUOTE from John F Kennedy:
"Of course, having on the market a rather large source of cheap labor depresses wages outside of that group, too – the wages of the white worker who has to compete. And when an employer can substitute a colored worker at a lower wage – and there are, as you pointed out, these hundreds of thousands looking for decent work – it affects the whole wage structure of an area, doesn’t it? "
See, Racist White Southern Democrats AND Racists White New York Progressives used the minimum wage to push Blacks (who, one more time, where working more and divorcing less) OUT of the workforce.
This is what the Government does - it pits one group of people against another and, in the process, destroys both along with society.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
njanovic1980
No, it's 'loons' like you who HAVE returned us to 'those' conditions. Because, the food in the 1800s was actually better than the FDA "Regulated" HFCS Pink Slime that passes itself off as 'food'. As a matter of fact, Amoorikans have never been fatter or less healthy than today.
But, don't worry, we're not getting less FDA - we're getting more. Much more. Oh, and just so you know, I'm one of your Regulators. So, my advice to you - you keep paying your income tax. You let us do the thinking for you, and, we'll keep regulating you for your own good.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
NaziGOPBallmer
The last 6 terms of POTUS, 4 have been democrats.
Currently the POTUS, House of Representative and Senate have Democrat "Liberal" majorities.
Anyway, I don't buy into the Right / Left dichotomy. Those terms were used to distinguish Royalists from Jacobin's - not really applicable to modern politics. Which is why they're utilized. Because they're meaningless and simple. Just what the modern American consumer would like to fall for while feeling informed. Most Americans I speak to, think they know it all, yet when pressed, couldn't (Google free) tell you who was the second and third POTUS, what a T-Bond is, the difference between Deficit and Debt and most support the US having military bases all over the planet, you know, to protect Liberty and whatever.
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
I'd usually agree, however, I think this generation has an hitherto unknown access to sexual perversions compared with, well, maybe any time in history. It's not 'normal' to see violence mixed with sexual gratification. I have no idea why TYT thinks it's "okay" to sit there and accept such disgusting aesthetics. Even laugh about it. While it may not be immoral to 'punish' a consulting adult - it's aesthetically sickening.
As an example, I recently saw a girl who had (this was in a hospital setting) cut herself with cm deep lacerations up and down both arms. She has deep scars all over her stomach. While she may be an extreme example, she IS a real person and she is an example of someone who would consent to being harmed. Again, though extreme, it exists and it is unnatural and sickening.
There's a reason why two branches of philosophy evolved. Ethics and Aesthetics. Somehow, humanity ignores one and totally forgot the other.
As far as I'm concerned treating ANY human, consenting or not, in a degrading manner (even when they do not recognize their own degenerating or concent to it) is sickening.
Cent may laugh about fisting all day long. It's not so funny when you later see the girl fisted commit suicide. Many of these girls and boys are performing sex in porn out of desperation. Sometimes for drugs. Sometimes for food. Sometimes they've been degraded for so long they just do it for the fun of being humility. Maybe even for self control. Either way, it's unnatural and should not be seen by adults - let alone children.
Again, I find it sad that a generation of children have grown up only a click away from watching what would have only been found in the most vile recesses of the underbelly of humanity only a couple decades ago.
Anyway, that's my opinion. Maybe Cent and Anna should visit a hospital every now and again for a reality check. It's pretty sad stuff.
1
-
Sweederland Johnson I don't understand how you just turned this into men vs women? Both men and women are often degraded in porn. As a matter of fact, pretty much all porn caters to the basest of humanity.
Unfortunately society is so broken, that much like a heroin addict, many in society need their porn fix - and watching porn actually reduces violence. Given CGI is pretty realistic, I suggest this as a better means to provide such people with the porn they need while allowing the rest of society to slowly stop devolving and start developing a healthy attitude towards relationships and sex.
No, I'm not religious, and no, I'm not suggesting Christian style morality. However, those who choose to have children, must take serious that decision because scientific evidence also shows children are best served in a tradition household - which is why such arrangements became normal in most civil societies.
Anyway, that's where I'm coming from. Not that it matters. Pandora's Box is wide open. So, that's just they way things are in the short term (say a century or so).
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
Actually, giving in to basic instincts, such as lust, appears to be unnatural.
Lust is an urge to procreate. But that's it. A small part of what sex is. Guess what? Humans ALSO have other natural emotions connected to sex, like jealousy and life long love.
Giving into to shallow simple emotions, such as lust, could possibly ruin one's chances of ever forming a deeper life long loving relationship. Leaving one an old, shriveled lonely, shallow, shell of human being with pathetic impulse-driven memories no better than a dog humping a leg.
Actually, I see such old white men in Japan all the time. Old sad pathetic geezers who tricked Asian women into sex - or the women just wanted it too. Yup, with the personality depth of a child's play pool and emotionally stunted turnip they're left all alone - unable to develop anything meaningful in terms of relationships.
It's actually kind of sad to see to be honest.
Anyway, have fun with your lust. If you're uninterested in monogamous relationships, then please try not fathering any children along the way out. All empirical data show it's unnatural and unhealthy for children to live in a house without both parents present. It's probably why monogamy is natural for at least 7-8 years. After that, then maybe not. Then it's about personal integrity, affection, love and desire for something more than a leg hump.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Gamesman01 I agree, I wouldn't eat a cake from a shop that was bigoted against me either - as a matter of fact, I wouldn't patron such a shop.However, I personally like bigotry to be out in the open. I'd prefer it if the owners clearly said: No gays allowed, no Jews allowed, no blacks allowed, no whites allowed, no cops allowed, etc.... I see a private business as being no different from a private home. It should be up to the owner who comes in. The fact that money exchanges hands doesn't matter to me. Of course, I'd also like to see a LOT of deregulation so that poor people could open up competing businesses. We really do need to eliminate 99% of the barriers to entry and allow poor people to compete. In many cases, this alone will change a bigots mind on who they sell to.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
VeryEvilPettingZoo
Most scientists I know (and I've worked and lived in 5 different counties) know how the system is structured and they of course support it. In this sense, Scientists of 2014 are no different than Barons, Lords and other Aristocrats of the 1700s. There were some very good scientists back then, and most would 100% disagree with the political assessment of Scientists in 2014. Why? Because both have their own innate biases and are inclined to support the system they themselves were successful within.
I have a question for you: Do you know the differences between logical, rational, reasonable and empirical? How about deduction, abduction and induction? Descartes rationalism, Hume's skepticism and Locke's empiricism? If you do, you probably know more than 99.99% of most Scientists alive today. Most scientist in 2014 IMO don't really know all that much aside from their specialized field. And each successive wave of "Scientist" seems more specialized and more ignorant than the last. So, no, they are not politically well versed.
Many don't even know what a basic T-bond is, let alone how it's sold. Yet these fund their research.
Your jibe regarding libertarians makes you look small minded. I'm never read any of the great philosophers to take such a small minded attitude. If you have an argument, then make it. But, then, you'd have to know what an argument is wouldn't you? Perhaps it wasn't your libertarian colleagues who has the mental 'infection'?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
BernieSandersenEspañol Firstly, most of those third world was and has been in the third world thousands of years. Secondly, the third world is not an example of free market capitalism. Most of those countries are run by dictators. Socialism creates third world nations: Communist China, North Korea, East Germany, the USSR, modern day Cuba, modern day Venezuela. Compare those with Japan, Taiwan, West Germany, South Korea, Hong Kong and modern day capitalistic China. Free markets have lifted 100s of millions of Chinese out of poverty and is lifting millions of other people out of poverty as well. China is expected to be the richest nation in the world by 2030 thanks to a lean towards free market capitalism and away from socialism.
Again, you're simply babbling. The USA is LESS free market than most Scandinavian and Asian countries. I find life to be much freer in Japan than the USA in terms of economic freedom. And even more free in China. The USA is one of the most regulated unfree markets in the world. And worse, it's run by crony bankers.
Oh well - somethings you just have to experience. That's when your magic thinking faces reality and you'll then understand that free people and free markets with sound capital are best for society. Government run monopolies are good for one people: Crony well connected (often rich) liars.
1
-
BernieSandersenEspañol The numbers show you are wrong. Communism in China starved 30 million humans to death - the largest death toll in history. Capitalism has lifted 100s of millions out of poverty. I do agree 'some' markets are State managed - and those tend to be the inefficient markets and are usually (eventually) privatized because they're so inefficient.
Markets are not de facto 'unfree'. The word "market" is just an analogy for free people freely trading with one another. So long as there is rule of law and sound money, most people will choose to make Win-Win trades which create prosperity for everyone. This is economics 101.
As for Japan, I've lived in Japan and I have family in Japan. Japan is not a tinderbox. I'm not even sure what you mean by that. Japan is probably the safest society I've ever lived in or visited (and I've been to both China and Russia). The people are hardworking and honest. Yes, there are structural problems due to the large population of aged people - but that's just the way things are. Germany and Italy have even LESS children. Russia and China are following suite. Japanese are dealing with it head-on instead of bringing in large numbers of migrants (one day they'll be old too and this only delays the problem as well as creating other problems due to cultural differences).
As for healthcare, I actually work in the industry. I also have lived in 3 countries with private public. I can tell you right now, you'll go private for most healthcare services. The only public services I've found where public is better are for the elderly. Other than that, you'll go private if you want to get the best chances for a positive outcome. There's nothing 'magical' about healthcare and you're not going to wave a wand and poof it's a public monopoly and suddenly it doesn't suffer from all the problems of public monopolies. Not to mention - there's ONLY SO MUCH TAX MONEY to go around. When you pay for more healthcare - you pay for LESS of something else. I've seen the cuts first hand to education. Tax is a direct measure of the people working - it's MAGIC THINKING to imagine there's more goods and services than there actually is in existence. You seem to think there is a magical endless supply of goods and services - there is NOT. In the real world, there are limits to everything.
As the population get's old, they want more 'FREE" healthcare and thus the State cuts back on public services children K-12. Thus, the doctors are actually LESS competent in the future because they receive less resources. This is what happens in your 'Single Payer System'. You seem to think magically healthcare is provided - as if there's a big pool of healthcare services just out of reach because of the Evil Rich people hording it all to themselves - that simply isn't true. Most healthcare is under a LOT of stain due to the obesity epidemic among other lifestyle issues. If anything, it needs more rationing. A single obese patient can run up a $1 million dollar gouge of the public purse - and there are literally MILLIONS of them out there. Many don't eve work and contribute nothing to society. They just consume.
As I said, I'm happy for the US to have a public option. You can use it. Hopefully it will bring down the costs of private healthcare and one day we'll get real competition via real free-markets (probably with robotics and AI replacing overly expensive humans - which, I'm sure, you'll complain about that too and the loss of jobs).
1
-
BernieSandersenEspañol You're entitled to your opinion. However, your arguments are unsound and your conclusions are not cogently strong. Worse, some of your arguments are outright nonsensical and immoral. The one argument you make I do agree to is that there are no truly free markets. This isn't to say that there can never BE free markets - that's impossible knowledge up until the day their is free-markets. If there never are free-markets, then it remains an unknown (see: Hume Problem of Induction).
Other than your spurious arguments, you seem to think in analogy quite a lot. I find this to be true of people who are purported 'socialists'. They're often quite literary-minded, and I believe they probably live in word-worlds more so than here in the real world. As a scientist, I'm training to see these things quite clearly and I while I know the value of analogy, I'm always dubious to employ it as a rhetorical device other than in teaching a principle (say, Nernst potential I may use the word 'want' in reference to an ion).
For example: You say the 'State' needs and wants. State's do not need or want things. Humans do, not States. You say private ownership is silly - really? What about the ownership of your kidney? Is that silly? You claim "China became industrialized due to Communism" - are you sure this isn't a correlated event? I'm sure industries would have occurred in the State of China without the need of Communism. You claim it led to a lot of 'sacrifices'? Don't you mean Communism caused a lot of death?
History strongly suggests that State regulation leads to regulatory-capture and rent seeking. As an example see Taxi Medallions. Purported to be for the "Good of Society", in reality, it was a State-run racket. Until Uber came along, people were only given the State-regulated-market choice. Uber examples how free-markets serve both the poor worker (the driver) and the customer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1955RodHot
Like electricity, radio, automobile, airplane, television, inoculation etc.... just because the State took over our lives, doesn't mean it's good to have a State. I always imagine a North Korean dictator telling a dissident "YOU use the roads!!!" And then marching him/her off to be executed. That's how you sound to me.
FREE people can provide one another with roads, cars, water, etc... there's no NEED to use force against them (aka: using the State).
I'd advise you to look at the War on Drugs and the $8.5 trillion wasted on these lies called War on Terror or the billions spent on the NSA to spy on us with our Orwellian "Patriot Act".
We NEED to end income tax, which will END the FED which will finally get the poisonous fog that is the Federal Government OUT of our lives. I'll take my chances getting my water from my local government (actually, we get ours from a well).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
GreatPirateSolomon There's so many interesting ideas in your sentence :)
1) There really is no 'we'. There are schools, teachers, parents and students - all are individual 'them'. Not 'us'.
2) We cannot copy the German system. That is impossible.
3) I feel most people think as your sentence implies. What I mean is, saying X magically makes X happen. In this case, German schooling system.
As an example: Most Chinese languages place an emphasis on verbs than nouns. This in turn promotes a societal way of thinking, versus an individualist way of thinking (and correlates well with wheat vs rice cultivation). Imagine if you thought 'social' way of thinking is better. And then someone said, oh, that's easy: Why don't we all just think and speak Chinese. You know, so we'll all think more socially. (a) that isn't ever going to happen (b) this misses out on the reason WHY Chinese think and speak in their dialects. (c) diverse from their culture, it makes little sense.
- We are not German. Most of the important learning actually occurs in the family - not in school. Copying one aspect of German culture, its school system, is not possible and wouldn't work even if it were possible (which it isn't). The approach that works for America is freedom. Freedom to offer different forms of non-Government schooling is the better option and would, in the end, deliver a superior product to either the German model or our current system. We don't even have the companies to take on the interns - as an example. Unless "Walmart" greeter is now an internship?
1
-
1
-
Mr. Pink
It's interesting you mention the social system. I think socialism works best at the beginning (when it first starts) and within a monoculture. See, at the beginning, people are lowly paid and so mostly people go into the public service to provide a service (not to get rich). But, something happens along the way. You end up with public servants telling the private citizens (who pay their wages through taxes) what they can and cannot do. Without a bankruptcy process to remove incompetence, you end up with nepotism and abuse. Then it collapses. Before that collapse occurs, the Public Institutions look towards the most successful Private enterprises and say, let's do that! But it's too late. See, the 'type' of person who is needed from bottom to top in a private company, doesn't exist in a public institution. Also, there was a processes of weeding out the crappiest players in the market - this never took place in the public institutions.
This is the stage Germany is at. So is the USA, England, France, Australia, Canada.... etc.
The USA is not, not, not, NOT a capitalistic country. Germany is MORE capitalistic compared with the USA. The USA is a Fascist State. We don't use capital, we use debt. Our Central Bankers are our Central Planners. Some States require a State licence to sell flowers or to fix a computer ... does THAT sound like free-market capitalism? No way. Lastly, we're in never ending wars and must remain in never ending war because THAT is our Fascistic economy - killing people is what the USA sells.
Germany probably isn't so much modelling itself on the USA as it is following a road all centralised States follow. It's an inevitable outcome of centralizing power in the hands of bureaucrats. As natural as night following day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
romperstompist
Please don't take this the wrong way, but you clearly do not understand the meaning of some of the words in the sentences you are using.
You're using Unethical when you mean immoral.
I was talking Aesthetics, not Ethics. Which is quite clear if you go back and re-read what I wrote.
That said, some of what we're talking about could fall into the discipline of Ethics (which is a field of study, the study of morals).
I don't think you appreciate how many other very deep thinkers came before TYT - people who have shaped your very language and the manner in which you create thoughts themselves. Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, ...
I don't form my opinion, Aesthetically or Ethically, by watching TYT and conjuring an opinion out of the aether. Of course, being an aesthetic, it is MY opinion and only mine.
1
-
romperstompist
I did not say prostitution is immoral. It's not immoral.
One more time in case I was not clear, in regards to the physically, mentally and sexually abused child that grow into adults who work as prostitutes - their actions are not immoral. For children who grow into adulthood in our sick society, where depravity is the norm, that decide (due to desire or personal dire circumstance) to sell sex as adults - their behavior also is not immoral.
I didn't say anything about legality.
As for the myth of the prostitute that enjoys having strangers cum in her or his mouth for money - well, many people enjoy cutting themselves, many people enjoy starving themselves, many people enjoy eating shit. Of course, if many many we mean an extreme few who were probably (statistically) abused as children, then that still would have nothing to do with my answer.
We live in a sick society and the way I see it, it's only going to get sicker.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
zeisengreen1913 Okay, Pink Slime is off cuts not fit for human consumption. Ears, snout, hooves, tail, etc... these are boiled in ammonia, mixed with filler (wood pulp) and dyed pink. This is then FDA approved "food". If you buy it, and then want to sue for being sold 'food' that isn't fit for a dog, you will lose. Because it's regulated as food. Ironically, if you attempted to sell real food without a licence, you'd go to prison! Worse still, raw milk is illegal. Can you imagine?! How insane. Another example is cigarettes. Now that they are 'regulated', you can't sue. You can smoke, you can get cancer, you can die. But your family can't sue. Because magically they're now 'regulated' as safe to sell. How ironic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
technatezin Wow, very interesting response! How long has it been since I've written anything in propositional calculus / classical logic? Yonks! Your example is the material conditional? Is that correct? Okay, let's write a few more true statements using the material conditional:
"If the moon is made of cheese, then Gods exists." Truth-Value = True
Isn't it the case that when the antecedent is false, the material conditional is true regardless of the consequent?
Therefor, "If the moon is made of cheese, then 3 + 3 = 6." is True.
AND
"If the moon is made of cheese, then 3 + 3 = 10." is also True.
Agreed? I mean, it's been a long a time, but I sort of recall this was in the basic truth table? Isn't that the case?
You stated: If the state exist then there is coercive indoctrination of falsehoods.
I agree, this is false.
However, this is true: If the state exist then there may be coercive indoctrination of falsehoods.
This is a True statement.
Agreed?
Now, if we're not going to wander into existentialism, I think we can agree this is true through general induction. I mean, this is assuming we're talking about the real world.
I can even find evidence of such occurrings, occurring, in the above Interview. In the form of this statement: It must be what the School or The State wants them to believe.
Is that good evidence?
Note #1: We poor Empiricists don't normally employ deductive logic. Rather, we utilize general induction. Alas, that's the best we can do with our sense data (that I'm aware of). Thus, we don't make valid sound arguments, we instead make cogently strong ones. I think I have made just such an argument. Do you agree with me? Or will we need to employ some sort of Bayesian inference to come to an agreement? If that's the case, we'll need data, that takes time, I don't have free time, so if I gathered such evidence and analyzed it, then I'm writing a publication!
LOL :P
Note #2: I seriously cannot fully remember the material conditional truth table, but, I do value logic and would ensure my children are taught to think logically beginning with the even more classical logic of categorical syllogisms. Why? because I think it would be fun :D Not sure if I could teach it to a child, but I'm sure Play Doe works wonders. Happen to have a link for me? Maybe ask your Prof? Perhaps you could rewrite into categories? Is this an AAA?
Note #3: I seem to recall some songs we used to memorize these tables? Would you mind asking your professor if she/he has a link to such mental devises? I wouldn't mind rehearsing them for fun :)
1
-
technatezin "Anyway, what's your point? In the real world there are never perfect people nor perfect systems filled with incorruptible perfect people."
Yes, I agree. Which is why we should work towards limiting the Government (again). The US Constitution was mainly written to protect us from Government - not so much from one another. Common laws that protect private private (beginning with our body) and that can be used to uphold contract, free markets (which is to say free people able to interact with one another) and sound money (derived through voluntary exchange).
Government (a collection of people) is delineated from other groups of people (private citizens) in that public servants have the legal right to initiate violence and coercion against morally innocent humans. No other group of people have this right. Which is why really don't need them teaching our children what they should or should not believe.
An example: Government's War on Drugs. Imagine not being allowed to drink a beer (KSA) or smoke a weed (USA) and if you were caught, you were sent to prison. Yet, YOU own your body? Maybe you don't. Another example would be the Governmental Laws around who can marry whom (legally). This is mostly around taxation privileges, which is what the government (and the Mafia) use to 'encourage' Government approved behaviors. Another example would be Income Taxation (allows for the sale of T-Bonds on future labor output, to the Chinese for example).
If we want to live in a moral society, then we should work towards reducing the immoral actions legally available to some groups of people (governmental employees being by far and wide, the largest of those groups of people).
It's why Socialism, democratic, autocratic, fascistic, communistic, etc.... is immoral.
Agreed?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
technatezin If the Slave voluntarily provides goods and services then they are, by definition, not having their labor stolen.
If you've debated Libertarians and An-Caps without resolution, then this is futile. So, let's return to my original post where we surely can agree.
I wrote: 3:00
"It must be what the School or The State wants them to believe."
Hypocrisy much? I don't want my children being indoctrinated by the crazy Theists or you crazy Statists."
As a strong atheist, I do not want my child to be 'educated' in what to believe based on what Theists want my children to believe. Why? Because their thoughts run counter to my own.
I also apply this reasoning to Statists.
Now, it's not that I do not think Theists have anything of value. Many in my family are Chritsitan and many are Buddhist. Both of these have ideas I will introduce to my children. Such as the concept of forgiveness (only I will make it clear that self forgiveness doesn't require a God). Buddhist mediation, is healthy (but doesn't require a non-physical realm).
See?
Using Weber's definition of the State (as well as Kant's four types of government) we can clearly define the State as having the legal right to initiate violence against innocent humans (ample evidence for). According to Kant, this is not ideal. However, it is what most people currently appear to have a subjective preference for. I can accept that. I will ensure my children develop an understanding from empirical evidence gathered in the field of developmental neurobiology as to why this may be the case.
I study developmental neurobiology. While there's an application for Logic, it's limited (I suppose mostly only modus ponens and modus tollens?). Logic is superseded by Empiricism in terms of providing information that will allow you to better model the real objective world.
I'd say this, if you want to end Slavery, you probably don't want to let your children be taught by a Slave Master. The same applied to the Church. As well as the State. As you are well versed in Logic, that is great. Teach this way of thinking to your children. Never yell at them, make sure you have ample skin contact (ensures a good somatosensory cortical development), do not put them in day care (preferably raise them at home until at least 4) and never hit them. Do that, and maybe one day, far off in the future, this conversation will have been resolved satisfactorily to both of us.
1
-
1
-
***** Here are some well known facts: http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/04/01/infrastructure-gap-look-at-the-facts-we-spend-more-than-europe/#4b2fa512137a
(oh, and we spend more than the EU)
One of the major problem in the USA is our low quality Government Schools that graduate functional illiterates at a rate of 1 in 5. Another Government created problem is the Government run Welfare Projects. These literally breed more of the problem: Lastly, Government regulations strangle the economy, though it is great to see companies like Uber tackling this head-on.
What you want is Big Government to come in and give you a high paying job without having to work for it. That's not going to happen. Go learn a skill and freely sell it to other Americans. If your skill is low, like labor, then don't expect much money for it. That's not the fault of the free market, no more than are apples being cheap in summer. Plenty of low skilled workers around. It should be noted here, if the Government had a more restrictive visa program, we'd actually have a demand for low skilled labor. But the Government keeps letting in millions of low skilled labor, which increases supply, lowering price - and the Government does this on purpose, and has specific visa programs intended for this. Even high skilled workers are now forced to train their replacements. Again, thanks to Government policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Again, have you BEEN to China? It's not a toxic waste dump. Sure, some areas are polluted, no doubt, and humans have been living in China for 5000+ years, and China has 1.3 billion people. Yes, some areas a polluted, just like in the USA, look at Flint or Detroit (and in less than 100 years). These areas will in time be cleaned up. They will be cleaned up because China is already the second-largest economy and soon will be the largest - over time they will triple the size of our economy. Anyway, Kyle is peddling a narrative he knows next to nothing about by cherry picking a group of people who go out of their way to sell a story to naive people like Kyle. Classic confirmation bias. They purposely go to Asia to make up these stories. Do they find a factory somewhere in Asia? Sure. So what? That's not the real story. The real story is "Slave Labor" Asians are becoming richer than Americans and will be buying a lot of land in the USA over the coming decades. Those 'cheap' smartphones will be paid for, in land. Which I think is fine, I personally like Asians. They're smart, generally honest, hard working and make good stuff which enrich our lives - like all of the components that keep the internet running smoothly.
1
-
There's no such thing as "Trump's Factory". Ivanka doesn't 'own' a factory. One of her product lines is made in a factory that pays people $5 a day. Those people do not 'have' to work in the factory - they choose to do so because the alternative is worse. The fact is, if they don't offer a low priced product, then Americans will not purchase it. Thus, the only solution is to reduce the costs OR, there will be $0 dollars a day because there will not be a factory at all. You can market a higher priced clothing to Americans as 'sustainable' - but they don't care. They want the cheapest.
Now, let's stop and think about what happens when Kyle here wins the argument and forces Ivanka to pull her product line out of Indonesia. That factory closes, those people lose their livelihood. Where will Kyle be then? Helping them by opening up a new factory that pays $50 a day? No. He'll be happy because he thinks all these jobs are then going to come back to the USA. But, they are not coming back - what happens is the factory owners will invest in robotics that completely replaces humans and open a factory in Japan, Korea or China.
You do know that if Bernie Sanders had his way, Indonesia would pay a huge tariff to sell in the USA? Which would mean even LOWER wages or, and more likely, no factory.
I'm typing on a laptop made in China and owned by NEC (Japanese company) that is 100% assembled by robots. ZERO humans work on the floor. None. I love it because it must be the best-made laptop I have ever owned. I paid a small premium, $300, over the human-made ones. Yes, that's right, it actually cost MORE money than if humans were employed. I'd happily do so any day of the week. That's the real world.
Lastly, these hit pieces aren't even news, Kyle just wants to take a jab a Donald Trump through his daughter and her fashion line - that's the ONLY reason people even went to Indonesia. They don't give two shits about 3rd world people. And apparently, Kyle doesn't give a damn if his peddling this so-called "News" cost Indonesia families their livelihoods. Which, if he keeps it up, will.
1
-
Illiteracy Statistics
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute of Literacy
Research Date: 4.28.2013
Percent of U.S. adults who can’t read 14 %
Number of U.S. adults who can’t read 32 Million
Percent of U.S. adults who read below a 5th grade level 21 %
Percent of prison inmates who can’t read 63 %
Percent of high school graduates who can’t read 19 %
http://www.statisticbrain.com/number-of-american-adults-who-cant-read/
It's nice to see the Public taking a stand against Government Unions like the bloated self-serving Government Teacher's Union by voluntarily taking their children out of Government schools and using their hard won time, efforts and money more productively by supporting organic, LOCALLY OWNED Charter Schools and other Private Schools built brick by brick by local people (many of whom were teachers who quit Government schools to do real education) and supported by the local community.
WI has some of the nation's top Charter Schools serving the poorest with real education. Its great to see The Public continue to vote in a Governor who supports giving the poor the freedom to choose a Private pedagogy via School Choice just as the rich have always had.
I think O-blah-ma was the last straw. The general public has had enough of this Progressive Socialist's 8 more years of never ending Warmongering, bailing out the Crony Bankers and bloated over priced Government 'services' - all shoveled down their throats.
Of course, it'll take decades more of a dropping standard of living in the USA before enough people say enough is enough. But, we didn't get into this Progressive Socialist mess over night, this took over 100 years and it'll take decades to reverse and then fix the damage they've done.
The first step in real change is voluntarily removing your child from Government school is a good Charter School is available. Again, this is going to take decades to change.
Oh, and the problems with Government schools, their bloated Teachers Unions and their horrible 'pedagogy' of pump and dump education, have nothing at all to do with the Koch brothers. These problems have built up across 100 years with an acceleration from the LBJ/Mao's Great Society in the 1960s equating in our horrid Government School system we have today.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
WhiskeyWhiskers
Except in the real world, real women are being left out for these exact same laws you think are helping them. It's not helping them, they're simply not being hired. This is a FACT.
I've personally hired women in their early 20s who are ideally at the age to have children. I find the one's I've interviewed are dedicated and hard workers. They are on 4 year contracts and then it's up to them what they do afterwards. So, I actually hire and manage this demographic. They're really some of the best workers I could ask for.
So, don't lecture me, and stop putting words in my mouth. I'm simply telling you the way it is. You're wish to pass a law and make the world the way you wish it were is just that - a wish. The REAL change comes from real people hiring real people. No law is going to stop discrimination as people can also do it subconsciously, but, if consciously, it's impossible to prove one way or the other.
As for my coffee example, it is the same - you'd find it asinine to be forced to have your choice taken from you, yet are happy to do so based on your perception of what is and is not fair. Yet, in the real world, if you do not buy coffee from a store, those people can lose their job. But, this you seem to live with quite comfortably. So, you're OK with your coffee discrimination, but not gender or skin color (my family isn't white by the way). Why is that? Because, to me, it's all the same. The best way to deal with unfair discrimination is to open more businesses - this will drive up demand for labor-hours and put bigots out of business due to competition as only the best will remain in business, not those that indulge their bigotry.
So, I hope I've made my point clear enough this time.
1
-
Sean Jackson
I seriously doubt this woman was a misogynist. She was a lawyer who does hire women, just not women young enough to be starting a family. She clearly stated that she would like to, but could not afford to maintain her business. Unless you know her business better than she, we'd have to take her at her word.
But, imagine if you hired a programmer, or lawyer, or medical doctor on a six figure salary and were absolutely dependent on their skills - and they got pregnant each year. Suppose you were going to go bankrupt - well, there's nothing you could do, that is, unless you're going to suggest it's OK to be a "misogynist" after, what? X number of children? Or suppose someone takes a job fulling intending to immediately get pregnant (I've known of people in the public service who did exactly this) - you're going to pass a new law that limits the time you have to be employed? What if their pregnancy was unplanned?
In the real world wishful thinking is just that - wishful thinking. And you'll find the general public, want value for money - and for the most part couldn't give two craps about where that value comes from.
How many Aussie's go out of their way to buy Made In Australia outside of food products? I'd be surprised if Ugg were still made in AU.
Anyway, there's the word-world where politicians sell bullshit and then there's the real world. You'll find in the real world most people primarily care about their wallet first, and other's second. Sadly, but that's the way it is.
1
-
Duane Craig
Yes, this is because most people do not discriminate - not because of some laws, but because, culturally, most people value the emplyee's skill set over whether they are of one gender or another. However, if the labor pool is large, and employers are expected to pay for benefits they can not afford to pay - then they'll hire women who either (a) already have a family (b) not hire them or (c) sign a contract stating they do not intend to start a family or (d) something worse.
Again, the best way to deal with this problem IMO is to increase the demand of labor - which is to say, allow for the creation of more small businesses. Make that easier, and you'll find many of these other problems fall to the wayside.
If you're young and live in AU, then you may have inadvertently developed a skewed perception of the real economy as AU has been in a bull market for over 15 years. AU has had the luxury to indulge in non economically viable laws and regulations. Now that this is coming to an end, and as the population is stuck with the housing bubble - you're going to find less people willing to risk starting a business in AU. Then what?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
WhiskeyWhiskers
I never said workplace discrimination was a problem. And, at least in the "West" - it's not. If anything, I expect there to be a 'reversal' and increase in females over the coming decades. I base this supposition on two phenomena (1) females do much better in the current Government School structured learning environment due to an, on average, longer attention span and ability to remain seating for longer period and (2) in the risk adverse society we currently inhabit, females mature early and do well in such environments (come in on time, a productive, etc...).
However, for highly skilled jobs, where gender shouldn't play a role at all, as the skill is in limited supply, women may be discriminated against IF employers feel taking risk of hiring women of child baring age will jeopardize their business.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
staygreezy
I said I agreed that China is not a "free market". There are no free markets. Anywhere. Modern markets are highly regulated with varying degrees of Fascism.
What I said is that I find "ASIA" to be much freer in many ways compared to the USA. And I'll stand by that statement. Given half my family lives in Asia, some of whom own small family businesses in Asia, I find it "in many ways" a freer market.
Take this example: A small restaurant run out of the back of someone's house, up on the third floor, seats a total of 8. Up a winding creaking staircase. At the bottom are two vending machines, one selling beer, the other cigarettes. The woman at the top of those stairs is a single woman, in her 30s, who decided she'd open this little eatery out the back of her house. This was just off a main tourist street in Kyoto, Japan. Would Americans be "allowed" by our Government to open such a restaurant. The safety violations, the winding stairway access, the home-made food. Hell, the vending street-side machines alone would shut this place down.
Land of the "Free"
Home of the "Brave"
Indeed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Andrew Macintyre
Being an arse-hole is a free choice made by free people.
For example, do you chose the women (or men) you date based on their looks? Wouldn't that be 'unfair'? Should the State step into your life and dictate who you can or can not date?
No.
Well, I'd personally prefer my bigots out in the open so I can know not to do business with them. Thus, a company is free to discriminate against Tibetians. Those Tibetians are free to make it known - then it's up to free people (who care about such matters) not to trade with those companies. It's also important for those Chinese who are likeminded - not to work for such bigots. Finally, in a free society, these people should work together to create a competing company and through hard-work and fair trade, put the bigots out of business.
No one said freedom was easy. It's not. But it's worth it. Resorting to the State to stop people from being arse-holes only results in the horrible State we have today where Tibet itself is occupied.
Anyway, I hope that's clearer.
If a person were to pay me less for being an Americans, I'd quit when the time was right and find a better place to work. My skills, knowledge and expertise are valuable enough to demand I am paid what they are worth on the open market. Anyone who let's their personal bias dictate their business decisions - such a person will soon be out fo a business. I'll go even further - if I was GAINING an advantage just for being an American. I would quit. I don't want to work for such an immoral institution/business. I'd simply work elsewhere - even for less money rather than work for such arse-holes.
Again, free good people do what's right - over time, we win. Sadly, we're losing because most people take the easy route and give up their freedoms for short-term gains made by the State. It's like paying the Mafia to do you a favor - you'll be worse off in the end (if their even is an end).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
1) I didn't say taxes, I said income tax. Income tax is a form of slavery. Slavery is simply ownership of one group of human's and their labor, by another group. Income tax is 1/3 of your labor, yet, you don't think you're a slave? Suppose it was 1/2 or 3/4? Then what? I think you'll still think you're free. Even if it were 100%, you will still think you're free. Just as you do now.
So, we'll agree, I think you are a Slave as you must pay the State a portion of your labor or go live in a rape-cage (should you attempt to work) and you can continue to believe you are a "Free" Citizen OF the USA (that "of" is in reference to ownership of you, by the State, due to your accident of birth in the geographical location referred to as the USA).
2) I didn't say anything about monarchies being 'glorious'. I also don't think the USA will become a monarchy.
The USSA will remain an oligarchy whereby It's Citizens will continue to pay their Masters when they labor. That payment will be used to maintain the Oligarchy. At least for another 50 years - and possibly much much longer.
3) The employees of air conditioned Chinese factories (as you call 'sweatshops') are FREE to leave. You OTOH will never be free - if you labor, you WILL pay the State or you will go live life in a rape-cage. Two totally different situations.
You thinking you are free is exactly the way you were taught to think. The people who taught you, are happy you accept your enslavement.
I have a question: When the Chinese State buys 30 year T-bonds, what exactly are they buying? I mean, what is it they actually own? What ARE those 30 year T-Bonds?
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
What? I don't 'have' to get a job? That's your argument?
Ha! This is the argument Slave masters used to justify Slavery. Slaves ate the food, Slaves used the roads, Slaves wore the clothes. Jesus, if we didn't have god damn Slavery how would the food, clothes and roads be made and maintained?
It's a simple fact that the US Constitution had to be amended and before that time Labor Tax / Income Tax was 100% illegal. It was clearly understood then that forcing people to pay the State to work was immoral. Yet get this - we had roads, and schools and cars, and everything you think you need Income/Labor tax for. Well, sorry, but we do not need Labor tax and the roads are maintained by sales tax.
The ONLY, and I mean ONLY, reason you think Income Tax is just, is because you've been normalized to it. That's it. The fact is people OWN their bodies and they OWN the actions of and labor of their bodies.
What are you going to tell me next, that the State has a right to one of your kidneys? I mean, look at all the people on dialysis - and there you are greedily with two when you can live just fine with only one. Of course, if the State was in the business of taking actual body organs, you'd think that was fine too. Because taking labor is exactly the same moral argument.
It's stealing. Stealing labor is Slavery.
SO? When the Chinese buy 30 year T-Bonds, WHAT are they buying for their money?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Harmony Alexandria Actually it depends on the country, in Japan, medical error rate is quite low whereas in Canada and Australia the medical error rate is probably higher (maybe even double that of the USA). I know someone who studies medical error rate and the governmental statistics are not the true rate as medical errors are under reported as well as re-categorized. As an example, a person came in to the hospital with a neck ache, he had an underlying condition (MS). Due to medical error / utter incompetence a routine surgery resulted in quadriplegia and later died of complications (about 8 months later), His death was not medical error. In another case, a Professor's wife was misdiagnosed with an obvious tumor any idiot could see - she died of cancer about 1 year later, again, not listed as medical error. Anyway, you probably have little or no idea regarding medicine, while I work in the field.
As for gun violence, again, it's at decades low. Decades low. And we don't own guns. So, I'm not a gun owner. It's just simply a fact, gun violence is at decades low. Of the top 10 so called mass shootings, the shooters have been religious fanatics or pill heads.
I do agree, crapitalistic medicine in the USA has ruined healthcare. But, socialized medicine isn't going to change that in the USA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
technatezin You're describing a false dichotomy. I can both BE myself (consciously) as well as OWN the body my consciousness exists in. As a matter of fact, my consciousness arises FROM my body - my neocortex to be precise. They're not indistinguishable from one another physically.
Let's see if a couple examples will clear this up:
(1) Suppose "I" (referring to the subjective consciousness you commented on) require a kidney (maybe "I" have Type 1 diabetes) do "I" have the moral right to forcibly hold the body that "you" exist inside of and cut "that body's" kidney out for my personal use?
(2) Suppose "I" wanted to put a tattoo on my face, of course this will upset some other people's 'subjective' consciousnesses (namely my partner). Do "I" have the "Right" to put a tattoo on the body "I" happen to inhabit?
On a pragmatic level, "I" take care of this body, I feed it, wash it, and exert about as much control over it as is currently humanly physically possible. As humans have come to use the word 'property' and 'ownership' and 'right' I can safely say "I" have ownership over this body, it is my property, I have the right to it.
Oh, and your snide remark about anyone who doesn't agree with you is "insert ad hominem" is not making you look like you have a strong argument, it's making you look like you have a weak argument - thus your attempt at poisoning the well. Aside from being childish, it's also fallacious. A religious fundamentalist may or may not be correct. What is important is their argument, not their personal belief system. This is the entire reason WHY Aristotle developed the concept 'validity'.
1
-
technatezin
Again, you start out with a false dichotomy. You can both own your body and be a part of the thing you own. There is no false dichotomy. People die all the time and their physical possessions fall into disrepair and return to the land.
RE: "Nope, because that would be violating the indivisible-ness of the body and the critical functioning parts that comprise it.."
--> This is referred to as moving the goal post. First you try (and fail) to demonstrate I cannot own my body and now you're replacing property with "indivisible-ness" (a word you made up on the spot, unless you meant indivisibleness. Either way, it's not a valid argument).
RE: "You do have that "right", but you do so because it is something you did to your body that didn't take away any functionality from anybody else's body."
Oh, really? Anybody else's body. Did you notice the possessive you placed on the word "body" with your apostrophe on the letter s? The apostrophe on the s is used to indicate ownership or possession. Property is defined by ownership. You implicitly know you are wrong. Your own language shows you believe the body is owned (is property) by the consciousness that inhabits it. Putting a tattoo on another person's body, does not affect it's function, but is still violating that person's property rights.
Oh, and you are incorrect in your assertion about the tattoo. In tattooing your own face, you do 'take away functionality' of the other person's body in the sense that you have changed their aesthetic perception of you - as in, you've changed their synaptic connectivity of their cortex. You're affected their physical body - their brain to be precise. But, we accept this in society as non violent and thus it falls into the category 'aesthetics'.
Lastly, when you're suggesting "Again, the obviousness of this is astounding" is a classic ad hominem. It makes you sound like you're 12. Are you 12? Seriously, you sound peril when you conclude your lack of success in making an argument by denigrating anyone who doesn't agree with your fallacious reasoning. Actually, I know 12 year old children that know better than to do that in an argument.
You may be interested in looking up the following:
- types of reasoning
- deductive vs inductive
- sound and valid vs strong and cogent
- ad hominem
- poisoning the well
- logical reasoning
- rationalism vs empiricism
- argument by analogy
So, my apologies, but we cannot come to an agreed conclusion. You may persist in your belief you do not have ownership over your own body and, perhaps, mull over how such a sentiment was generally shared by slavers of the 1700s. Have a nice weekend.
1
-
1
-
technatezin Okay, I'll re-read.
RE:
A: Social agent's "free will" determines the ownership of critical body parts that are mandatory requirements for sustaining the life of the biological entity that acts as the social agent.
B: Ownership of critical body parts can be released and transferred as a social construct that then belongs to another social agent without affecting the functionality of the social agent that is transferring it.
A implies B or If A is true then B is true
Okay, you start with Modus Ponens for 'critical body parts' (I'm not sure if ANYTHING, including an idea, can be transferred without affecting the functionality of the social agents transferring it - the act of transferring will cause some change somewhere thus affecting the functionality of the brain - but anyway) and then perform the contrapositive.
AND?
Is it your goal to part the body out into what is and is not property based on what is and is not within the category 'critical body parts' and/or 'affects the functionality of a body? I'm not quite sure of your point here?
NOTE:
When Libertarians talk about Private Property and begin with self-ownership, I don't think delineating 'critical body parts' has any bearing on their proposition. Which is self-ownership (or whatever term you'd like to replace with self-ownership that retains the meaning of the apostrophe after the S you used earlier). Do you have a term you'd prefer to use other than property?
I, as a strong Atheist, also do not think it's a leap of religious faith to suggest 'self-ownership' involves referring to the body as your property. That's the common vernacular as well as the legalese.
NOTE:
None of the following fall into the category 'critical body parts':
kidneys, lungs, epidermis of the skin, sampled DNA, blood, vagina, hair.
RE: "Owning property clearly implies the realistic transferring of ownership when the property can be taken".
1) Kidney can and are sold.
2) Space on skin for tattooing advertisements can be and is sold.
3) You can live with a single lung - therefor lungs can be sold.
4) The red cross pays for human blood.
5) You even own your unique DNA sequences.
6) Hair is sold ALL the time.
7) Sperm can be sold - and are.
8) Eggs can be sold - and are.
9) Wombs can be rented - and are.
These examples clearly show that you are attempting to redefine what property is relative to the common legal and ethically defined term. Which is fine. There's nothing wrong with attempting to be more clear in the usage of the term property. But the only argument you appear to be making, assuming we agree to the premise in A is that 'critical body organs' cannot be sold, is one that strengthens the position of 'self-ownership' by whatever terminology you come up with to explain that apostrophe YOU used. Not only this, but your A --> B implied that 'non-critical body organs' CAN be sold by the social agent and therefor are probably property.
What word do you propose we replace the parts of the body that are 'property' and can be sold from the parts of the body that are not sell-able? How is your new term going to make one bit of difference from how the general use of Property Rights in reference to the body is employed? If anything, you're strengthening the underlying argument for the notion of 'self ownership'. You may come up with a new term, but the proposition is only that much more strengthened.
RE: "Meaning that the property transference can be reversed like in any ordinary kind of property exchange agreement"
1) Sex can and is sold.
Is the vagina a "critical body part"? Do women own access to their vagina?
Again, it seems you're attempting to create a new category for 'property' in an effort to exclude self-ownership, but you're actually achieving the opposite.
Social Agents can legally (and Ethically) terminate their own body's life. Why? Because they OWN their body. It is their property, and so they can even destroy it if they so choose.
This last example suggests that social agents own more than just their non-critical organs. they can terminate their entire body. Including the critical organs. That's actually the whole point of suicide. Again, this is evidence for self-ownership and that the body is property (or, whatever word you'd like to replace with property that means 'property' as in the common vernacular).
1
-
1
-
technatezin "You don't own your body. You've just used yourself including the part that comprise your sexual organs in a social behavior in order to exchange entitlement privileges for yourself."
LOL
And now you're replacing the word 'sell' with the word 'used'? How far are you willing to push this goal post? And more importantly, why? You're not changing the proposition "private property" and the implication of self-ownership by changing the words used to describe the relationship a free-agent has with the body it lives within.
You do understand that much? Legally, you own your body. When Libertarians discuss the body being private property, they are also discussing the legal fact you own your body. If your body commits a crime, 'you' are held responsible.
The proposition "Private Property Rights" is not going to change just because you change the word property to "non-critical organs of the biological substrate that houses an individual free-will agent". Or change the word 'sell' to 'used'. Or etc....
The words may change, the proposition is not going to change.
And I'm sorry but when money is exchanged, in English, we no longer use the word 'used' (as in, she used him for status, he used her for sex) and instead replace used with the word sold (as in: he paid her for sex, she sold sex).
Let's use some examples, you can answer them true or false:
1) Sometimes people sell their 'critical organs' such as their kidneys for money.
2) Sometimes people sell their car for money.
3) Sometimes people sell sex for money.
4) Sometimes people sell their hair for money.
5) Sometimes people sell their sperm for money.
6) It is not possible to legally sell something you do not own.
7) It is not possible to legally sell something that is owned by someone else without their permission.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Gatesealer89
And I told you last time, you do not have to drive your car on the roads and thus do not have to buy car insurance for it of be punished by the State. You could drive your car on your private property without insurance.
See the difference? If you OWN your car and your property then you do not need insurance as these are your private property. So, unlike your body, which is now owned by the State (which fits well with income tax) you will not be fined for NOT purchasing car insurance.
Simple enough?
Thus, why do you continue to bring up an example that is clearly a red herring?
As for Obama being the next in a LONG line of POTUS on both the right and left who want to use the State to promote their personal ideologies and/or buy votes - I don't disagree. AND? Yes, the US was fascist before Obama and will be long after Obama.
You think I've made ad hominem attack against Obama by referring to him as a Progressive Socialist? Perhaps you should look up with a logical fallacy actually is. Where have I attacked Obama's argument? Oh, that would be ... I didn't. Do you understand? If Obama had an argument and I referred to him as a Progressive Socialist as my rebuttal - then sure, that is illogical and that would be ad hominem. But, I didn't do that now did I?
1) Obama IS a Progressive and he IS a Socialist.
2) ObamaCare meets the definition of fascism as it uses the State to protect private corporations by forcing Citizens to buy goods/services from said private corporations. It's an example of the merger of public force with private profit. WAS Obama the first POTUS to do this? No, his was just the most brazen as he is actually taking ownership of the body itself. Income tax was the State claiming ownership over on the actions of the body and this now completes the ownership with the State now claiming ownership to the body.
How nice.
Oh, I'm not 'mad' at Obama. I'd never waste a perfectly good emotion like anger on something of such fruitlessness.
Its interesting to note you're more than happy in an attempt to refute my position with a dish of red herring and ill conceived ad hominem - yet give Cenk a pass on the glaringly in-your-face straw man has opened his demagoguery up with. I mean - come on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
As you probably know, Germany, Switzerland, etc... do not have a general minimum wage - as the entire idea is idiotic.
Anyway here's a link to a couple of lay journal articles (as opposed to peer-reviewed journal articles).
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/17/us-germany-minimumwage-idUSBRE99G0GN20131017
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/01/economist-explains-11
RE: Racist orgins of minimum wage in the US (and in South Africa incidentally).
John F. Kennedy:
"Of course, having on the market a rather large source of cheap labor depresses wages outside of that group, too – the wages of the white worker who has to compete. And when an employer can substitute a colored worker at a lower wage – and there are, as you pointed out, these hundreds of thousands looking for decent work – it affects the whole wage structure of an area, doesn’t it?"
Jacob Javits (Kennedy's colleague and Senator from NY)
“Although probably no northern senator today would dare admit it, many who vote for increases in the minimum wage understand that one consequence will be to destroy jobs for the least skilled workers, a disproportionate number of whom are black.”
--
This is the face of both the middle class. The middle class are always looking for ways to use the State to stop the poor from competing with them. Rent-seeking (as in limited licences or regulations) to copyright to patents to even minimum wage. The middle class (and the rich) will use every dirty trick in the book to keep from having to compete.
The fact is a racist will overlook or overcome their racism - if it means high quality cheap labor. Minimum wage acts to pit one 'group' against another and has decimated the black community as it allowed racists to get away with their racism. It allowed racist companies to 'compete' with companies who WOULD have had the monetary advantage by hiring poor blacks willing to work hard for a lower wage.
Just another fine example of fascistic governmental policies in the USA destroying our way of life (see: any inner city).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, you're both correct.
Government Theft / Taxation actual can drive economies 'forward' and lead to prosperity through infrastructure project. Of course, this initiation of force is immoral - and in the long run generally leads to Government metastasis into all sorts of areas of human interaction (aka: the economy).
Stop and think about Slavery itself. Lots of gold was mined for the Romans during times of Slavery. Yet, much of the rest of their empire was about as Laissez-faire as one could imagine. Did the use of Slaves help the rest of society by providing it with cheap gold? Yes. It probably did. Was this immoral? Yes, it most certainly was.
The problem is complex, and no solution in terms of 'economic' prosperity is going to happen in any conversation. Let alone a YouTube one. However, it's a Kantian Ethical position that Government (force, law, freedom) is immoral due to the use of force. Only Anarchy (freedom, law without force) is moral.
Japanese (half my family are Japanese) self regulate through culture and therefor can have a lot of personal individual freedoms we do not have. Its possible to open small businesses pretty easily in Japan (if you speak Japanese). Little restaurants that seat 5. However, they also have had a LOT of government infrastructure projects. Most of which are well looked after by the people. This has, IMO, lead to an economic boom and bust. A long 30 year bust. A better way would be a slower initial 'boom' through less (preferably no) governmental spending. That way we'd have had a more sustainable economy. Instead we say a huge amount of economic activity (helped along by Government spending) followed by a just as massive bust leading to a projected 50-80 MORE years as the resulting population declines back to 80 million from 120 million.
So, you're both correct. Government is immoral force and through it's spending it can cause huge economic booms which can lead to economic benefit - particularly in the short term. Or long term, no one can know until the time passes. Plus, we can not go back and 'rerun' history to see how things may have been had the government not taken on debt and reallocated resources. Probably a less economic activity (many of us would not have been born) but more sustainable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
WaterspoutsOfTheDeep Who are you? Of course I know how funding is appropriated. Here, I'll explain: Governmental funding works like this. T-Bonds are sold to the Chinese, who buy these at interest. The government takes a large cut of these moneys for itself as well as to fund the tax agencies that will collect the money from the future generations that have to repay it. Some of that money eventually find its way into the hands of some University researchers. I've personally seen $300 million blown through in a matter of a few years with little to show as an outcome. But hey, there's always $40,000 degrees in business (the University's big money maker - this pays for most basic science research as most science schools haemorrhage money). Then there's private charity - they're generally pretty thrifty about giving grants.
As for research at Pharmaceuticals, they can raise money in a number of ways. Sales, stocks, bonds, venture capital, etc... but - unlike Government, they have to make a profit or they go bust.
Clear enough for you?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
yourparagon
1. I did not use the word 'punishment'. I stated that an unskilled or low skilled laborer is only WORTH that much per hour. IOWs they can only SELL their work-hours at the minimum hourly rate. This isn't a value assessment - it's a fact.
2. I am not 'utterly indifferent' towards the homeless. This is you projecting. I noticed your entire post/rant reads like a D.C. comic book childish view of reality.
3. I am not talking about 'Social Darwinism' either. I'm talking about economic reality. Why don't you walk over to IBM and ask to be their CEO. When they say no, go away, or start as a clerk, you can tell them your theories on why they are social Darwinists.
4. 'Fair and Caring' Society. Well, first off, 'Society' doesn't care. This is a human emotion and can logically be attributed to a human - not a collection of humans. This is what you do through your entire post, you use a combination of analogy and magic thinking. In the real world, those homeless people are in competition with other Japanese for work. IF the hourly wage was $20 an hour to clean up - no one would hire the homeless person because they'd prefer a more dependable person if being forced to pay a higher wage. The ONLY thing saving those homeless people is the fact the wage is low. But hey, why don't you just climb up into your rectum and live in magic thinking world where 'society' can be attributed with emotions like 'hate' and 'love'. You remind me of when someone says "American' is in disagreement with 'China' over blah blah blah. It's pure nonsensical gibberish.
5. You are simply wrong. The Government hyper-regulates the markets. And I can promise you, as it goes broke doing so, those markets will become more liberal. Those with ambition and skills to freely trade wit other members of society will prosper and those that do not will not. Over the next 15 years, our economies are going to become LESS dominated by crony-capitalism and return to a state of free-markets.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
john carlisle
The problem is not funding, the problem is the structure of government schools. As an example, anthropologists have shown when children are grouped per age, bullying naturally arises. This has been published. Yet, we continue to structure grades by age and not aptitude. This leads to bullying and also lowers educational outcomes. We still take off summers - this has been shown to correlate strongly with a reduction in children's long term learning. Again, even though this is published, Government schools continue to take summers off. I'm sure Teachers Unions would fight tooth and nail to keep it that way. Teaching topics in classes per a single topic does not integrate learning - but it's easier to do that way. Thus math is taught without any history, often making it meaningless and useless - completely abstract, and likewise with history. Over and over we see Government schools are unsound in their pedagogy, thus parents should have the option to put their kids in a PUBLIC Charter School that is attempting to make positive changes - often with less money.AND Teachers who want to teach should have these employment opertunities. Many of these schools are succeeding with less money. It's really that simple. Parents pay, they should get a say in where their children are educated.
The DoED has published stats that show 1 in 5 graduates are functionally illiterate. Yet, in Japan they have nearly a 99.99% literacy rate while spending almost half as much money as we do. Again, it's not the funding, US Government Schools are some of the best funded in the world. These are all facts you can research at your leisure.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
karl john What are you crapping on about? Let's take Apple Inc as an example. Given it's the largest corporation in the USA. Then we'll look at Steve Jobs. By every account he was a total arse hole to work with/for. Now, do you see how in a FREE-ish market, even an arse-hole has to provide value to gain money and power? Do you understand that the State has NO obligation to provide you with ANY value.
Just look at the Department of Education. Do you know what their budget is? It's $80 BILLION dollars a year! Apple Inc ONLY made $36 billion in total for a year. That's working their arses off to provide us with value. Want to know what the Dept of Ed has given us for our $80 billion this year? Yes, another year where 1 in 5 Americans are functionally illiterate. How wonderful! Oh, and do you know your public servant who runs the Dept of Ed is? Of course you don't. Oh, and if you don't pay the State it's due (who then pay this useless unknown director of the DoE), then you get shot in the head, or put in a State run rape-cage.
See the difference? Not making myself clear enough?
Imagine if Apple Inc called you and wanted to do business with you. Now, imagine to you told them to piss-off. I bet you wouldn't have a care in the world would you? Nope. Now imagine it wasn't Apple but was the State. Say, the IRS. Now you're on your knees sweating bullets for your "Regulators" in the State. Starting to see the difference between FREE markets and dealing with the State? In one you're a free person. In the other you're a sniveling slave.
Don't worry, we're getting more State. Not less. More. Much more. Much more regulations. More rules. More taxes. More inflation. More spying. Less freedom. Less privacy. Less prosperity. And this will continue for at least, at least, 30-40 more years. Minimum.
Hope you like the New Economy, it's here to stay.
1
-
1
-
Beelzeboogie
Nice strawman. Feel better? Want to know what else 'most' economists have? A tract record of totally missing the GFC until after Lehman brothers collapsed. Until that day, "most" economists thought the global economy was doing 'great'. Oh, and once these same Economists tried to fix the GFC, they messed that up as well - which is why we have QE1 (which was supposed to work, according to 'most' economists models) and then QE2, then QE3, then Operation Twist, then QE4 and then "most" economists just decided to drop adding more numbers to QE as this was an embarrassment and reminder of their total incompetence and go just with QEternity. Notice your argument is fallacious as it (a) appeals to authority and (b) appeals to majority. I'm sure you'd have a lot of flat-earth friends 1000 years ago.
Now, let's apply your "argument" to electronics. The iPhone6 is a cheap and fast supercomputer that fits in your pocket because (a) Apple is in competition with other free-market smart phone makers or (b) Apple is in competition with government subsidized poor quality over priced public smart phones.
Also, I wonder, why is it that our experience with Public Australian medicine was that it was complete shit (and thank the Gods we were able to fly to Japan where we received high quality private medical care). So, do tell me, why is it that the same Private care that cost us $5500 in Japan would have cost a little over $25,000 in Australia. So 'mate' explain to me why your 'theory' seems to fail in Australia where Public healthcare is horrendous and Private healthcare is 5 times more expensive than in Japan.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ahabthewhaler
Republicans are no different than Democrats. They're both 'Progressive' socialists. They only differ on what they think is "Progress".
They both LOVE lots of government.
They'd both have bailed out the crony banks.
They both support expanding government (see NSA).
They both support never ending wars.
If you think deregulation led to the GFC you've been fooled. Firstly, the financial system in the USA (and elsewhere) is and has been one of most regulated markets in the world. It's neck and neck with medicine and hard to say exactly which has the most regulations. And, of course, both hyper-regulated unfree-markets of finance and medicine are a total mess. Secondly, Clinton 'deregulated' finance (although, as I said, this is NOT what caused the GFC - and finance remains one of the most regulated markets in the world).
Do you have any evidence that "Republicans" don't "want any regulations on financial markets"? This sounds rather absurd.
Of course, I personally would love no regulations on any markets outside of those derived by common law and contract laws. If you think some clueless bureaucrat in Washington can effectively regulate their way out of a wet paper-bag, well, I have news for you - they can't. Most are totally incompetent and couldn't give two craps about anything other than making more money through ticking the right boxes to get promoted into better paid, cushier jobs.
If we had stuck with common law and contract law we'd have developed the sort of finance that doesn't exist only to serve the richest 0.1%.
Oh well, hope you like being poorer. Because the government is going to be bailing out/transferring wealth to the Too Rich To Jail for decades to come. This IS going to happen and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
technatezin I completely agree that instructional methods have not changed much - and, with the exception of some forms of technology/CAI (visuals and movies for example), probably can't do much about transferring knowledge from one person to the next. That's where "teaching" comes in. Teaching is a skill, like acting, some people have it, some do not. Which is why we need a free-market in pedagogy. In this way good teachers are rewarded (profit) and bad teachers can go find something better to do with their lives. Government Schools are fascistic in their monopolizing the K-12 pedagogy. You want to talk about fleeced, after 12 years of Government Schooling 1 in 5 graduate is functionally illiterate (according to the DoED). THAT is at a cost of $12-23K a year ($150,000+ PER student ) to the tax payer. This is some serious fleecing being done by Government Schools. Anyway, if you like Government Schools, great, you're free to use them. Some are genuinely pretty good. Free-Market competition will keep them that way.
1
-
technatezin 1) Firstly, of our top ranked 20 Universities, 19 are private.
2) Sure, some people feel they were ripped off - particularly if they paid $150K for a liberal arts degree and now cannot find work. Well, they have recourse, they can sue. AND the same could be said of buying a car or a house.
3) The DoED publishes statistics on functional illiteracy and they show 1 in 5 graduates of traditional Government Schools cannot competently read or write. So, you tell me, where is OUR recourse? Where is the return of our tax money?
4) Sorry, but we have many successful Private Schools K-12. Many parents are more than happy to pay. I've lived in AU and JP and in both countries you will find a thriving Private School market. So, it's not just the USA. This is evidence that people WANT and are happy to pay for Private education. So, in the real world, it does work. Our premise is in fact aligning well with empirical reality. These schools do exist and are thriving.
Agreed?
5) Like it or not, many traditional Government Schools have become total mockery of education. And, like it or not, they will compete with Private Schools, Alternative Schools and Charter Schools - and many Government schools will go bankrupt, right along with the rest of the corrupt public institutions, taking down entire cities with them (SEE: Detroit, Flint, ChIraq).
1
-
technatezin Yes, I do agree, sometimes people lose their time and money. Welcome to life.
1) I am not assuming anything about perfect information, don't create a straw man. I am arguing that people have a right to buy private education if they so choose - and they do.
2) Do people open scam schools? Sure. And? Again, welcome to the real world. My advice is do some research before buying a product. If you don't have the money to lose, then stick with a tried and true source of information. Examples of quality private schools include: Harvard, Stanford, MIT, etc...
3) No one is telling you, you have to buy private, if you don't want it, don't buy it. But don't tell me what I can or cannot buy with my money. Agreed? Like I said, we're not going to privatize Government Schools, why would we do that? We're going to out compete them in the free market by offering a superior product, and they'll go bust. As many already are.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
sharper68
What are you talking about 'doom and gloom'? The USA looks like a franchise poop smear from coast to cost and many Americans are now only able to find a job as a cog at a crap chainstore or franchised restaurant.
Secondly, ALL economic data show that when the minimum wage is raised, all that happens is the price of everything goes up meaning that those people who didn't get a job are stuck with LESS money pay more for everything. ALL major schools of economy agree this is the case. All of them.
Thirdly, how about this - if you don't want to work for less, then simply don't take the job. It's really that easy. Go start up a small food stall/or little store of your own.
Of course in the USSA with all of regulations, you'll never be allowed to start a small business. Not with the millions and millions and millions of fees, licencing, restrictions, zones, etc....
So much for "land of the free".
Not that any of this matters, Americans will become poorer and simply normalize to it.
1
-
sharper68
Raising minimum wage reduces the number of jobs available. But, let's stop and think about this another way. You seem to think it's 'fair' to use force and ensure a 'minimum wage' is paid to people - OK then, how about minimum prices? Why not ensure that all apples are sold at a minimum price. And gasoline? And rent? Why are you specifically picking out low skilled labor-hours? How about the Cafe' owner? You have no compulsion forcing her to pay her employee's (who volunteer to work in her shop) a minimum - even though the worker takes ZERO risk. She takes the risk investing in her Cafe', why not force customers to pay for her coffee? Regardless of what customers thinking coffee is worth - it should be worth what some bureaucrat thinks it worth.
If you want to raise the price of labor-hours, then reduce regulation so that workers can open their own small businesses and compete for labor. That way labor-hour supply is reduced and the price per hour is raised until people no longer want to open businesses but want to instead sell labor.
You may also want to ask yourself: WHY are their so many labor-hours on the market? What role does the Public "Schooling" play in ill-preparing young Americans to go out and START businesses? Or is Public School actually creating an over supply of labor-hours by training Americans to BE worker cogs?
Of course, the solutions: sound money, law, deregulation, ending public schooling and allowing for competition are NEVER EVER going to happen - because, at the end of the day, Americans like paying lip service to freedom, but being free, that is the very furthest from most Americans to-do-list.
1
-
1
-
sharper68
You're wrong, and I didn't say "tax". I said 'Income Tax" as in a tax levied on laborer when they labor. The USA had roads, hospitals, schools, town halls, police, fought the revolutionary war, fought the civil war - all WITHOUT using an Income Tax. As a matter of fact, the US constitution forbade taxing laborers. It required a 16th Amendment to make it legal. In the same year the privately owned Central Bank was created. From that point onward the State has been able to sell debt to any and every buyer, often used to buy votes and just as often to line their own pockets, and force to steal money from the laborer.
Don't mistake force with civilization. Civilization arises through FREELY made interact. Force is a return to the jungle.
As for 'value' the State provides - maybe you need to step back and ask how you measure 'value'? What IS value?
Tell me, I have a coffee cup in my hand - how much do I 'value' it? Will you, or the State, ever know the answer to that question? No - it's impossible information. A prosperous society is one that uses sound money, law and gives people the freedom to freely interact with one another - thus will the value of my coffee cup be realize through free-trade with one another.
Because the State can never know the value of my coffee cup - or anything else, as that information is only know when a true free-trade is made, it must use other means to approximate that information. Which is why it will use it's ability to initiate force against "Society" to reduce the variables - ie: reduce civil liberties and reduce privacy. AND even then - it still can not know, only make a very poor approximation of value.
Don't worry - oh, we are headed in your direction. While it's sad to watch as freedom transpires and people lose their privacy, this is an inevitable journey. Expect to be much less freer, with much less privacy and less opportunity - and very much poorer. We're going to get all the State you want - and then some.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bryce William
We don't 'need' a government - but yes, we will have to live in Nation States for many more decades (or longer). I'd suggest freedom of movement would help along their elimination.
When you say 'corruption' what do you mean? Fraud is a legal term and so I replied with the legal remedy, the contract. International legal agreements are upheld and there's no World Government. So, don't jump to the conclusion we need a Government - we don't. 10s of Trillions of dollars worth of trade occurs between Nation State and, again, there is no World Government, or World Police, etc....
As for corruption, what do you mean by that term? If GM is mismanaged to the point of no longer providing value for money - then the company goes bankrupt. So, simply leaving the market is how corruption is dealt with. In short, people stop doing business with you - voluntarily.
I'll give an example. Apple made $35 billion last year. They work hard, across the whole world, to provide value for money. If they don't make the next iPhone6 or etc... they will go bust. The Department of Education cost $80 BILLION each year. The scores of American children have declined or remained static since it's inception (1979). They never go bankrupt. They should. They certainly do not provide value for money. If anything, they HARM education as they consume so many resources, producing nothing but more paper work and bureaucracy. They ARE the corruption you talk about. The only solution is to eliminate funding to the Government to deal with this corruption. Thus, the smaller the government, the less real corruption. IOWs, we need to eliminate income tax (labor tax).
So, that's how corruption is dealt with.
1
-
1
-
1
-
torchandhammer
I've lived near Detroit, in it's cousin, Flint. Detroit was run by Progressive Democrats spewing the same crap as this idiot. Yes, UAW got all the 'Works Rights' they could ask for. But get this: No one wants to pay $30,000 for a UAW made GM plastic toy car that's probably only worth $8000. So the entire company went bust. And took most of Flint and eventually Ford run Detroit with it.
As for the BBQ - what are you going on about? I have NO PROBLEM eating a BBQ from a neighbor in Detroit and would happily support his business. What a jerk to suggest just because a person lives in Detroit and is Black and poor that they can't produce value for money.
That's a jerk thing to say. I'll tell you what. I'd much rather buy the poor black guys hamburger than the pink slime from McDonalds and TacoHell. At least I'd see the meat come out of the package and grilled right there in front of my eyes. When I'm in Japan I generally notice there are TONS of small 5 seater restaurants and bars often converted out of someone's small house or livingroom. And guess what? They're just fine. Of course, in the 'FREE' USA these would all be totally illegal - you know, because we're so "FREE".
Stop and think for a minute, blacks in Detroit DO have BBQs and they do invite over friends and GASP it usually turns out just fine.
I make it a personal endeavour never to shop at or buy from chain stores of chain cafe's whenever there's a local alternative. I'd much rather support a local small guy and his BBQ grill - ANY day of the week, rather than see that person dependent on the State or working as a wage-slave at a fast-food chain.
Wouldn't you? And even if you didn't - don't tell me what I can do. I'm an adult, given I'm medical researcher, a doctor and have lived in 5 different countries - I think I can decide what's good for me. I'm happy to let you do the same for you. That's a real 'free' society. Where adults have the freedom to live their lives as they please if it's not aggressive against others.
1
-
torchandhammer
You seem to be missing the point. I don't mind if you don't want to eat at a non-FDA regulated fast food chain. You can do, and you can pay, for all the inspection you want. Don't force me to pay for you choices. Thus, my BBQ lunch at a privately regulated or even unregulated open grill is my choice. Your pink slime is your choice. It's that simple. The nice thing about this, is, over time that BBQ will build up a reputation and expand if they're providing value for money. And if they sell something that makes someone sick - they'll be sued for fraud and if they have insurance, it'll go up. If they don't provide value for money, they'll go bust. And over time, we'll become a prosperous society as the best stay in business and expand and the crap leave society.
(actually, we MUST do this and eventually we will, because we need the jobs).
Secondly, I train medical doctors. I have no problem with you opening up a surgery. A) basic surgery is easy, any idiot can do it. B) basic medicine is pretty easy too. C) If people find value paying you and not a certified doctor, that's their choice. They're adults. It's not like certifications will go away - most people will WANT some level of certification. Which, by the way, is PRIVATE.
One of the reasons why the price of medicine is so costly, the the quality is so low, is because the AMA has regulatory-captured healthcare and turned it into a massive rent-seeking scam. In the USA 450,000+ Americans are killed BY healthcare due to medical error each year. No amount of regulation is going to ever change this - it will, actually, make it worse. Much worse.
The solution is freedom. More civil liberties. Not less. More.
1
-
1
-
torchandhammer
If you sell medical services to adults and are totally upfront in the fact that you're in idiot, then it's their money, they can pay you. Of course, if you lie and say you're qualified to practice, then you go to jail for fraud.
See? It's pretty simple really.
As for selling drugs, once there's a free market for drugs, no one would want your drugs are the free market would provide extremely safe and cheap alternatives.
Right now you could offer your services as a software engineer - go ahead, tell people you'll program for them, see how quickly you get a job. You could even offer to work for Google for free, see if they hire you.
You seem to mistake having the freedom to trade with people as other people automatically wanting to trade with you simply because you offer a low quality product at a cheap price. It doesn't work that way. You won't be the only one with a BBQ. If one person sees you're making money, they open one too. Also, you won't be the only person offering medical services. And likewise.
The AMA run medical industry kills up to 480,000 every year due to medical error. So, whatever fantasy you have that the highly hyper-regulated medical non-free-markets produces quality (even at an outrageous price), well, I'm sorry to inform you but the empirical data shows this assumption is dead wrong.
I do find it interesting you are arguing for less freedom. That is the most interesting to me. Of course, you've lived in this system, you've normalized to it. You support it. That's only natural. Even when informed, you'll continue to believe and put faith into what you think of as normal.
Even so far as to support reducing the freedom of other's living around you. I'm not telling you, that you have to do anything. You can keep paying for the poorly run FDA. I'm arguing other adults shouldn't have to live by your decisions and can make their own for themselves.This is GASP the foundation of the USA.
Orwell's quote from 1984:
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
Your argument is that Freedom is Slavery. That's what you're attempting to do (fallaciously). I wonder: Do you support the War on Drugs? The War on Terror? If not then should I argue how you then think people should die of drug ODs and of Terrorist bombings? That was your argument to me after all. How about Government Schools? The ones in Detroit paid a 13th month bonus. The ones that pump out functional illiterate graduates who can barely read and write?
As I stated: You should be free to do as you like so long as it doesn't harm others. That's a BASIC Human Right.
Give other the same freedom.
Of course, Americans now hate freedom, and so you needn't worry as it's not coming to the USA any time too soon. Exactly the opposite if anything. So, you're in luck. It's over. No civil freedoms, highly regulated lives, a State that spies on us.
Perfectly Progressive: Welcome to Socialism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
torchandhammer
Michigan, within which I lived for over 20 years, is about as far from a free-market as you could imagine. Tax cuts for the politicians business friends is far from a free market for all participants. Yes, usually that does enrich a few. It's generally called fascism. I suppose in modern America it's called business as usual.
Why would you expect MI to have a good employment rate when, at the same time, you want all these regulations to prevent people from opening businesses and hiring people? Also, you want minimum wage laws, millions of other regulations (safety for example) and probably want the business owner to pay for employee healthcare etc... why would ANYONE want to risk their personal assets on such a loosing proposition? Better to just get a high paying secure job in government with a strong government union and lots of vacation time, benefits and a sweet pension.
If we want poor people to open up businesses, and be something other than working cogs, then we'll need to greatly eliminate taxes and regulations. Hell, the paperwork alone is enough to put most poor off even the thought of opening a business.
Why do people buy supplements? Because people want supplements. So long as there's no fraud involved, I see no problem with buying supplements. Think about this acetaminophen (Tylenol), a very common analgesic, was found to have no significant effect for many types of pain it is prescribed for.
Placebo is quite powerful - so, again, I see no problem with supplements. If people volunteer to buy them, then they're getting value for money. That's fine by me. I could ask the same about TV. Why do people watch 90% of what's on it? I don't. It's useless crap. But, many do. They find value in it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
torchandhammer
Actually I said increased civil liberty, personal freedom leads to prosperity. Which it does - by definition. Prosperity = time + freedom. We've seen an increase in prosperity and loss of freedom because we've (generally) been so efficient we've gained a lot of time thanks to the industrial revolution. But, around 4 decades ago that ended and we've been hemorrhaging prosperity ever since.
I disagree it's easy for a poor person to open a business. It's not easy. Worse, many poor are (after 12 years of Government Schooling) functionally illiterate. As a matter of fact, 1 in 5 American adults can not read and write with a high enough level of competence and would not be able to read these paragraphs and understand what we've been discussing.
Lastly, we can not 'know'. There's no knowing the future (see: Hume's Problem of Induction). It's impossible information. I stated freedom leads to more prosperity because by definition it must (assuming time remains constant). However, that's not my argument for why we need civil liberties, that's an argument made on Ethics. It's immoral to initiate force against innocent people. So, we should try not doing that.
Sadly, we live in upside down world, an Orwellian dystopia. It's here. Ever notice how people in the dystopia think everything is normal (NK as an example). That's us - now. It's now 'normal' to put 3 week old infants into daycare. That's how much time we've lost, how much prosperity we lost. I hate to imagine the damage being done to those children's brains, but I can see some of the outcomes. Namely the eating disorders, antipsychotics, SSRI's, cutting and other self harm. This isn't normal.
IMO, and I've lived in 5 countries, the solution is more freedoms. Not less. More. We also need Law that protect property rights (beginning with self ownership - which means no income/labor tax). We need sound money - which means no fiat currency. We need more freedom, not less, more. Lastly, parents must teach their children to think reasonably and never hit them. It's going to be a long long road out of this mess, it is possible, I'm not so sure most will make it though. A few will.
Oh well, at least the internet is still 'free' - for now. There's at least one place people might be able to create value and maybe even be paid for it.
1
-
1
-
torchandhammer
There's no way I have the free time to start a business. Zero chance of that happening. Although, if I did open a business, it'd be a private school. Which, perhaps I may one day. Maybe in Japan.
I still find it interesting I'm arguing for more freedoms, and you for less. I'm not arguing for no State (although that'd be nice) but for limited government - the founding principle of our nation. The first 10 amendments are to protect us FROM government. Not from the rich, but from the State. There were some very rich people who lived in the USA. And plenty of poor. Yet, the Framers overwhelmingly agreed to limit the State - imagine, James Madison refused to pay a general welfare towards Revolutionary War Widows. THAT'S the degree to which the Framers sought to limit the reach of the State.
Anyway, that's not the direction we're going. We'll be getting much much much more Government, we'll lose more civil liberties and can kiss personal privacy goodbye. That isn't coming back. This of course is inevitable. The State must grow and we must lose our civil liberties and privacy. Those are the primary variables in the post-hoc modeling of the economy. And, now that the State makes up 60% of the economy (or more) those variables (our freedom and privacy) must be reduced.
It's a necessary evil and what Americans want after all. So, that's what we'll get.
1
-
torchandhammer
You're using the word 'theories' incorrectly.
A good example would be Scandinavian economies. They cycle through periods of being more free market, which create prosperity, and then back to more socialistic, which reduces prosperity. It's quite clear that prosperity is strongly correlated with personal freedom. Likewise in Japan. As they socialized, they've seen a reduction in prosperity (yet, in many ways they're still way more free than us).
As a matter of fact, the US Government sometimes insists that other countries grant their citizens freedoms we don't even enjoy as a means of creating the prosperity needed to repay the IMF.
Communist vs free(er) market China would be another example.
West vs East Germany is a great example. North vs South Korea is another example. Slavery in the USA is a good example, German farmers who migrated to the south USA demonstrated that paying free people was actually cheaper and more productive than Slavery (which always requires a State to be cost effective - reducing overall prosperty (externalizing costs).
Now, Slavery is a fine last example. Why? Well, you're making the Slave Owner's / Master's argument, and I'm making the Abolitionists'. Slave Owners actually said exactly what you said: "Your theories are fine and dandy, now show me a successful world power not built and maintained by conquest and Slavery". And, no one could. Everyone had normalized to Slavery. The ONLY argument anyone could make is it's immoral.
The same goes for giving women the right to vote. Or ANY truly Progressive movement.
The fact is, I'm the Progressive here - you're the Conservative. You want things to remain as you were normalized to and have internalized to believe as normal. I'm simply suggesting we stop the violence against the innocent - or at least reduce it. From freedom will come trade and free trade is good at finding value when done with law and property rights.
Just something to think about as you continue your argument for less freedom.
Which, you're in luck, most American's hate freedom and so we'll get a lot less of it - and be poorer off too. I wouldn't doubt the sociopaths who run the State aren't, as we speak, looking for another War to drum up. Just to burn off their less productive tax chattel. As any good Farmer managing a Farm would think as sensible. Quite Nihilistic of them TBH.
1
-
torchandhammer
You're using the word theory incorrectly. Suppositions would be more apt.
I chose NK and SK because they share culture and land. W. Germany and E Germany likewise.
The GFC 'bubble' was not 'free market'. We haven't lived in a free-market ever. And since the early 1900s, with the creation of the central bank, became a regulated market. It's a myth to suggest the financial markets are 'deregulated'. Medicine and Finance are the two most heavily regulated markets (hyper-regulated) and they're both gamed by those on the inside and rent-seekers. Both are a total mess. Finance in particular is not even a shadow of a free market. The State creates our currency (fiat), tax incentives, and 1 million and 1 other regulations.
Lastly, Freedom is not the same as Lawless. We actually don't know what our society would look like free - maybe we'd have more laws and less regulations? We just can't know that information.
As for Scandinavia:
http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Scandinavia_and_the_social_state
I'm not arguing a LIMITED state can't increase economic output - it can. But, history shows this is not sustainable because once the State is given domain it grows to take over more roles in society. I personally think no State would be more ideal. And, in the long run, as society becomes more complex - this may start to happen in some places. As for now, I'd like to see MI and some other States leave the union, create a cheaper currency (cheaper than the Yuan) and begin to trade again. Not likely to happen - but, I'd be interested to see it happen.
In the mean time, I expect more State. Less freedom. Less privacy. More regulation. Probably more war too. The State likes war. War on drugs. War on illiteracy. War on Terror. Cold War. Hot War. War on Privacy.
That's what it does after all. It's what it is actually. Force. Which is why it used to be limited.
1
-
Julius Buset Asplin
I don't disagree we're losing both prosperity and liberty. However, I'd argue our loss of liberty preceded loss of prosperity. Yes, it is true that people are becoming poorer. However, IMO, the solution is more personal freedom, not less. Free trade between two people means both people gain. It's a win-win. Or else the trade wouldn't have taken place.
The problem (as I see it) is those who got in first (the big corporations as an example) are now using the State to limit or outright prevent competition, they use tax laws, debt obligations, even the police and military - all to prevent peaceful adults from trading with one another. Essentially, they want to control our ability to create our own prosperity. It's better for them, if our wealth is controlled by them. Thus, we are controlled by them.
Apple was started in a garage. Google in a room. You may not be able to start a multibillion dollar car company, sure, that is true. We live in a world of limited resources. But, you should have the freedom to create the trades you can create - and then leave it up to people to decide if they want what you're selling.
Freedom is the path to prosperity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Julius Buset Asplin
Have you ever read ANYTHING regarding research into monopolies? Have you? I have. I actually read a dissertation who's research covered that topic. Empirically all evidence suggests the monopolies are actually good at keep prices LOW. Which is bad for competition, but good for consumers. Also, there's only been one true monopoly in the USA, it was Aluminium and when it was broken up, the price went up. Standard Oil wasn't a monopoly, but when it was broken up, the price of oil went up. Microsoft has a near monopoly on OS, but look at how quickly they're falling behind. GM had large near monopoly on automotive (well, the big 3) - all but Ford have gone bust. GM went bankrupt, Chrysler was sold.
Sorry, but in the real world, free people allowed to compete keep monopolies at bay. NOT the State. The State enshrines To Big Too Fail into Law. Worse still, workers (example UAW) work hard at keeping competition away (laws that restrict importation for example).
Again, you have everything upside down. Which is typical of religion.
1
-
1
-
Julius Buset Asplin
Give an example of a private monopoly overpricing their product. The fact is, empirically, only one true monopoly has ever existed in the USA (aside from the government's monopoly on violence) and that is aluminium. When that monopoly was broken up, the price of aluminium went UP. likewise, when Standard Oil was broken up (it wasn't a true monopoly) the price of oil went UP.
The empirical evidence suggests that in free societies (free-trade) monopolies are nearly impossible to develop and when they do develop (which only happened once) to maintain a monopoly they must keep prices very very very low to prevent competition from entering the market. This is bad for those who want to enter the market. But, its fantastic for the consumer.
I find it interesting you worry about 'private' people owning a monopoly but not a 'public' monopoly. Why is that? Both are groups of people. Private people cannot initiate force against you, Public people can. Private people must offer you value and entice you to trade with them. Public people can point a gun at your head (or very real threat of being killed) and force you to do as they wish. Public people can and do initiate violence against innocent people. Private people can only use violence in defense of property (mainly our body).
See, in reality, you've been taught to think of "Public" as "good" and Private as "bad". Which is now normal. But, there is no good or bad. What there is, Ethically speaking, are morals. And Public is immoral - which is why it was limited in the first place [the first 10 amendments are to protect us (private) from them (public)] whereas Private is moral.
(this assumes we use the Kantian definition of moral being voluntary and immoral being involuntary).
Think of it this way, if people really do want public services - then we wouldn't need the initiation of force to deliver them. What people really want is to steal. And they'd never soil their own hands, so they turn to the State. But, these are the LAST people you should entrust with power of you - as they can, and do, use it against innocent people. That's their role in society. Which, again, is why the government was LIMITED. Do you really think those Private people wouldn't use force against the innocent as soon as they can?! Of course they do! Which is why they must stay Private - so that they can't. But, now they have a big fat State to use against us. And that, they do.
Anyway, that aside, hey! You're in luck! We're getting more Government, more regulations, more laws, more Public debt (for the good of society), more inflation of our fiat currency, more taxes and as a bonus we get to lose our privacy. Yippie!
1
-
Julius Buset Asplin
You may be correct in some regards regarding why monopolies are cheaper (I'm not sure why you think employees will be paid less?). The data suggests they must keep prices very low to keep people out of the market. As soon as they raise prices, yes, people will pay more, but then competition comes in (and with free trade with other countries - there's always going to be competition, very few businesses can service the entire world AND maintain a monopoly - I'll given an example).
Sure, it sucks for people who want to start a business. But it's great for the customer. Not that these results matter. What matters is if people are FREE to voluntary trade or not. If they are, then that's fine.
I'll give you an example of a monopoly outside the USA. It's in Japan. It's the production of high quality silicon. There is one family owned company in Japan makes pretty much ALL of the silicon used in high end electronics - for the entire world. Germany tried to compete, with them, they could technically make the high grade silicon, but not at the same price. So, this one Japanese company has a trade secret and use it to maintain their monopoly - even the US Pentagon must buy from them and have a special arrangement to do so. Yet, electronics are cheap and stay cheap. So, it's great for us right? I think so.. But, yes, sure it was bad for the Germany company who couldn't compete and went belly up. Does this mean this Japanese company should what? Be broken up? Why? I wonder if it was a USA company if it wouldn't be broken up? Probably. And then electronics would cost more. Also, why would they endanger their special relationships and raise prices? They haven't yet - and there's no evidence they are going to either.
Lastly, I'm sure those German chemical engineers were able to easily find other work.
1
-
Julius Buset Asplin
You wrote that we "need inflation" or the economy will "collapse"?
(a) How do you explain electronics. Each year, for the last 5 decades computers have become faster and cheaper - yet, somehow, the electronics industries are booming.
(b) how do you explain 'free to play'? Online games that are free, that's a lot of deflation - right down to zero, yet they generate money through voluntary interaction.
(c) Youtube is free to watch.
(d) Phone companies used to charge an arm and a leg for 'long distance' (which was usually just the other side of town) and now the price to call the other side of the world is nearly free (Skype) - yet all these deflation is not resulting in collapse in the industry.
(e) What do you mean 'collapse'? What? People are going to stop buying and selling - everything??? Even oil? Gas? Food? Water?
Lastly, the mid-1800s saw deflation for about 20 years and is, by some standards, the largest increase in standard of living - ever. Ever. As in - ever. Most due to the second industrial revolution and how the price of everything dropped. To the benefit of everyone.
I always hear their so-called "Economists" who say we NEED 2% inflation. As if Americans who charge a TV on their Credit Card with 18% annual interest really take that 2% inflation into account. As if you're going to wait a year to buy a $100 pair of pants for $98 to save the 2%. That's asinine.
I do agree, yes, the economy of the highly leveraged rich might 'collapse'. They need the inflation to wipe out their loans. The POOR on the other hand, I'm pretty sure they'd like to see a little less inflation and maybe gasp even a little electronics-style deflation.
1
-
Julius Buset Asplin
I'm sure they're making a profit, but we can only know if they're truly overpricing their products if and when a competitor comes into the market - and the last one was in Germany and they went bankrupt. Thus, it seems/appears as if this company is keeping their secret AND their prices low. 36% of the profit made on an iPhone is made in Japan BTW. Also, 24% is made in Germany. 6% in the USA and 3% in China. Something to think about.
If money appreciated in value, why is it you think no one would invest? Also, if the money supply is low, banks can offer a better of rant of return than the couch to entice people to take their money from their couch and put it in the bank - who then lend out at interest.
I have no problem with natural inflation as that signals a product is low in supply (say, when blueberries go out of season). But, IMO this Keynsian idea we "need" inflation has only resulted in the real purchasing power dropping and thus we've seen families now where both parents have to work to get by. This means parents no longer spend time with their children. Those children are many times placed into day supervision. I know of mother's who've put 3 week old infants into day care. This is very traumatic for a child on numerous levels (bonding issues, body dismorphia from not being touched enough, anxiety when bond-mothers leave [18 months is the turnaround rate in most day care centers] not to mention outright neglect, etc...) - I hate to imagine how this is going to affect society in 20 years time.
I'll take my chances with the natural inflation and natural deflation and not the central bank manipulated inflation. I do agree with you, our current economic paradigm will collapse without constant inflation to reduce public debt. And our social paradigm will collapse because we do. In essence. I see no solution to this problem. I will probably move back to Japan. Although they're suffering from many of the same problems - some even more so. Yet, they still have a social contract that's hard to completely break (although it may loose a lot of it's cultureal aspects over time - which is a shame).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ETericET
I'm not a Rethuglican.
The problems with healthcare are actually just a symptom of the problems with the entire system. This is just the inevitable outcome of a State-run Centrally mismanaged monetary system, and three generations of regulatory mayhem.
The solution's are and are not simple. But the goal should be to create a social system where we do NOT lose more Civil Liberties. Losing MORE Civil Liberties is not the path to a prosperous society - nor to a healthy one.
As for healthcare, we need to allow free competition between insurance providers, we need to deregulate and allow free competition in healthcare providers, this will reduce costs. As it stands today, many States only allow MD/DO to practice medicine - but a few allow Nurses to open and own GP clinics. Many cities are not allowed to open competing hospitals - specifically to keep prices high.
As for people who go into hospital, (A) catastrophic insurance is pretty cheap and could be a voluntary aspect of credit card approval (Japan does this). Thus, the once-in-a-blue-moon accident can be covered through voluntary means. (B) Simply refuse to treat non-life threatening diseases until an agreement is reached and then sue the person who doesn't pay - take their 'truck and their guns' as payments (C) children should be given "Free" healthcare as they are not responsible for their parents bad choices.
Insurance companies should be allowed to charge more for people who are unhealthy (obese as an example) and less for people who actually work hard at staying healthy - together with competition, we would have affordable high-quality healthcare.
As for ObamaCare, I can tell you right now what it's going to be like. The working-poor will pay a lot more than option (A) as outlined above (a lot more) and Public Hospitals will, in time, look like Public Housing Slums. The rich will get great healthcare - many of whom will write-off as an expense and probably get it deduced on their taxes, which they don't pay anyway. So, if you really cared about the poor - you'd NOT be in favor of ObamaCare.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
NUTCASE71733
"public education has always been more sucsessful at what it does, or rather did before libertarians and republicans decided they had to destroy it "
Are you serious? What planet are you on? Certainly not earth.
-- Chicago is generally liberal progressive, public school teachers in Chicago make about 40% MORE than your average person living IN Chicago and paying tax for public schooling! The neighbourhood Obama represented has shit public schools with 40% functional illiteracy.
-- Detroit was run by Democrats unbroken for 50 years, public school teachers were being paid a 13 month bonus, many are on $75,000 a year, Detroit graduates have a 50% functional illiteracy rate.
-- New York, ditto
As for "Libertarians" give me a f*cking break. They make up less than 1% of the total voting population and to my knowledge there's never been any Libertarian POTUS or Senators. DO YOU KNOW OF ONE?
Wherever you're getting your information it's totally lying to you.
RE: Public Schooling vs Homeschooling. I suppose it all depends on what you want your child to learn. I'm honestly not worried at all about religious people, they're generally honest. While they may believe in superstitious nonsense, they generally think each to their own. And, more and more people are becoming less and less religious. This may or may not be a good thing. I think it could have a down side to it (and yes, I'm 100% atheist). I find there are more Statheist's now-a-days. You probably are.
Well, think about this: The Government spent $8.5 TRILLION dollars on two made up wars. I don't know about you, but I imagine that money could have been better spent on schools and even provided tax credits to families who'd like to try homeschooling, alternative schooling, etc...
As I work in a University, I can see how poor the public schools are. These kids are supposed to be the best (which is why they go into university). Many can't even read and write well. Sometimes it looks like a 12 year old - I'm not kidding. Many can't even do simple math. I mean SIMPLE math in their heads. Like 12 x 8 or Log10 of 1000. It's as if they didn't learn anything at all other than basic reading. No understanding of philosophy, history, nothing. What the hell ARE they learning? Not to be religious? Big deal, that will happen anyway.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jenni Lee I didn't say owning a business is a civil "Right". I said OPENING a business WAS a right - long ago. When we were a freer nation of people. As a matter of fact, there's little difference between opening a business and selling a service or good and offering to perform labor, which is itself selling a service - labor. The Progressive State has also restricted this as well. Thus, of course we are becoming a poorer less prosperous society and will continue to become so as more and more progressive regulations make it nearly impossible for anyone to do anything.
Anyway, let's let empiricism see who is correct. Are Americans opening less businesses and are restrictions increasing? Are we becoming poorer? So far? Restrictions and regulations increase (by the millions of lines of legal code) each year and less and less Americans want to bother wasting their time opening up a business - particularly when people like Thom run their name's through the mud. I personally wouldn't open a bussiness up in the USA. No way. It's not worth the regulatory hassle, combined with how litigation happy we Americans are.
That said, overseas I probably will open up a business. I find Asia is much freer than the USA, personally. Also, I like the Asian "Can Do" attitude and Asians have a good work ethic and positive attitude about doing work when at work. Asians don't sue as much either. It's easy to organize to do business over a handshake - and some are much more trustworthy. In my experience.
So, there you go, another American entrepreneur makes plans to leave and provide goods and services to others outside of the USA. Your understanding of a "right" vs a "privledge" isn't going to do squat to keep me or other's like me here in the USA. We will not be investing and working hard to make our nation a better place - no, we'll do that elsewhere, for other people's benefit. And get this, I imagine, I won't be hassled over the nuances of having the 'right' to own a businesses vs the 'right' to be allowed to freely OPEN a new business. A small added bonus :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Andi Amador Talk about a sloppy strawman.
1) I didn't say anything about 'shooting' someone because you didn't like their service. That would be against the law.
2) I also didn't say anything about lawlessness. Contract law, laws that protect property rights and sound money are all perfectly compatible with civil society.
3) I also didn't say anything about removing licencing. Receiving a qualification is perfectly compatible with a civil society. The AMA, a private medical organization of physicians, as an example, qualifies and licences members.
4) No, it would not be legal to sell goods and/or services fraudulently as that's both a breach of contract law and potentially property damage if it leads to someone being harmed. IOWs, yes, you can hang your shingle up, but you can not claim to be a qualified medical doctor as that would be fraud.
So, if you're done with the strawmen, please feel free to address the timely and quite simple example that was taken from contemporary news just this last week. See, unlike you and your 'Wild West' red herring, I posted a meaningful question, one that is being dealt with by the State, as we speak.
Oh, and to make sure we're clear, my family isn't white and I have no time for superstitious non-sense like belief in asinine memes such as God/s.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
thrisbt1 No, I thought you asked me how I would personally rectify this.
To my question: "Okay, suppose someone opens a Pizza store and they refuse to sell pizza's to Blacks, Asians and homosexuals. What do YOU want the Police to do about it?
Let's hear what YOU think the Progressive State should do to legally rectify this?"
My answer is, given the information presented here, the Police are to play no role in this particular transaction.
1) Ethically, there is nothing immoral occurring.
2) Aesthetically, the store owner is, in my opinion, acting in a despicable manner.
I would personally, not shop there. I would instead, make it a point to buy pizza directly from competitors. If possible, I would work towards educating the next generation not to follow this particular superstitious belief system. Perhaps I'd promote competing superstitions like Buddhism. Or other belief systems such as bayesian epistemology.
I understand that the slow learning process (which involves up regulating the production of AMPA receptors - this takes a while) is not as satisfying as the immediate base feeling one gets when violence is perpetrated (which is why our News and society is filled with images of violence). But, if we want to live in a civil peaceful society, then we have to act civil. Perhaps a logical biconditional argument could be made here?
Anyway, if worse came to worse, I could invest in a smart phone app that allows me to refuse business with any of the people who volunteer to supply goods and services to the pizza shop owner. Perhaps even shutting off electricity to the shop once the contract has finished. Or not renewing a rental agreement. Etc.... Though, this should only be done in an extreme situation. The best option is to buy my pizza elsewhere. Ultimately, it may take generational learning (this is due to low levels of synaptic plasticity in the adult brain).
I hope that has answered your question satisfactorily.
1
-
LiberalLionMMXX Strawman much?
1) You used the word utopia, not me.
2) I certainly did not say Licences would not be issued, only that you would not be required to obtain one by the State.
Here, let me show you how faulty (and simplistic) your reasoning is:
"You think licensing professionals is a bad idea? Good luck when the dropout down the road decides that he's a brain surgeon"
3) No, I think private licensing is a GOOD IDEA. As a matter of fact, that's how we do it currently.
4) I think giving the State a monopoly on who can issue licenses is a bad idea.
5) You can get on a plane, fly overseas and have brain surgery done today by a surgeon who is not licensed to practice in the USA. As a matter of fact, many people do go overseas and have major surgery performed.
6) Good luck getting an insurance company to pay for a non-licensed drop out to perform your surgery. That is never going to happen. I wouldn't even raise that one to the level of strawman argument. It was insulting - to your intellect and makes you look puerile. You should apologize to your Ego immediate.
7) It would be illegal to pretend to be licensed as that is contract fraud.
Lastly, you have no idea about how MD's are qualified. I on the other hand actually qualify MDs. So, unlike you, I am one of your regulators in this instance. If you think having a monopoly on who can practice is driving UP quality - well, you're the one living in a Progressive utopian bubble. But, I'll give you a clue. In 1990 about 90,000 Americans died that year due to medical error. In 2010 that number was 480,000.
The only one living with dreams of Utopia are you Regressive socialists. And more often than not, you think you know much more than you do. My suggestion is vote Hillary and hope the nation does us the favor of collapsing soon. Until then, enjoy our Progressive Socialistic NSA Police State. It's going to be here for a long long time to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here's an eye witness who saw him run at the police officer, not to mention the autopsy is consistent with a forward charge shot in the front and top of head.
Transcript:
#1 How’d he get from there to there?
#2 Because he ran, the police was still in the truck – cause he was like over the truck
{crosstalk}
#2 But him and the police was both in the truck, then he ran – the police got out and ran after him
{crosstalk}
#2 Then the next thing I know he doubled back toward him cus – the police had his gun drawn already on him –
#1. Oh, the police got his gun
#2 The police kept dumpin on him, and I’m thinking the police kept missing – he like – be like – but he kept coming toward him
{crosstalk}
#2 Police fired shots – the next thing I know – the police was missing
#1 The Police?
#2 The Police shot him
#1 Police?
#2 The next thing I know … I’m thinking … the dude started running … (garbled something about “he took it from him”)
But I'll tell you what, you want to blame the police for the riots and looting and mess that became of Ferguson et.al. - go ahead. But if you want to actually make a change - then discuss the REAL problem which is the parenting. Black parents hit their children, statically, more often than other cultures of people in the USA (however, the other cultures are very bad as well). This has been shown to lower IQ and lead to violent behavior. Further, black men are not being the stay at home fathers due to the mess that is welfare (which pays fathers NOT to remain with their children's mothers). Also, regulation makes it hard for blacks to start business of their own. Lastly, Government school does NOT teach your children to read and write - YOU have to do that. Some black (and white) neighborhoods have >50% functional illiteracy.
Do we have a problem with the Police State USSA? Yes, this isn't one of those instances. So, stop being driven by emotion and do something to address the violence, State rent-seeking and illiteracy plaguing these communities. Or, don't. Sink into a pit of self-pity and hope to the Gods the wars in the ME bring the oil needed to pay for these 'services' because - one day, the wars will end and the ME oils going to be gone. And then there won't be cheap food, energy and welfare will be severely limited. The work-houses (or worse) will return. Count this as a timely warning - at least as I see things to come.
1
-
1
-
(1) Care to explain Darren Wilson's brused eye? What? Magic faeries?
(2) The front facing shots are consistent with a 6'4", nearly 300 pound young man turning and charging, head down, towards the cop.
(3) Yes, having THC in your system can, and does, cause some people (particularly young people) to experience paranoia and hallucinations. It's actually common.
(4) Michael Brown pushed over a store owner AS he stole something from the store - just a few minutes earlier. That's thuggish behavior. He's lucky THAT man didn't have a gun on him.
(5) We'll see what the grand jury's verdict is.
(6) YES - we live in a hyper-regulated POLICE State. Yes, it's a total mess. The Police are way way way out of control. But get this, 'free-markets' in unregulated or minimally regulated markets/societies where people are civil enough to voluntarily trade with one another don't poof into existence with the words 'free-markets'. Free markets are hard to develop and even harder to maintain. Which is why, for most of history, we live with regulated markets - usually under a monarch.
Japan would be a good example of somewhat free markets. Want to know what you'll find in Japan? Beer vending machines. You'll also see food stored out on the sidewalk at night because store-fronts often don't have room to store it. You'll also see houses totally unlocked. What you don't see is looting. You don't see beer vending machines vandalized. Children are safe to walk ANYWHERE through ANY city in Japan.
The USSA is a total mess. A Progressive State-run Fascistic violent crap-hole.
I grew up poor in a welfare single-mother farm in the USA. The solution to success is quite easy. Parents need to get rid of their TV, limit time on the Xbone and PS4, control the types of music in the house, and either place their children into a Charter School and/or if possible homeschool them. MOST IMPORTANT do NOT hit them. Hitting as a form of 'discipline' has been shown to decrease IQ and increase violent behavior later in life. Their fathers MUST remain in their sons lives showing the LOVE and teaching them logic - or finding someone who can. Then, after 2 - 3 generations of raising children intelligently, MAYBE a somewhat unregulated free-ish market can take root in these poor communities bringing trade and prosperity.
OR you can run around like a chicken with your head cut off, loot the few business stupid enough to open in your neighborhood, do drugs, listen to and follow gangster-culture, watch brain-numbing TV (like this doco), and graduate from Government School as one of the 20% of functional illiterate Americans that now populate the electorate.
Your choice.
1
-
smartdave599
I'll have to be brief as I'm in a hurry.
1. The State has the legal obligation to initiate force against innocent people in society. This is it's legal definition and has been for over a century.
2. The militant arm of the State internally is the police.
3. Once a law is passed - example: drug laws. Now, the State must fulfill it's legal obligation: which is to initiate force against innocent people. To do so it uses the Police. Thus, the police are employed to use force against innocent people for the State. Thus, if you have an innocent human, on their property, smoking an all natural weed they found on their property, if they refused to desist, the State can escalate to the point of killing this innocent adult.
The USA now houses more non-violent morally innocent humans in cages than any other Nation in the history of humanity. Is that a good enough example?
So? Where did the drug law come from? Well, it started with medical doctors wanting a monopoly on Rx. This is referred to as regulatory-capture and is a form of rent-seeking. Which the AMA did get (and the main reason why AMA-run "medicine" sucks in the USSA, almost 450,000 Americans die each year of medical error). Once these Rx laws was passed, it became legal and was very easy for the State to extend this regulation to include other substances - ones that prior to this, you, as an adult, were allowed to consume. This is what the State does - you can think of it as a cancer. The original tumor has long left the lungs and metastasized to all areas of the body. The State passed a law forbidding some substances - even natural ones. This is insane. Slowly but surely these and other laws have evolved the USA into the Police State we now live in. Not only with drug laws, but food laws, and a million other laws.
It's too late now. Americans are as normalized to living as tax chattel to our Farmers as North Koreans are to worshiping the Kim family. Americans now hate freedom and much prefer State regulation/State violence. Americans can't even imagine living freely. So, we don't. And we won't.
The only solution to the State is ending the Federal Reserve. Why? Because the State needs money like cancer needs blood. Money is the life-blood of society. The Central Bank is being used to divert most of the money towards supporting the cancer - aka: The Police State. Expect to see more big wars in the coming years. Expect to see the State expand, and as it does, we lose more rights, more liberty, we lose our privacy, we become its servants, we'll pay more in tax, we'll become more regulated and much poorer- this is all very natural. It's the cycle all nations go through. I'd say, we have another 30 - 40 years of this "New Economy". So, if you like the ways things are going, or don't, plan on a few more decades of this.
That's what I think anyway.
Your best option is to recognize this and raise your family to think logically - or if mathematically inclined, perhaps rationally. Although I think logic is more useful if you're not math-inclined. You MUST never ever hit them. Ever. As in - never hit your children. Unless they're going to be hit by a bus (which is your fault for letting them out of your site) then you better not yell at them either. Get rid of your TV. Highly regulate the internet. Read to them - every day. Work logic puzzles with them. Get them into a chartered school. Plan on living your life FOR your children, and if they love you, they'll look after you when you're old. Have as little to do with the State as is legally possible. Don't wish for over the top material goods, save and invest your money. Eat at home. It's all pretty common sense stuff.
Anyway, now I'm going to have end my time on this thread. I really am too busy.
Best of luck.
1
-
1
-
1
-
smartdave599
The minimum wage allowed bigots to indulge their bigotry. In a free-society a bigot is forced to pay a price for their bigotry. Thus, if they exclude skilled blacks (particularly if the black person is willing to undercut on price) then over time it's likely they'll go out of business. Why? Because the other person, who is willing to hire blacks, will be able to offer a cheaper priced item of similar or better quality. Minimum wage laws (and other 'regulations') where specifically brought in BY white-democrats to legally use force (at the point of a gun) to prevent blacks from selling labor at a cheaper price. Like the Chinese are doing now. As a matter of fact, if the poor white worker had his/her say - we wouldn't be allowed to trade with the Chinese and 100s of millions of Chinese would still be living poor. As it is, they are becoming the richest nation in the world. Blacks were the Chinese of the 1930s.
And guess what? It worked. Blacks went from having a lower unemployment rate and lower divorce rate to a higher unemployment rate. Then the State paid mothers who didn't get married. This did wonders for their marriage rate. Which is now at all time lows. Many single children without fathers.
Public Housing welfare ghettos is what the State did to the black community. Deserts of Single Mothers and children filled with disparate violence. Many of these children will never learn to read and write, they'll never be allowed to open a business, they'll never be anything other than a dependent on the State or at best - a laborer in a fast-food chain. Eating pink-slime and giving birth to the next generation of hopelessness. This is what your so-called "Social Welfare Programs" bring to the real world. While OTOH, Progressives talk of "Slave Labor" in China while the Chinese are becoming the wealthiest nation in the world will 100s of million being lifted out of poverty. Freedom to trade is real Social Welfare.
The solution is really quite simple. MORE freedom. Not less. More. Sound money. Not debt - savings.
The State IS violence - we need less of it. Not more of it. But less of it. And while you may not understand it as being violence and may not understand why the first 10 amendments were about LIMITING the State and protecting us FROM the government - - you can damn well bet the oligarchs running our society sure as hell do. They just used the State to bail themselves out. The rich have never been richer. AND we're about to lose our privacy too - well, we already have, but we'll lose it permanently.
Look, for most of history, most people loved their Rulers. Today is no different.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
im1greatman
Why are you equating free markets with barbarism? Freedom does NOT equate to lawlessness. Free markets is a shorthand of saying freedom of association. This requires law, law that protects contract and law that protect private property - starting with your body. Lastly, freedom of association is facilitated by sound money as it facilitates trade.
The only thing that delineates the Government (public groups of humans) from private groups of humans is the Government has the oblation to initiate force against innocent people. Law is a role of government - but don't mistake that with it's function. Many laws are outside of Government's role: international laws - there's no world government yet trillions of dollars in trade occur through free trade agreement (voluntary) as well as private - a shopping mall has laws and can enforce those laws; upheld through voluntarism and, when needed, force can be used - just not (legally) against innocent people.
The solution is more freedom, more privacy, less regulation, less State force, less taxation - and this begins by ending the Federal Reserve and Income Tax/Labor Tax. Until then, unlimited power will reside in the hands of the State and the rich who own it. Expect to watch the USA become a much poorer nation than it already is - and it's pretty poor by my measure of things.
The only solution is to LIMIT government. I find it amazing, and interesting, that Americans no longer think this way, it's culturally dissapeared. Even though the USA was founded on limited government. The first 10 amendment protect us from the Government - not the rich, but from the State.
Anyway, it's a moot point now. America is no longer America, 1 in 5 Americans are functionally illiterate, we have the largest government in history, with more rules and regulation than most other nations, a government spying on us - it's pretty much like living in a police State. You even need permission from the State to cut hair. How pathetic America has become.
1
-
1
-
kirpid
Thank you for your reply. I'd strongly suggest looking into the empirical data whenever possible.
My argument against Government schooling:
Firstly, literacy is not dependent on Government. Japanese had a, nearly, 100% literacy rate prior to government schools.
Secondly, literacy in the USA had a nefarious undertone - it was used to "Westernize" so-called free people living in America (read: culturally dominate Native Americans - thus, they learned our culture and it replaced theirs).
Thirdly, Literacy rates among Black Americans in the early 1900s, prior to Government School, was higher THEN compared with now! In some cases there's been a 30% drop (or more) in functional literacy among Black Americans. 100 years of Government provided Government school has eroded literacy - and welfare has destroyed any incentive that may have been there to teach children to read and write. Kind of reminds me of how second languages are lost within a generation.
Lastly, many Public Schools of the 1900s requited students to be literate BEFORE they were allowed to attend the school. Literacy rates for white Americans was 90% - - before Government schooling. That said, Government Schooling wasn't nearly as useless then as it is for most children now.
So? The question is: Why have Government schools? Take a look into the history of modern Government Schooling. Modern Government schooling is a product of The Prussian-Industrial Model. This was based on Aristocratic Military training. They simply changed the Drill Master with a Head Master - pretty much everything else was left the same. except instead of adults, they trained children/brainwashed children. And the end product, in this case, isn't a killing machine, but a Factory Labor Cog.
Now that the factory's are gone, the facade that is Government Schooling is glaringly obvious. Government schooling trains children to take orders, sit in rows, do what they're told, and raise their hand to pee. Imagine the last time you saw children being forced to recite over and over and over a religious text - you'd see that as brainwashing. Welcome to Modern Government Schooling. It doesn't inspire children to learn, it doesn't change - hell, we're still taking summers off for Harvest even though 99.9% of Americans do not work on a farm. THAT is a classic example of Government stagnation.
If you want your children to compete in the modern world - it's worth building up their individual strengths and taking the time to teach them yourself. Don't put them in the race with 10 million other's just like them. Most likely, the winner is due to blind luck selecting the top 10-15%. No, it's much better to really focus on a child and ONLY a parent can do it.
1
-
kirpid
As for regulation. Free market is not free-for-all. A free market has rules, sometimes more rules than a regulated market. Secondly, when you say the free-market has spoken and it doesn't give a f*ck. What you're saying is that free people do not, as an agregate, care. IF this is true, then the last thing you want is a regulated market - because these same uncaring market-participants will vote to use legal force against innocent people. Something only the State can legally enact (for an example see: War on Drugs, War on Privacy, War on Dress, War on Marriage, etc...).
All regulation does is allow for the market-makers to dominate the markets by restricting competition. Thus, instead of Bob's BBQ we have boiling ammonia washed FDA regulated pink slime. Well, I don't know what to say other than I'll take my chances with Bob's BBQ. Because, at the end of the day, we're adults.
Free markets (that is to say, voluntary trade) require: Law, Property Rights (ownership of your body) and Sound Money. They are not a free for all.
We live in a hyper-regulated tax pen. We are Citizens 'OF' a State (we are property of a State). You could think of us as Tax Chattel. The vote we're given for who is our Tax Farmer is really just for show. Which is why nothing changes and everything goes from bad to worse. The ONLY time voting works is when it's small, regional or even smaller - local. And the best vote is made with sound money. This is a real personal vote. So, please do NOT mistake the USA for a free market. Nothing is free in the USA. Our money is State Fiat Currency, controlled by Central Planners and their Central Bankers, our lives are lived with millions and millions and millions of regulations. Millions of them. You can't even wipe your butt without breaking a few lines of code.
The solution is what it's always been: LIMITED small government, sound money, Law, and a lot more personal freedom. Oh well, not likely to happen in our lifetimes. Not for decades anyway.
1
-
1
-
kirpid That's funny you should mention nihilism as I was reading Nietzschea a couple weeks ago, and while there's something almost teenager-like to some of his writings, as well as an obviously deeper insight into the death of God and it's effect on society, I still felt a little sick to my stomach in a way. I've never been partial to that sort of philosophy, I'm more interested in empiricists like Hume or logicians like Russel. I'll have to go back to it later in the year.
Yes, I agree with the notion cryptocurrencies could be a good means to free people from fiat currency. But, I also think, in the long run, social media type software will ultimately derive our value to society through the perceived value (or real) we create for society. I wonder, who delivered more value to society, Steven Jobs and his ruthless drive or an unknown engineer and his idea of a smart phone. I'd like to see the engineer be given a little more credo. The same with medicine. Thanks to rent-seeking, doctors enjoy vast prestige - many times for dolling out medicine invented by hard working graduate students or medical devices developed though 14 hour days and teams of engineers.
Anyway, yes, the internet is the one true game changer in human social development. For the good and bad, it's really a marvelous invention.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
anthony alexander
You started your post with an ad hominem - sorry but, that isn't a logical argument. It's an illogical informal fallacy.
Here, I'll make it simple: make a syllogistic argument with sound evidence and I'll read it. But, given you have no evidence, other than a 'WIKI' link, I'm pretty sure you're less than useless.
Yes, the USA, ENG, AU, JP, Germany are fascistic. They are also "Progressive" as they all use Central Banks and progressive income tax as part of their 'Socialist' agendas.
As I've lived in three of those counties and visited them all, I probably know much more than you do in regards to how they are structured socially.
But don't worry, keep thinking you live in a free society and that it's all big bad free-market capitalism (aka: Freedom to interact) that's to blame. Believe me, if anyone thinkis up is down and right is left, that someone is you. I suggest you vote Hillary or some other so-called Progressive. Maybe O-blah-blah will run again.
Don't bother writing back I will delete it as soon as I see you name. Why? Because of your starting ad hominem. If you want to act like a troll, I'll treat you like one. I've listed you under Mute. I really don't have time for trolls like you. Go back under your bridge.
Have good day.
1
-
RizenLink
Yes, Koch Industries are the second largest company in the USSA. Why wouldn't they receive millions, hell 100s of millions of dollars worth of contracts? Just who do you think builds all the bullshit your beloved State gives you for 'free'? GE, Halliburton, GM, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Boeing, and a million other companies get millions of dollars in 'contracts' from the government. It's called Fascism and David here thinks it's perfected fine when the sword cuts his way, but that's thing about swords, they cut both ways.
IOWs the Kock brothers do nothing other than what other companies do. They also donate to PBS - care to mention that?
The solution is LIMITED government, no income tax and ending the Federal Reserve and it's ability to sell T-bonds on your childrens' labor. But gasp that'd mean living freely. AND if there's one thing Americans abhor, it's personal freedom. No, it's much easier to blame some boogyman named the Koch Brothers than take personal responsibility. Particularly if you're ignorant of how the fiat monetary system works.
We're just starting to see the effects of NOT having a limited government - expect to see much more as the rich get much richer and the poor much poorer. If need be, the poor will be killed off through another made-up war.
Welcome to a Progressive Income Tax, to Progressive fiat monetary systems with a Progressive Central Bankers and their Progressive Central Planning. Welcome to Progressive Hyper-Regulations and Progressive Minimum Wage that barely keeps up with our Progressive Inflation that's so good for us.
Welcome to the Progressive United States of America.
Do enjoy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
John Smith
RE: "the Patriot act was not a progressive policy"
Th Partiot Act IS a Progressive policy.The Patriot Act is a continuation of the Progressive Tradition of the State keeping us 'Safe' and we lose more personal liberty 'for the Good of Society'.
The "Conservative" tradition is rugged individualism - just ask Thom, he says as much while he constructs his Strawmen to blow over.
The "Conservative" tradition is SMALL government and MAXIMAL individual freedom. Exactly the opposite of "Progressive Socialism". Even Thom admits this. Now, you tell me, which is closer to the "Patriot" Act??
Obviously the Patriot, a MASSIVE expansion of the State and MASSIVE erosion of Personal Liberty and MASSIVE erosion of Personal Privacy thus IS, by definition, a Progressive policy. Loss of Personal Liberty for 'the Good of Society' IS Progressivism 101.
The Partiot Act is simply MORE Nanny State babysitting the sad pathetic populace called Americans. Which is why we will, one day, end up in a neo-Fascist State completed with something akin to a Dictator/s (see: TBTB Banking Aristocracy). Progressive's really got started 100 years ago with the Progressive's creation of the Central Bank and the Progressive's passing of the Tax on Labor (Income Tax) - well, this was followed up with a century of Progressive Regulations to make us "safe" and for "The Good of Society" (See: Rent Seeking and Regulatory capture and, together with Government Schools, is the reason there are no good jobs).
Summary, now, 100 years, almost to the day, the Right Wing of the Progressive Party passes the Patriot Act and the Left Wing of the Progressive Party has maintained it for 6 years - even expanding the NSA with 100s of billions of dollars of spyware. We continue to LOSE more personal freedom, LOSE more personal privacy and have to be questioned/searched at boarders 100 miles INSIDE the USA. This is the exact OPPOSITE of the Conservative Tradition, which again, as THOM likes to point out, IS personal responsibility/individualism and maximal personal freedom.
If you don't like the stink of your Progressive Policies, well, stop blaming the Conservative tradition and blame yourselves. Maybe take a bath too.
Note: I'm an Atheist by the way. That is ALSO part of the conservative tradition, almost ALL of the Framers were atheists or deists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Merv van der Swerv Actually let me explain why it is you that have no idea 1) they've been saying that for over 3, going on 4, decades 2) guess what? with less workers the wages are going up, per hour, naturally, 3) every single year the standard of living increases in Japan, while the GDP drops a little there are less people who are more productive so pp there is more wealth, 4) housing becomes more affordable and it's even possible to own a second home away from the city for weekend family vacations.
In short life is better than ever. The problem with the West is the came to trust their so called experts and politicians. Progressivism and multiculturalism have been shown to decrease social cohesion and trust while promoting inequality.
Sweden, ironically, was very much like Japan. And had the same second home phenomenon, not anymore. Your political class fixed that - permanently.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MrDragon1968 For example within Birmingham, Bordesley Green is about 74% Muslim, East Handsworth about 50%; Sparkbrook is 70%; Washwood Heath is almost 80%. In Blackburn, Audley is about 70%; Bastwell is 85% etc...
Also, I was referring to ethnic British. You think Brexit happened for no reason at all? Britons are just racists for wanting to protect their social and family ethnicity like any parents anywhere in the world?
It's too late for those cities and burrows.
Anyway, this simply doesn't happen in Asia. Not in China, Japan or Korea. The idea of other people being allowed to form their own community inside an E. Asian country is completely foreign. It will never happen. Not even European colonialists were able able to do so permanently. Hong Kong, an English ex-colony, is about 96% ethnic Chinese.
The demographics determine the society. Over the next few decades ethnic Germans will be displaced in Germany JUST AS ethnic Britons have already been displaced in the aforementioned cities. And in a short amount of time. Those cities are no longer culturally British. The same is true of areas of Sweden and will, one day, be true of ALL of Sweden.
The Swedish culture is done for. New Sweden, a mixed multicultural society, is the future of Sweden. This society will be less cohesive and have low social trust. As has been reported on and researched in all other multicultural societies. From Chinese in Indonesia to Blacks and Whites in America.
Sorry if me telling you the likely outcome of this experiment doesn't bring a smile to your face. That's life. Sticking your head in the sand isn't going to change reality. Sometimes people have to tell you the hard truth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is idiotic, of course the Government controls the nukes. Libertarian is not fundamentally different than the Republic prior to Labor Tax and a Central Bank. Of course, without a labor tax to pay for the police State, we wouldn't have the military industrial complex. We wouldn't have made up bull shit phony reasons and invaded Korea (lost), Vietnam (lost), Iraq (losing) and Afghanistan (lost). We wouldn't have wasted $100 trillion (estimated) on the Cold War. So, we wouldn't have all these nukes.
Of course we don't have to guess as to what happens in a Hyper-regulated Progressive Socialist Keynesian State - we know exactly as it's the one we live in. We have next to no expectation of privacy, pay 3 months worth of labor in tax to the State, have a military that runs amok making up phony WMD lies to invade other countries, public schools who, when they're not graduating 50% functional illiterates, are destroying what's left of children's education with Oblahma's Common Core, over priced hyper-regulated poor quality healthcare (#3 reason you will die is iatrogenic/death FROM healthcare), a hyper-regulated/rigged Fiat financial banking/scamming system run by a Central Bank full of Central Planning morons and a State that consumes more energy than any other human institution in human history that also holds the title for largest polluter in human history - destroying the Earth ecosystems in it's Statist filth.
Yeah, so lets ask some idiotic question about nukes in a hypothetical Libertarian model of a State.
I hope to hell Hillary Clinton is elected POTUS. Please Gods, grant us this one wish. Her with Oblahma as her VP would be perfect.
1
-
Kim Stockton
You think India (Caste System) and Africa (Warlordism) are 'free markets'?
Seriously???
I can use the USA as an example of a nearly free-market. From the end of the Civil War until the 16th Amendment and Central Bank (that ushered in a Great Depression within a decade of it's creation).
Free markets alone are not the complete answer, free markets only mean 'free people' allowed to freely trade with one another. We also requite Law and sound money. Laws protect against fraud, protect property and uphold contract. Most people here think regulation is required - because they don't know the difference between the two. They mistake me suggesting deregulation as lawlessness. I'm not.
Most regulations are there to protect companies FROM you. Not to protect you from them. An example if Limited Liability. And while I do agree frivolous lawsuites are a hamstring to running a business, I also believe in people's ability to create solutions that do not rely on the State as an immoral agent.
Lastly, prosperity requires sound money. Sound money is derived by the people for the people and, again, does not require an immoral agent such as the government - ie: fiat currency.
One may want to ask: IF the State can create as much currency as it likes (and did to bail out the banks and play war in the ME) then why the need to levy an income tax on laborers. It's not as if the State lacks the ink needed to print it's currency. It can create as much 'currency' as is needed.
So? If Progressive Liberal Socialism is so wonderful, why not create enough currency to pay for all the schools, universities, medical research, roads, hospitals, public police, fire fighters, hospitals, medical care - all of these things. A simple story would be "The GOP won't let us". This is what I hear on TYT day in and day out. As if this magic want is just sitting there waiting to fix everything - if only those evil Republicans would just let Democrats get to work.
That's a fairy tale. A story sold and resold again and again. Left vs Right. Conservative vs Liberal. The truth is we live in a world of limited resources. And the most efficient, fair and equal way to distribute those resources is by letting FREE people trade with one another using sound money and Law.
Sadly, Americans have come to despise freedom in favor or living in a world populated by promises. Yes, why live in the real world when a world of nice sounding words is much nicer. Problem with that - is we're literally destroying our society.
Here's a couple facts about our Government - the USA.
1) Largest polluter in history.
2) Consumes more limited energy than any other group of humans.
3) Jails more non-violent humans in rape-cages than any other government in history.
4) Started a phony war in Vietnam and dropped chemicals on women and children that are still, to this day, causing cancers.
5) Started a phony war in Iraq and uses depleted radioactive bullets against cities of civilians that is causing cancers.
6) Has taken on more debt obligations than any other government in history.
7) Bailed out the richest Americans, the top 0.1% with generational debt.
8) Is now spying on all of us. This post is being collected and stored by the Federal Government's NSA -all of our information is.
We will become a poorer people.
We will lose more civil liberties.
There is no turning things around - not in our life times. Or, at least, not very likely.
1
-
nychold
FACT: The USA is the largest polluter on the planet in the history of humanity.
The USA fire bombed civilian cities in Germany, nuked two civilian cities in Japan, dropped chemicals (agent orange) on civilians in Vietnam, is currently using radioactive bullets that leave radioactive dust in civilian cities in Iraq.
Could you please give ANY example of ANY company that even comes close.
Secondly, I said with PROPERTY rights. This means if you live on a river, and a chemical company dumps it's chemicals into the water and those chemicals cause property damage to your property (or your body) you sue them.
As it stands the chemical company gets a regulation passed (more than likely the same person who worked as a regulatory agent now works for the chemical company) and there is a 'legal' regulated amount of pollution the company can put into the river. If you don't like it - well, tough. You don't have the legal ability to sue them (see natural gas fraking as an example).
Regulations are there to protect companies FROM YOU. They're not there to protect you from them. The government knows which side it's bread is buttered on - and it's not yours.
The richest Americans literally used the Central Bank and bailed themselves out - just 5 years ago. That wasn't a company - that was the USA Government.
I am not worried about big scary Apple or Google, Ford or Toyota. With law and sound money - I can trade with them, and I can sue them. But the State, the State you can do next to nothing against. It is legally obligated to initiate force against you (as an example: see drug laws and prisons).
Lastly, why in the world do you conclude societies collapses and people grow there own food??? How does using sound money (to trade in) law and free markets (free people) equate in your mind to social collapse?
Here's my past point (as I see people making it continuously): In the not so distant past, if you saw a wealthy person it was more than likely that they accumulated that wealth by brute force - stealing it. Example: Europeans stealing the gold from the Americas. BUT we do NOT live in that world. Laws that protect property rights make such actions illegal. You can ONLY get rich in a free society with law and property rights by providing value. Therefor, if you see a wealthy Cafe owner (business owner) then you know they are providing value to people in society. Because this is the ONLY way they can become rich.
Of course, we don't live in a free society, and we don't use sound money (we use fiat currency) and we use regulation and many times this violates basic common law. Thus, we see ultra rich bankers who do in fact steal - they use the State to get away with their theift. As an example; 30 year T bonds are sold to banks, children (who legally can not vote) will be forced (through income tax) to repay those loans - that is stealing from them and giving to the purchaser of th ebond. That Bond is in referrence to Bonded Labor.
PS: I'm more than happy to see a logical (informal or formal) fallacy pointed out to me. But, just saying there's a fallacious argument somewhere in a post is not making a counter argument. If you have evidence of poor reasoning, provide it or you look like a foolish person who's just learned the world fallacy.
1
-
1
-
Hal Jordan
You have your analogy wrong. The T-Rex IS the State. T-Rex was the King we fought against and won (before there even was a USA).
Today is not the age of Kings. In a free society, you gain wealth through providing value to people. Stop and think about this a moment.
Can you give me an example in a free society of a personal gaining wealthy without providing value to the people around them? Just one example. Any real world example.
Remember, a free society with Law that protects private property (including your body), upholds contract and protects against fraudulent trade. Also, one that uses sound money derived by the free market. And lastly, one that allows free people to freely interact with one another.
Do tell me about this so-called T-Rex in such a society? Because I can tell where one is: The Government. My example: Drug Laws. This means that as an adult, on your own property, if you grew and consumed a natural weed, the State/T-Rex could break into your home, take you away, put you in a rape-cage. THAT is IMO insane. Yet, that is THIS society. Not some made up one, not some hypothetical, not some analogy - but THIS ONE. The one we live in.
1
-
Hal Jordan
Actually, the USA government was not designed to protect minorities. It was only White men who could vote (blacks were Slaves, native Americans didn't count as people, women were property of husbands and fathers, etc...). I only say this so that we're not looking back on history with rosy glasses.
The US Government was just as corrupt (maybe even more so) in various times of history. Which is why it was limited. By limiting the government, the Framer's made sure no one group (of White men) could use it against another. This created a society where free people, using gold and silver, had to trade through voluntary interactions. Adam Smith's invisible hand meant that prices of items (priced in gold and silver) ensured those items Americans wanted were produced (by someone freely) and we became a wealthy society.
You suggested Oligarchies now rule the USA. Yes, they do - through the State. They themselves are powerless. They use the State, and the Central Bank, to rule over us. Sometime outright stealing (see bailouts) and other times by selling us beads for debts our children must carry. Not only that, but the middle class has become adept at using the State to 'regulate' competition out of existence - as an example, see the AMA's confiscation through the State of Rx. It has literally destroyed healthcare in the USA.
The solution is to return to sound money (end the Federal Reserve), eliminate income tax, and regain individual liberty and freedom - while maintaining Law that protect private property, against fraud and uphold contract.
It's not that hard. But the path we are on is exactly the opposite - less freedom, more regulation, less privacy, more spying, less opportunity, more licencing requirements - heck, in some States you require a licence to arrange flowers or fix a PC!
Oh well, this is a story as old as time. To see it's ending, just look at how any great empire has ended. We're just beginning the decline phase - I suspect things to get pretty back across the next 50 years if we don't stop our fairy tale belief in the State as anything other than the immoral agent that it is.
1
-
Hal Jordan
RE: "All institutions hold the potential to be corrupted. That's why the constitution was written as it was, why we have the checks and balances of power, and why governmental servants are supposed to be accountable to the people and each other. The US was designed to be run by sociopaths. The reasons why it's gone to what it is , is because the people are not vigilant and informed. Also, Adam Smith's system left incredible holes for private bodies to exploit at the expense of the people. Regulations were meant to protect people against those who only care about the bottom line."
1) Yes, but private institutions cannot use force against innocent people. GM (which I also worked at as a chemist ironically enough) was pretty corrupt. But it was also powerless to use force against people. Sure, it could con people into buying it's crappy cars - but sooner or later, its corruption would put it into bankruptcy. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED??? This corrupt company got bailed out by the State!!! The State did this. In a free society GM would be gone - along with it's corrupt board of executives.
2) The US was designed to be very very very LIMITED and to have next to no effect on the lives of common every day people. LIMITED government was the entire bases of our Constitutions and founding. The first 10 amendments are about further protecting Citizens FROM their government. Not from private corporations - but from the State.
3) As for Adam Smith and these alleged holes that private groups of people exploit at the expense of the people, could you provide me with a couple examples where the people have no legal recourse AND the State isn't involved BUT these private holes are being exploited?
4) Laws protect private property damage (including your body) and protect against fraud and protect contractual obligations.
Wit this in mind, what do we need additional "Regulations" for?
I'll tell you what regulations really do - they protect companies from you. Which, may be reasonable, but, I think we can do without them - much better. I'd rather deal with some frivolous lawsuits and retain freedoms. Not only that, but Private Organizations (AMA) use 'regulations' to secure monopoly over "regulated" markets like Rx. Fast forward 60 years and medicine is a mess, cost too much and most Americans OD on Rx not illegal drugs. Middle aged mothers are now hooked on heroine because Rx prescriptions from their MD made them think it was OK. Anything but!
Oh well.... as I said, this tale is as old as time. At least we get to live through interesting times. Sadly, they'll be much poorer times - but, interesting nonetheless.
1
-
gunnyblender
I'm not quite sure of your point. You appear to be pissed that I'm one of the many hundreds of thousands of people who have regulatory authority or licencing authority over your life.
Isn't this what you want? You want to be regulated - correct?
As for me personally, I have certain training and expertise that allows me to determine if you are going to be eligible to obtain a licence from the State to practice medicine. It's not just me, there's all sorts of people - in some respects, going as far back as public high school if you count the accelerated programs (the MDs I train graduate in their early 20s),
Here's the thing, my role in society is probably valued. Because, you probably want your MD's trained properly. You probably also want them to be certified by someone you know is knowledgeable in each area of medicine.
OK, then that's fine. We can still do it that way - only make it a voluntary certification. IOWs, in a free society ANYONE can offer a service - yes, even medicine (which actually isn't that complicated to be honest). Then allow the public to determine who they want to seek out for treatment. For a minor earache, many people go to gasp grandmother (heaver forbid). For a sore eye, maybe they want someone with a bit of trailing. Brain cancer - ok, now they want someone certified by someone else who has a history of producing good trained doctors.
See? In this way, over time, you get high quality professionals (much higher than now) and also get to retain your free society.
It's.... really not all that complicated.
As for the Canadian Stefan, yes, I sometimes like to listen to his podcast. Primarily regarding peaceful parenting - these are valuable as he does spend the time to do the research (or pays someone to do as much). While he's certainly making many over generalizations regarding some topics in terms of neuroanatomy, so what? Most people wouldn't know a caudate nucleus if is hit them.
Peter Schiff sells gold. I LOVED his book his brother wrote regarding an island analogy. Really really great children's book. I use it to demonstrate basic economics to other medical researchers :) Some really good basic facts in there - and it's funny too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
TeamPill You don't understand what the word "markets" mean. It's means trade. A babysitter selling his or her labor hours watching children, at market rates, is free markets. Forcing a babysitter to pay the State for a licence to babysit is a regulated market. Using the State to determine the maximum number of license holders if regulatory-capture. Of course, in a FREE society free people can choose to only employ licensed babtsitters. However, they are free to also hire their friends' do do the job, even though they may not hold a State licencee.
You seem to think restricting the poor from freely offering their services is "bad" for the poor and "good" for the rich.
That's asinine. It's the reason WHY there's perpetual poverty. Deregulation HELPS the poor AS WELL AS anyone they trade with.
The two markets with the most regulations are (1) financial and (2) medicine. They're both totally corrupt, over priced, and offer extremely poor quality for money.
When you opt for Regulated Markets over FREE markets (the freedom to trade) all you're doing is taking power AWAY from the poorest and giving it to those who have power - political elite and the wealthy they already compete in the regulated markets. As a matter of fact, they use regulation to PREVENT the poor from competing against them.
The solution is MORE civil freedoms - NOT LESS. More.
Anyway, you're in luck, the State regulated markets are not about to become freer. Exactly the opposite. Expect to see more desperately poor in the coming years.
1
-
Dm Gray
Building yourself a nice little strawman - feel good knocking over your own argument?
I didn't say public government is bad and private business is good.
The FACTS: Legally, Government has the obligation to initiate force against innocent people and private businesses can not legally do this. Therefor, in terms of power, it's better to have less power in the hands of those who can legal shoot you in the head for doing nothing morally wrong (smoking a weed, getting married to the same sex, refusing to fight in a phony war) and shift that same power over you, to people you can legally tell to piss off.
Imagine the IRS calls you - how comfortable would you feel telling them to piss off you're not having anything to do with them. Now imagine it was Apple Inc. Apple is the largest business in the world, yet, for all their power - you;'d feel perfectly safe telling them to piss off.
So, you can either go back to strawmen, or educate yourself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dm Gray
You don't have to worry, we're getting more regulation - you'll be the one being regulated.
So, you're going to cherry pick a couple small Northern European countries. Well, that's not going to happen in the USA. See, it's not the 'regulation' that has brought some level of prosperity to their people. Its the people that create prosperity.
The countries in Europe you're looking for as examples of the USA are Greece, Portugal and Spain. See how EU regulation helped them so much? They're much closer to the "American Way".
Not Sweden.
Not Finland.
Not Denmark.
In many ways, northern EU countries have LESS regulations then the USSA. Why? Because the common people can be trusted to do the right thing. It's why you can step onto busses in Germany without presenting a ticket, it's assumed you paid. It's why vending machines selling beer can sit out in the open in Japan. Or food can be stored outside at night without being stolen. This could never happen in the craphole hyper-regulated USSA.
I'll give you some numbers. The USA spends more than most EU countries on primary education. State-run State-regulated education. The functional illiteracy rate in the USA is 1 in 5. We spend double what Japan spends - they have near 100% functional literacy.
Enact all the EU regulations you like. We are not them. They are not us. I know, I've lived in numerous counties and I can safely say, the USA has now become one of the worse places to live on Earth. It's like a Police State. The people are idiots and the Police are way over the top. Worse than anywhere other than a few communist countries I've visited.
You think less the 100s of millions of regulations we already have are not enough? You think LESS civil liberty, LESS freedom and MORE regulation and MORE tax is the path to prosperity?
Well, you're in luck. That's exactly what's in store for us. Hope you like carrying your papers and proving to the State who you are at any and all times with your State ID card - on command and whenever commended to do so. Hope you like needing a licence to open a lemon-aid stand or to babysit.
Don't worry, you'll see.
1
-
Dm Gray
Are 1 in 5 citizens of your country functionally illiterate? Tell me, given we here in the USSA have a HUGE number of regulations regarding education, and we also spend more per student than most countries in Europe and we have very powerful Teacher's Unions. Tell me why 1 in every 5 American citizens, is a functional illiterate? Tell me, how many High School graduates do you know that cannot read and comprehend the words they're attempting to sound-out at AGE 18?
You don't get it, we're not a small northern EU country. Not to mention all the regulations of the EU has done nothing to prevent Greece from the Greeks! Did it? No. They're as poor today as ever - aren't they? Same with Spain. Same with Portugal. France is an economic mess. Italy is an economic basket-case.
And we already have 100s of millions (billions) of lines of State regulations. Adding millions or billions or trillion more regulations - is not going to fix this problem.
We have Government School graduates, GRADUATES, who can not read and write with any level of competence. You think adding another 10, 20, 200 million more lines of code, law and regulations is going to give the 1 in 5 functional illiterates the ability to read and write?! Suddenly teachers magically create wonderful students? Parents suddenly start reading to their children and doing math with them over watching football or basketball?!?
Give me a break!
You think "the rich" have anything to do with this? Come off it.
LESS freedom is NOT the answer. The answer is MORE freedom. Not less. More. More civil liberty and less police State. The freedom to trade gasp with other free people using sound money, law and property rights. This is what's needed here in the US. Not that any of this matters, we're going to get more regulations. And we'll be poorer.
You'll see.
In the end, I think I'll probably open a school up in Japan. The people are simply made better over there.
1
-
1
-
1
-
RokeorDie Look up Cultural Appropriation in the dictionary, there's photo of Warren (who also describes herself as a Woman of Color when unfairly competing for promotion). TYT "Keeping it Real" (LOL)
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/elizabeth-warrens-family-ties
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2012/05/25/elizabeth-warren-identified-as-woman-of-color-in-1993-publication/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2012/05/31/did-elizabeth-warren-and-harvard-make-false-federal-filings-in-violation-of-law/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2012/06/01/exclusive-eloped-elizabeth-warren-parents-married-in-religious-ceremony/
Incidentally, I dated a Native American (100% Native American). She was DENIED Citizenship into the tribe, and her grandmother was the princess in that tribe. She wanted free University. The tribe told her to piss off. Yes, her parents were both 100% Native American, her father worked at General Motors and she couldn't even speak the language fluently - and had never lived on the reservation, ever. See how it works in the real world? The benefits are meant to help people on the reservation, not to be taken advantage of. I think the Tribe did the right thing in denying her Citizenship. She lived a comfortably middle class and could more than afford University. Here we have this Arse hole Warren who lies about some story she claims her parents told her and poof she's suddenly a Woman of Color. What a load of crap. She didn't live on the reservation. She probably has 0% blood. But, hey, she can give blood and this can be settled easily enough. Which is why she doesn't. Again, she IS the definition of cultural appropriation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't know about homeless, but I've read studies that show so-called "Conservatives" give more to charity compared with so-called "Progressives". Mainly because they're Christian and do so through their religion.
However, for the two political "parties/mafia crime syndicates" DemoCrips and ReThuglicans; they're about equal in donations.
I really wish TYT would clarify their use of various terms like Progressives. I'm fairly certainly most people do not know what a "Progressives" actually is. It just sound good. For example, interventionism abroad (aka: War) is a 'traditional' Progressive value. Because early Progressives through it was important for America, not just to lead by example, but to actually be "Progressive" about changing other countries. We see the legacy today with the Iraq War. Conservatives are 'traditionally' against foreign Wars, however ReThuglicans are more than happy to go to War - because they're not Conservatives on that issue (or most) but are actually Progressive on that issue.
So, TYT PLEEEEASE do your homework and do a segment on the philosophies you suggest with terms like traditionalist, progressive, conservative, liberal (Am) and liberal (En) etc...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jeremy Einbinder
Actually, you have it backwards. Exactly the opposite. You may want to ask yourself how and why this came to be.
In Politik als Beruf by Max Weber (1919): A single entity, the State, exercises monopoly on legitimate violence over a given geographical territory (territory is deemed to be also characteristic of a State). Importantly, such a monopoly must occur via a process of legitimation, wherein a claim is laid to legitimise the state's use of violence. Thus, the State is the source of legitimacy for any use of violence. The police and the military are its main instruments, but this does not mean that only public force can be used: private force (as in private security) can be used too, as long as it has legitimacy derived from the State.
I'll give you an example of the State's use of violence - that man who was strangled to death for selling a 0.50 cent cigarette. ONLY the Government can legally exercise such violence. The State is the antitheses to civilization. It's a return to the jungle.
The Drug War is another example of the State's use of violence against morally innocent adults.
The Income Tax (tax on labor) is another example of the State's use of violence against morally innocent adults.
It doesn't matter if the State we're talking about is the USA or North Korea or KSA, ALL State's are by definition immoral as they, and ONLY they, can initiate legal violence against innocent humans within their geographical constrained area of control.
Private people can not initiate violence against anyone. Private people can only use violence in defence.
I'll give another example: lets say we agree that procreation is something most people (society) would agree is 'good'. The Private means of procreation is to voluntarily agree to sex and thus a life is initiated. The State on the other hand would instead identify procreation as something needed and then set about using rape to meet this end.
That's the difference.
Anyway, you needn't worry. We're getting much more State. And we'll get more Police needed to enforce the State's immorality. Thus, we'll end up living in a Progressive Police State were violence is used against all of us 'for the good of society'. We'll of course have to lose our right to privacy (see the State's spy agency the NSA) as this is also needed to make our Police State more efficient at using violence against us.
You'll see.
1
-
Jeremy Einbinder
1) Taxes are not all the same. I have no problem with requiring someone pay a tax (such as gasoline tax) because this tax is voluntary. IOWs, IF you want to use the roads with a car, and assuming you don't have the means to produce your own gasoline at home, then you must pay a tax when you volentarily purchase fuel.
You pay the tax, because you don't own the fuel. The person who does not pay the tax is the gasoline station. They own the fuel.
The same could be said of an apple seller. The farmer who grew the apple, owns the apple, and thus when a sale transaction is made, it will be YOU who pays for the tax (voluntarily) when you choose to buy the apple. This tax can then be used to maintain the fairgrounds (toilets etc...).
Contrast these types of taxes with Income Tax/Labor tax. YOU own your body, why would YOU have to pay a tax when you perform actions with the body that you own??? You wouldn't. But you do. Because you no longer own your body's labor. The Pogressive Party of the 1800s stole it from you 100 years ago in the early 1900s. Your forced taxation of your labor is a form of slavery.
Of course, it was the Progressive Party who gave us the Labor Tax - together with the the Central Bank.
2) You claim taxation without representation is immoral AND at the same time support income tax?!? Just what are your ideas on 30 year T bonds or 50 year municipal bonds??? Do you think it's 'fair' that the State sold bonds 30 years ago, and used the money to buy votes 30 years ago - and even though those public services are long dead and gone (in many cases the infrastructure no longer exists) and yet YOU and I are being forced to pay. Why? We didn't get a vote - some of us weren't even born!
In summery: Income Tax / Labor Tax is not like other taxes. It is immoral and fits like a hand in glove with the Central Bank.
1
-
Jeremy Einbinder
3) RE: Representative Government
In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia the majority of 'Citizens' support forcing women to accept polygamous marriage. The majority of citizens support forcing women to wear a burka that covers their face. The majority of citizens support murdering gays. According to your 'Representative Government' theory this is perfectly okay so long as the majority of people in society are supportive of these immoral policies for their perceived notion of being 'Good for Society'.
Likewise, here in the USA, if you sold a 0.50 cent cigarette without paying the State it's tax, you could be strangled to death - and that's perfectly legal because this is the 'Will of the Majority'. Here in the USA, if you sold a drug to another adult, be it a medicine or recreational, and you didn't have the licence or the Will of the Moral Majority deemed it not 'Good for Society', then just like the gays murdered in KSA, you could be murdered. Here in the USA, if you committed the crime of performing work without paying the State it's due on your labor 'for the Good of Society', and resisted the State's militant arm, then you could be legally strangled to death.
We are NOT free people. We do NOT have free markets. Thanks to the Progressives we live in hyper-regulated markets and must (a) ask/pay the State for permission (ex: State licencing schemes) to conduct trade with one another, and then (b) pay the State for this privilege (income tax). All for the so-called 'Good of the Nation'.
Well, using force against innocent people is NOT good for anything. Not in KSA and not in the USA. Not against gays. Not against laborers. Not against people selling 0.50 cent cigarettes.
1
-
Jeremy Einbinder
RE: In a true representative government, people consent to what goes into the collective pool.
This is dangerously close to the No True Scotsman fallacy.
We live in a representative democracy/republic. If you don't like the society this has created, perhaps this is because we also live in an ocean of violence in the form of Government. Government regulates ALL aspects of our lives. To the paper we use to wipe our butts, to our Government Schools, to our medicine, to our money, to who can get married to whom, to what we eat, what drugs we can use, what medicines we can access .... everything. All of it.
This IS the Progressive Social paradise. The Police State and NSA you notice are simply needed to enforce Progressive socialism. Which is probably why it sucks.
--
As I said, vote for whomever you like for the next few election cycles. That isn't going to change anything. The State is not going to shrink, it's going to grow. Oh, and IMO, we're getting much more State violence. Many more regulations. We'll lose more privacy. We'll be forced by the State to bail out the oligarchy. And in the end, we'll probably end up with something akin to a Dictator or a King complete with the Oligarchy becoming a permanent legal TBTF Aristocracy.
You'll see.
1
-
Steve G
Firstly 'black' people didn't just poof into existence out of the void. This means that black people were somehow able to manage to buy and sell with other people, be they other blacks or white or yellow or etc.... and do so with enough extra calories to come into existence - for millions of years.
As for your question. Interestingly, we actually have an example from our own history that answers your question. And, just like everything else, so-called Progressive liberals helped 'solve' that problem too.
In essence, blacks were discriminated against by whites.
[note, in racist America circa 1910 the US census recorded blacks had a 85% literacy rate in Chicago. This is important for two reasons: (1) we can compare the same area of Chicago today and (2) back then, to attend Public schools, you had to be able to read and write BEFORE you were allowed to attend (just another way whites discriminated against the poor - particularly the poor blacks)].
Secondly, so? How did poor blacks deal with this discrimination? Well, simple enough. They lowered the price of their Labor-Hours. See, in a free-market, all it takes is ONE person to break and start buying the cheaper labor and guess what??? Everyone else has to as well ^ OR go bust. Because, at the end of the day, people want the best deal they can get. They will look the other way in regards to race in order to get that deal. IOWs, money trumps race.
Well.... how do you think whitey decided to deal with this little problem? Well well well, in steps the Progressive Socialist. And the Progressive socialist decided to set a 'minimum wage'. This prevented Blacks from under cutting whites in terms of labor hours. See, by the 1960s blacks had a lower divorce rate and were well on their way to becoming as rich, or richer, than the average white.
In essence, blacks were like the Chinese of modern day. See, that's exactly what Chinese ARE doing - the only reason they get away with it, is because they don't live under the jurisprudence of the US Government. If ONLY American blacks were so lucky! And unlike the LIES of the Progressives about so-called slaver labor, Chinese are becoming RICH. Blacks were doing the same up to the 1960s.
Here's a conversation with JFK:
In a 1957 Senate hearing, minimum-wage advocate Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts, who just four years later would be President of the United States, stated:
*Of course, having on the market a rather large source of cheap labor depresses wages outside of that group, too – the wages of the white worker who has to compete. And when an employer can substitute a colored worker at a lower wage – and there are, as you pointed out, these hundreds of thousands looking for decent work – it affects the whole wage structure of an area, doesn’t it?
Although probably no northern senator today would dare admit it, many who vote for increases in the minimum wage understand that one consequence will be to destroy jobs for the least skilled workers, a disproportionate number of whom are black.*
Get it now?! The answer to your question is white business owners would hire Blacks or go bankrupt. THE Progressives KNOW what they're doing. They don't give a f*ck about the poor. Progressives are selling you wishful thinking, but it's all a lie. It's a scam to take power from one group and give it to another - many times with the implicit understanding of those that stand to gain.
Oh.... and as for the Chicago literacy rate 100 years later. After Progressive welfare estates and 'free' Government School - it's at less than 50%! Yeah, that's right, BEFORE government school it was 85%. After Government school and it's 50%! Right now, according to the department of education, Publicly funded progressive Government school GRADUATES have a functional literacy rate of 20%!!! That's 1 in 5 graduates are functionally illiterate. The USA spends much more than Japan in terms of GDP on education - yet does much much worse.
Anyway, you needn't worry. We're getting more government, not less - more. And we're getting more Police State to enforce all this Progressive Socialism for 'The Good of Society'. Oh, and we're going to lose more civil liberty along with our right to privacy because 'you use the roads'.
Just watch, you'll see.
1
-
Steve G
RE ' If he was selling loose cigarettes, this would be a problem for the company that makes cigarettes (people get getting the company's cigarettes without buying them from the company). So if the company cared about maximizing profits, its private security force would brutalize Garner just like the State did.'
This is a question of property rights. Once Garner purchased the cigarettes they are his to sell. Of course, without a State tax, Garner probably wouldn't have had such an easy time under cutting the hyper regulated markets. He probably would have been doing some other, better higher paid, job. See, in a free market, people open businesses. This means there's demand for labor-hours. Someone like Garner was an entrepreneur. He'd had saved his money and opened a business and been a respectable member of society.
Of course, in our Progressive Nanny State with it's hyper-regulations, he was legally strangled to death for selling a 50 cent cigarette. This is a simple historical fact.
No, they could NOT (and would not) strangle him to death, if anything, they'd have hired him if he was so good at moving their product. You just don't get it. In a free society there is law and it protects your body/your property. Once he owned the cigarettes they were HIS property to do with as he wished. Sell or smoke. And people WANT to trade. You can see this with the internet. The Music Industry wanted to strangle free music, but they couldn't get the State militant arm to do it because the State is so incompetent.... and guess what happened??? MORE money is being made from FREE trade. Get it in your head - freedom is GOOD. The government is EVIL.
1
-
1
-
Steve G RE "the restaurant might have a financial incentive to check its food for poison, but maybe it gets away with negligence often enough that it doesn't care, so it prefers to save money instead of paying for more rigorous safety checks. The only way that I can be reasonably sure that the fish isn't poison is to have an independent agency that can come into the store, inspect the food, and, yes, FORCE the restaurant to throw out the bad food and replace it if necessary"
Do you have ANY idea how often restaurants are inspected?!?! I'll give you a clue - NOT OFTEN! Once a year at the most. And they almost always call ahead to let the owner know they are coming. They can easily take a kick back - and do.
Want to know what regulations do? They make it hard for a poor person to open up a restaurant. This means the fast-food chains use regulatory capture to rent-seek the food markets and we get stuck buying USDA regulated as safe GMO off cuts with bone and snout washed in boiled ammonia and colored red then infused with HFCS and this 'FOOD' / pink slime is what we eat. You are insane if you think that shit is better than just see it before you eat it unregulated grilled food. I've travelled the world, I can tell you, Americans eat some of the worse shit there is on planet earth. It's not 'food' by any stretch of the imagination.
Just now I was watching a show here in Japan about some crap arse food sold in America and called Japanese. It was a big laugh here to see the sad pathetic so-called food being sold in the USA and called Japanese. Enough to make most Japanese cringe at the thought of eating that filth.
Anyway, we're getting more regulations. Millions of regulations are added each year. And we're going to lose more civil liberties with each one that is passed into law. And we're getting more police State to enforce all these regulations 'for the Good of Society' - you'll see.
Lucky for me, I don't have to live in the USA. I can come and go as I please. But, most Americans can not. They are tax chattel to the State. Trapped in the tax pen - just they way our Farmers like it.
Expect more State - much more. And, you are NOT going to like it. You'll see....
1
-
1
-
Steve G
I'm not saying that everything that 'comes from' government is evil - I'm saying government by definition is immoral. Therefore it's not a surprise that the stuff that comes from it, turns out to be less than satisfactory.
I'd suggest the religious analogy is a strawman. In my opinion, if anyone here is thinking superstitiously, it is the Statist. The parallels with religion are uncanny. Instead of a Pope, we have a POTUS. Instead of Bishops. We have Senators. Instead of defining our lands as Christiandom and ourselves as Christians, we have States and Citizenships. Much like when the Catholics ruled Europe, we must ask our Rulers/Regulators for permission to trade, to marry, etc... and our State has even steps in and passes 'moral' laws (like the Drug War) as it attempts to use violence for the 'good of society'.
I agree that McDonalds sells crap food because this is what the highly regulated unfree market place has to offer. What I'm suggesting is that, in a free-market, McDonalds would have a hard time staying in business because cheaper food of higher quality we offer competition. The reason why we're stuck with all these fast food chains is because of regulatory capture and rent-seeking. Not to mention, our monetary system makes it much easier for low end fast food franchises who have proven they can use the State to ensure their competitive advantage are able to access the State's fiat currency. It's why when you cross the boarder poof magically it's a bunch of different chain shops within that State. You can drive 2000 miles across the USA and see the same bland crap, but cross a couple miles into CA and suddenly you're confronted with a different mix of the same shit.
What would happen in a free-market? No one knows. That's unknowable knowledge. What do know is what happens in a hyper-regulated market. Which is what we see.
1
-
Steve G
RE: It is the electorate's job to prevent regulatory capture in the first place, just like it is "the market's" job to to weed out bad actors in the Libertarian marketplace.
--
This is pretty much impossible. You're asking the electorate to prevent what in most cases it never knows of, or has too little at stake to make the time to do something about it. Death by a thousands cuts.
Let's take the Flower Arrangement Licence. This is a clear case of regulatory capture and rent-seeking (on many levels). The people who want these regulations will spend day after day after day with a laser like focus looking for any and every means possible to capture this market. From suing for cases where poisonous flowers may have been sold, to getting jobs in the government and working hand in glove to ensure these regulations are passed.
There are literally millions and millions and millions of lines in complex legalese / regulations passed every year. It's impossible for the electorate to prevent it. The only solution is less government. Make it illegal for the government to prevent adults from conducting trade (actually, this was the case at one time). Also, eliminate income tax and the central bank so as to remove the money needed to purchase the police State that enforces these asinine regulations.
The only reasonable solution is less government.
The free market does a fantastic job, through competition, in ensuring bad players exit the market place. Even though M$ is a powerful tech firm, no one wanted their crappy Zune and it quickly and quietly left the market place. Hell, Windows 8 was such a flop that soon there may not be a Microsoft. Same with GM. No one wanted their crap, they went bankrupt - even though they were the largest company in the world at one time. Across 100 years, of the top 100 companies in 1910, only a few remain.
Not so with Government. It sticks around and gets worse with each passing day. Just look at Government Schooling. In 1910 you had to know how to read to attend school. In 2010 one in five Government school graduates are functionally illiterate. Talk about rot.
The Department of Education costs us $80 billion dollars each year! That dwarfs Apple Inc, or Google, yet look at all the goods the public actually want that these companies provide to us. Imagine if school was the same. No one would pay $30K a year to a business that passes functionally illiterates. The only solution is free-markets, which will probably start with Chartered Schools.
The government is littered with these examples.
See, this the thing. People are people. The ONLY think that delineates Public employees from Private employees is the State has the legal right to use force against innocent humans. I'm fairly certain, that if the common electorate did not worship the State as their new religion, they'd be appalled at the notion a group of people can do this - yet here we are. A man was just strangled to death for selling a 0.50 cent cigarette to other adults. Only the State can legally do this.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Steve G
I'm not how much you've read regarding the philosophy of politics, but the State being an immoral institution is not a controversy. Nor has it been for hundreds of years.
Immanuel Kant (in 1772) named four kinds of government:
Law and freedom without force (anarchy).
Law and force without freedom (despotism).
Force without freedom and law (barbarism).
Force with freedom and law (republic).
Note the word 'force' in republic. That force is the 'immoral' use of force against innocent people. Using force against innocent people is, by definition, immoral.
Monopoly on legitimate violence (German: Gewaltmonopol des Staates) is the definition of the state expounded by Karl "Max" Weber (1919) and in Politics as a Vocation he defines the State as having a monopoly on legitimate violence (German: Gewaltmonopol des Staates). The State is defined as a single entity exercising authority on violence over a given territory (territory is characteristic of a State). Such a monopoly must occur via a process of legitimation, wherein a claim is laid to legitimise the State's use of violence.
Oh, and in case you're wondering, this is how the USA legally defines itself. This is WHY it was limited. The US Constitution is here to protect us from the Government, not from big corporations, not from wealthy individuals, not to redistribute wealth, not to provide us with welfare or housing. It's to protect us from the State. The other services are up to US to provide to one another through trade.
But, thanks to the Progressives of the late 1800s, we now have a Central Bank feeding the State money and we now have to pay the State for the privilege of working (income tax). The State regulates just about every aspect of our lives, from who we can legally marry, to what we can consume, to the paper used to wipe our arses. We have to ask the State for permission to perform work, we have to inform the State of just about any transaction we make. The State is now spying on us. It's wasting trillions in resources on never ending wars - which it lies the Government Schooled idiot electorate into supporting.
The fact that the State is immoral is not in dispute. It's a definitional fact.
As for what's in store for us in the future? Well, the Problem of Induction (Hume) proves we cannot know. However, a Boolean analysis suggests we will be getting much more immoral government, we will lose many more civil liberties (the State passes millions of new lines of regulations yearly) and we'll lose our right to privacy.
Prosperity is defined as civil liberty + leisure time. We are losing both. Thus, we will become less prosperous.
You'll see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
5:08
The look on Ana's face when she realizes her statement is self referential. For evidence of Progressive Socialism Utopia, see: 50 years of uninterrupted Democratic Rule over Detroit. Take a nice long good look too, that's what the rest of the U.S.S.A. will look like soon enough (and pretty much half of it already does).
Oh, also of note: Progressive Socialists gave us the Federal Reserve. Thank them for bailing out the rich, funding the wars, stealing your prosperity. Oh, the Progressive Socialists also regulated the so-called 'free' markets. You know, for the "social good". You pretty much can't wipe your arse (seriously, you can't) without breaking multiple levels of rules and regulations. The USA has more laws "Governing" our behavior than any other nation - in history.
Anyway, I digress. Again, take a good look at Detroit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
riddick1128
Firstly, free markets are very difficult to develop and even harder to maintain. They require a particularly type of society - one that is intelligent, hard-working, mostly honest and developed enough to form and work with free-markets. When such societies exist, they bring the maximum prosperity to the people who live within them. However, for most of history humans live in regulated-markets. Usually by a monarchy. This is a stable form of society - however, it does not lead to prosperity and advancement, but to stagnation and poverty.
Free market is another way of saying 'free people'. Being 'free' doesn't mean you're able to stab someone or steal from people. Or defraud them. It only means you're free to trade with one another, within the law, within contract (written or unwritten) using sound money.
It's not that complicated. As a matter of fact, the USA government preaches 'free markets' policies towards Asia (example: China - lifting 100s of millions out of poverty) while at the exact same time using the State to hyper-regulate our society (which is why we're becoming poorer with less opportunity).
So, no, uttering the words "free-markets" isn't going to magically bring prosperity. They're hard to create and even harder to maintain. Which is why you don't have to worry about living in one in your life time. Nope. For us it's more hyper-regulation, more rules, less freedom, less privacy, less opportunity. That's our future.
1
-
Beholder505
See: Princeton University
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Monopoly_on_the_legitimate_use_of_physical_force.html
"The monopoly on legitimate violence is the definition of the state expounded by Max Weber in Politics as a Vocation, which has been predominant in philosophy of law and political philosophy in the twentieth century.
It defines a single entity, the state, exercising authority on violence over a given territory, as territory was also deemed by Weber to be a characteristic of state. Importantly, such a monopoly must occur via a process of legitimation, wherein a claim is laid to legitimise the state's use of violence."
-
Imagine you have two groups of humans.
Group A: Have the legal obligation to initiate force against innocent humans.
Group B: Only has the right to use force in self defense.
Group A is the government/public
Group B is the individual/private
Anyway, you needn't worry we're going to break out into a society based on freedom to trade with limited government - exactly the opposite. We're getting more taxes, more regulation, more government, less privacy, less liberty and less prosperity.
You'll see.
1
-
Beholder505
Police are legally obligated, as Public servants, to initiate force against morally innocent people. As an example see the drug laws. If you are caught, as an adult, consuming a drug not authorized by the State, or selling drug (even if it were medicine to save lives - but do not have permission by the State) and you refuse to desist activity and resit being put in a public cage - you can be shot dead. Or, if you work as a laborer, selling your labor into the market, but refuse to pay the State a transaction tax / income tax on your labor sales - and you resist your confinement in a public cage. You can be shot dead. And etc.... Even this: in some states you require a liscence by the State to arrange flowers and sell them. You know, because we're so free in our Progressive hyper-regulated tax-pen/ USSA. If you refuse to quite selling arranged flowers, and you resist being put in a public rape-cage, you can be shot dead.
NO ONE, not Bill Gates, not the Koch brothers, no one has the power to do this to you. All their billions and they can not do this to you. But some nobody cop can. THAT is the difference between the State and the private individual. Oh, and don't think the rich don't use the State. They do - that's how they stay rich. Then they use the Government school system to ensure you worship the State. Die in it's phony wars. Pay it your labor tax.
But, as I said, you needn't worry about freedom coming to the USA. Nope. Our tax pen is getting more regulation, more tax, more spying, less liberty, less freedom, less privacy.
So, you're in luck. More Progressive Socialism in on its way. Do enjoy.
1
-
Roberto Blake
That's my opinion yes.
I imagine, in a few decades, perhaps some of the States that make up the United States will apply for legal succession, vote, and leave the Union. Then, through voluntary legal migration those who can and want to work and provide will move into those these States and those who are unwilling to do so, or can not, will move likewise.
Slowly the States with the better system, (which I believe to be the limited State government and free-trade/free-markets/freer-people) will lead through example (as Japan has done for Korea and then China and now China is doing for the rest of Asia) and within a short period, say 3 generations - return us to a limited for of government. Perhaps there would then be a unification of some sorts.
With a high level of prosperity derived from free-markets, the process of socialization will begin, the State will grow. Probably start offering all the same services it does now. Become militaristic. And, in 3 more generations, we'll be right back to where we are now.
This is IMO the rise and fall of all Nation States throughout history.
The only curve ball is technology - that may be a game changer. But probably not.
1
-
synapse131
Both Republicans and Democrats support a police State. The USA is highly progressive. Examples include our progressive income tax, our progressive central bank, our progressive morality laws (drug laws, anti-bigotry laws, etc...), our Government schools, our progressive Wars overseas (Progressives of the 1800s were why we entered WWI and WWII as well as the Korean War and then Vietnam - you could think of the idea of Progressivism as a form of White Man's Burden. That's certainly how the Progressives of the late 1800s thought - which is the history of Progressivism).
Socialism fits hand in glove with Progressivism. Most Progressives are Socialist because they know the only way they can cram their so-called Progressive ideas down the public's throat is by using the State (aka: violence against innocent people) to do so.
Again, BOTH republicans AND democrats support the Progressive State. Both voted for the Wars we're fighting in and losing. Both support government schools (right now, 1 in every 5 Americans are functionally illiterate, even though pencils and books are pretty much free).
Because Progressives requite the State to force their ideals onto society - we have to lose our liberty, we have to pay the State a tax to work, we have to live under millions of regulations (most of which are just for rent-seekers, insiders, regulatory capture and to support monopolies), we have to be spied on. THOSE are the prices we pay for the oxymoron that is Progressive Socialism. The funny thing is, IF people truly wanted all these Progressive initiatives - then there'd be no need for Socialism, because the free-market (free people) would provide them (see: the super computer that fits in your pocket for under $200 free-ish market). The modern world has never seen free markets - but, as they become freer, we become more prosperous (see: USA cirac 1850-1913, Japan 1960-80s, China 1990s-current). Again, NOT free markets, but much freer relatively speaking.
Which is why, for now, I support LIMITED government - waaaaay smaller than what it is now. And to do that, we need to end the Fed. Just imagine, we've spent over $100 trillion on Wars since the end of the WWII. $100 TRILLION. This came from our Progressive Socialistic State. NOT from free-markets. Free markets would never, and could never, afford that sort of lay out. It's ONLY possible by States.
Lastly, I don't blame Obama, he's just as bad as Bush Jr who was as bad as Clinton and etc... I mean, Clinton shoved his cigar up his nearly-teenage Intern's vagina AND people still love this creep. Hell, they think his War monger wife is a Feminist! Ha!
No, all these POTUS are sociopaths. The only reason anyone cannot see that is due to brainwashing in Government schools and normalization. It's why 99% of Americans think America is just great and 99% of North Koreans think NK is just great and why 99% of people born in KSA think Islam is just great, and etc....
BUT, if you can look past your indoctrination (most can"t) then you'll see that what I'm writing to you is true.
Or not. Your choice.
1
-
1
-
1
-
TheNavigateur Markets are not "dictatorial by nature". For example, suppose you wanted to go out on a date with Person A. Suppose Person A doesn't want to go out on a date with you. By your way of thinking, Person A is acting as a "Dictator" simply by not wanting to engage in a voluntary relationship with you. That, somehow, Person A not going out on a date with you means you're a "Slave"? This is nonsense. Yes, Person A has power over you in the sense you want a relationship with Person A but they don't want one with you. However, get this, in a FREE society, you are "free" to go elsewhere and find someone who does want to engage with you.
While this example is of a relationship, it could have been of a baker selling cakes, car salesman, or anyone. And, in fact, in free societies, you'll find most people are working hard to get you to BUY the stuff they're selling. In a free society YOU are generally in the position of Person A and most of the time it is YOU telling someone: No, I don't want your coffee or soda or bread, or etc....
I do agree War for Peace is an oxymoron. See, the fact is we've all lived in highly regulated societies for so long, no one actually remembers what a free society can be like.
Think about this, think about the massive productivity gains made across the last 50 years - yet, most people are living worse off now compared to then. It now requires two parents to work to maintain what one parent working could afford in the 1950s. So? Where is all our productivity going? It's going into the MASSIVE expansion of the State. It's going to fund wars. Our central banks' inflation makes sure no one can stop working and no one can catch up. Our taxes ensure we remain slaves to the State. We pretty much pay 50 - 60% (or higher) when you count all the costs of all the taxes. By some estimates our standard of living now, is equivalent to just before the Korean War.
Lets take the largest company in the USA: Apple Inc. Do you really FEAR Apple? If Apple called you'd up, and you told them to piss off and hung up on them - would you really lose one wink of sleep at night? No. You wouldn't. Because at the end of the day, even though they are a billion dollar company - YOU have the power in your relationship with Apple Inc. Now imagine it wasn't Apple calling, but someone from the IRS. Imagine you told them to piss off and hung up - my guess is, you'd have sleepless night right up until you were hauled off to a State run rape cage.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Adam Clark
Thank you for your response.
I'd suggest this: What does the age of a document have to do with making an argument regarding it's contents? Some syllogisms are 2300 years old, yet these arguments are sound and valid. The age isn't what matters. It's the argument that matters. David is making a fallacious informal fallacy to suggest the age of an argument has any baring on the argument contents.
Again, there is NO evidence that any ISP purposely slowed the internet. Exactly the opposite is true, the evidence shows they did NOT slow the internet.
http://www.techpolicydaily.com/internet/caused-web-slow-down-comcast-twc-verizon/
What people like David want is to use the State to ban their competition via the FCC. Regulatory capture is the Progressive's 'business model'. David's is simply looking to capture market share through FCC facilitated rent-seeking. IMO the LAST thing David cares about is anyone's personal freedom or civil liberty. And, IF he was being honest (or the FCC for that matter) he would NOT support using State violence as a means to regulate the internet. Lucky for David, most people lap up his demagoguery posing as an 'argument. Thus, we'll find our free market internet is regulated to the point you'll need a State licence to open a website, a State log on ID to use the internet and we'll pay a nice hefty tax to boot.
You'll see. The last thing the FCC cares about is maintaining a free and open internet. This is simply a power grab. I've worked in many large institutions in numerous countries, I can safely tell you, this IS the case with the FCC. As for David's motivation, maybe he's an imbecile, but I stated my personal opinion.
That aside, I was invited to join Lesswrong late last year and I am interested in doing so. Unfortunately I have hardly any free time at all. If I recall correctly, Lesswrong is orientated towards Bayesian epistemology?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mike Bond You start your post suggesting Comcast, Verizon and AT&T where working together to slow the entire Internet. This sounds like a CT to me. Do you have credible evidence of this? Because it did not happen.
You end your post suggesting the opposite, that a single type of traffic was throttled - in this case Netflicks. Well, this is false. As the link I posted shows. So, again, the FCC is NOT needed. We do NOT require State violence to 'solve' a problem that never occurred.
As am aside, if you think paying a third party, in this case the FCC, is going to give you 'free' internet - which is basically what everyone wants. Think again.
IMO Americans are like children. Children who want mommy and daddy to give them a lifetime allowance. Children who never grew up and hate the very idea that they have to pay for the things they consume. Like little children they want Mommy State to give them it for free. Which is the real reason why the FCC is cheered on. They think they're getting free internet. As if it's not fair Comcast didn't give Netflicks more bandwidth than what they purchased and GASP required them to pay for what they were selling.
IMO Progressives like magic thinking. Which is what people like David pander too.
Well, I can promise you, you're not getting 'free' internet. And now that the FCC has gained the legal ability to 'Regulate' our access to the internet, it's only a matter of time before they'll require State issued log on IDs and licencing fees and higher taxes all to ensure no one uses more than their fair share of "The Commons" and that we're all Safe from one another. The Internet is 'dangerous' and needs to be "Regulated' by the State for the "good of society'.
Current market players (like David here) stand to gain big as rent-seekers thanks to FCC regulatory capture. With regulations and licencing we'll watch as innovation is slow. No more game streaming - that's using up too much of "The Commons".
And, just like that, Regressive Socialists will have destroyed another free-market - the last one left. Which makes sense, Progressives absolutely hate free markets/freedom.
Just read the tone of your "until they paid" in your response. In my ears, this sounds like childish naivety. Make no mistake, the FCC is State violence (see: Immanuel Kant's Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View) - using violence to take from one person and give to yourself generally doesn't work out in the long run. You'll see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
Japan has the third largest economy in the world.
Of any iPhone sold in the States about 34% of the total profit goes to Japan, 26% goes to Germany and 6% to the USA and 3% to China.
Japan is the ONLY country that makes the high end silicon powder used in all high tech devises (phones, PCs, etc...). Germany used to, but quit (that was in The Economist a month or so ago)
Japan's problem is due to demographics, and this is simply the way things MUST be. It's not possible to expand the human population forever. At some point a peak population is reached and it starts to shrink. Japan is doing a pretty gawd damn good job of maintaining the livelihood for most Japanese - well, up until that twat Abe and his idiotic Keynesian economics / inflation. It'd be fairer to just default and be upfront about it - instead of stealing through inflation.
Japan is, in many ways, more free market than the USA (or Europe) at the ground level. All those little homemade restaurants here and there, most of those would be illegal in the USA. All those vending machines - half would be illegal and the other half smashed to bits as the idiotic population looted them.
Lucky for Japan, it has a homogenous population, and so it doesn't have to waste 10s of billions of dollars each year on police enforcement - unlike Police State USA. Japanese people are relatively great people and their cities are clean and safe. The USA is a shit hole in comparison. I'm a US Citizen by the way. I've also lived in Japan.
1
-
1
-
1
-
AJ Beamish
(a) I also have dual citizenship and have lived in more than those two countries. One, of others, not being a Western English speaking country.
(b) I'm not telling you TO emigrate. I'm saying, IF you like living in England, then move and live there. Pretty simple really.
(c) I've been to England multiple times, the standard of living is really no different than the USA. England's government schools produce a functional illiteracy rate exactly the same as the USA: 1 in 5.
(d) Just because truly free markets never existed, doesn't mean we should give up attempting to create societies where the legal initiation of violence against innocent people / government (see: War on Drugs as an example of this) is reduced to a minimum.
Your argument is akin to a 16th century person arguing Slavery has always existed and truly free modern countries have never existed and therefor.... (insert various normalization biases).... we should not eliminate Slavery. For progress to happen, yes, something gasp that has never happened in the past must come to pass.
(e) RE: Chartered Schools
The nice thing about Chartered Schools, is YOU are free to remain in, or put your children into, a Government School. We OTOH are free not to subject our children to such. See how simple this works? If Government schools are so wonderful, then parents will want their children to attend them.
Oh, and get this - you WILL lose this battle. Chartered Schools will replace Government Schools. Those few decently run Government schools will become Chartered Schools.
Lastly, I know plenty of English who pay to put their children in English private schools. Those children tend to get the best spots in University. This is really unfair. At least with Chartered Schools low-income parents are given the chance to put their children into a Private School of their choice. Much like poor people can buy an iPhone6 no different from that of a wealthy person, the same will, one day, be true of education (thanks in large part to choice).
(f) Libertarians don't argue for free markets. They argue for limited government and regulated markets. So, take your strawman elsewhere.
Again, if you think opportunity awaits in England - move there and take it. Overall, England isn't much different than any other multicultural Westernized country. I've lived in four and not noticed much of a difference in any off them. The differences are slight, and usually due to the community you reside in and what you happen to be doing there and the time you happen to arrive in what part of the economic cycle they are in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MusicMakeYouLoseControl
I was just in Japan last month.
1) I watched a news article complaining that children are only being taught to memorize and regurgitate (which they do, do well).
2) Japan has a culture of shamming people who do not work up to their best. We OTOH are still paying Detroit Government School Teachers a 13 month bonus - even though many of these teachers can, themselves, barely speak proper English. My guess is, most American teachers would never be hired in Japan.
3) Japanese mothers stay home and actually teach their children how to read and write and do math. Whereas, in the West, it's not uncommon for Western mothers to put their children into Lord of the Flies / Day "Care" where they never get the individual attention (not even close) to a Japanese child. It's not uncommon for Japanese children to learn the English alphabet before the age of 2. I just listened to a Japanese child 1 year 8 month recite the ABCs up to the letter P. Sure, the pronunciation wasn't native English perfect, but, pretty good.
4) I personally feel Japan had more child "things" in society compared with in the USA where I find there's more stuff for adults to have fun. It's more child focused then in the West. IMO.
5) While not Japan, I did read part of a PhD thesis where the authors found Korean children adopted into Belgium families, who were IQ tested, had an average IQ score of 117 +/- 5. So, it may be that E. Asians are more adapt at standardized testing.
6) Japanese public schools are much different than Westernized schools. It used to be they didn't even start school until age 7 (which is actually the ideal age) and when at school it's a different learning environment. Most children are taught to read and write at home as well as at school.
8) Private cram schools are quite common. My cousin would go to school from 8AM-4PM and then attend cram school from 6PM - 11PM with a half day on Saturday and Sunday off. There's no 3 month summer vacations either. While she never did a logic course, but when she was hired at an English company they said she scored the highest according to their London records of any person ever at the company on it's logic test. I'd say she's a slightly above average Japanese - but no where near the top.
In summary, the Government schooling in Japan is currently considered unsatisfactory to producing creative thinking and there's a large private component to education - both at home and in private schools. Even Japanese are saying we need to change education and this isn't working. Which, giving their homogeneity, means they might have a shot at changing Government schooling into something better.
That said, Japanese schools are no where near as good as some of our private Chartered Schools. It's simply a matter of modern education being unsound. It simply doesn't work. Also, one Chartered schools pedagogy may not work for "ALL" children. Each child/person is different - which is why we need the variety in education.
How many can tell me what the Log10 of 1000 is? Obviously 3. Any child could tell you. If you didn't know, then this is an example of the bulimic learning that is modern education and has been for 60-100 years. And, it's getting worse.
1
-
1
-
MusicMakeYouLoseControl
We agree that the bases of modern education lay in the industrialization of society.
As for daycare, I don't think you appreciate just how horrible abusive long-term day care is to children. From age 0 - 4 is the most rapid time of neural development in a child'd life. Changes that occur to the brain during this time period will have life-long and lasting effects.
To take a pre-verbal child out of a caring family and into a long-term (sometimes 6AM - 7PM) supervision center is, in my opinion, totally insane. So insane, that no one would do this IF it weren't normal. It's THAT insane.
Further, mo one knows what the long term effects may be to these children. It's now not uncommon to place 6 WEEK old infants into these supervision clinics. It's likely this is negatively and permanently effecting children's neural development. The Gods only know how this is going to turn out.
As for the Private component to Japanese education. Well, formally there's cram school and that's quite common. Also, private schools are also present in Japan - though they are considered lower and less reputable than public schools. Most kids who get good grades would not want to attend a private school.
That said, we can't really measure the parental effect. But, I can say this, most mother's do not put their children into long term daycare in Japan. And the thought of putting a 6 week old infant into daycare would be akin to physical child abuse. This personal care that Japanese parents take in personally educating their children may not be quantifiable, but from my experience, Asian mothers make the time to read to and educate their children more so than Western mothers - who on average focus more on their career.
Yes, that's a generalization and my personal opinion - but it is what it is. As evidence, again I point to day care centers that take in 6 week old children that are not uncommon in the West but would be considered child abuse in Japan. The future will look back at this and see it as child abuse. It's literally insane.
As for Government school - this is a nature extension of the same society that condones long-term day supervision centers. Little concern is paid to the education of children. They are treated like cogs in a machine. These children graduate from long term day supervision to longer term Government school. It's no wonder that 1 in 5 graduate functionally illiterate. Unable to master a simple 26 letters.
Japanese has two phonetic alphabets each with a base set of 46 letters. The 26 roman letters are learned as well. Then there's an additional 2500 basic Chinese characters that must be mastered for basic literacy. Another 2000 should be added for a deeper appreciation of the language. Did I mention we're also pretty decent at math too :)
AND YET, I still maintain that some Chartered schools in the USA are better for some students - particularly the creative learners who will invent the devises of the future.
1
-
1
-
MusicMakeYouLoseControl
I suppose this is a matter of perspective.
See, to me the last 60 years of daycare + 100 years of Government schooling has pretty much altered society so as to make it nearly unrecognizable to the people who would have lived back then. It's anything but normal.
To me it's normal to have the freedom to buy wine, beer, cigarettes or even Jack Danial's from a vending machine (I don't smoke, but, I like the personal liberty). To me it's normal to see children walking through any part of the city without fear. It's normal not to see graffiti anywhere. It's normal to feel safe at night in the city. It's normal to see someone open a bar that seats 3 people. Or a person set up a little restaurant out of the back of their house in the city. None of these places would come close to passing building and zoning codes in the US.
To me it's not normal to see mother's put their 6 week old infants into day supervision centers - which are no where near the same as a personal family member. On average a child needs contact with their parent (preferably mother) once ever 3 minutes. Day carers are 1 to 20 and it's literally impossible to show the love and attention of a mother to this many (unknown) children.
Not to mention day care workers typically last only 18 months - the gods only know what this pseudo-parental bond breaking is doing to these children's long term ability to form relationships or their sense of security. That's nothing like the way tribes raise children (which also doesn't delineate children by age, another unhealthy "normal' aspect to Government schooling).
It's not normal to me to see children put on anti-depressants because they want to go outside and play. See, to me, going outside and playing appears normal and sitting in a neat little row and raising your hand to ask permission to pee while taking SSRIs designed for adults is actually... well, insane.
So, I'd just suggest not confusing what's normal with what's virtuous.
1
-
1
-
1
-
kazooga 1234
I just provided you with the formal proof of your fallacious reasoning. I then provided you with the amount spent per pupil in the two countries in YOUR example showing Finland spends 30% less than the USA.
Thus, I've provided you with deductive reasoning and inductive evidence yet you're still holding to your superstitious belief in the State. I"ll post an article I read below, other than that, I"m not responding to you again.
----------
An Article I read:
*For decades critics of the public schools have been saying, "You can't solve educational problems by throwing money at them." The education establishment and its supporters have replied, "No one's ever tried." In Kansas City they did try. To improve the education of black students and encourage desegregation, a federal judge invited the Kansas City, Missouri, School District to come up with a cost-is-no-object educational plan and ordered local and state taxpayers to find the money to pay for it.
Kansas City spent as much as $11,700 per pupil--more money per pupil, on a cost of living adjusted basis, than any other of the 280 largest districts in the country. The money bought higher teachers' salaries, 15 new schools, and such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room, television and animation studios, a robotics lab, a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary, a zoo, a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability, and field trips to Mexico and Senegal. The student-teacher ratio was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country.
The results were dismal. Test scores did not rise; the black-white gap did not diminish; and there was less, not greater, integration.*
------
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MusicMakeYouLoseControl
I would strongly advise not putting a child into a day supervision center / daycare. Not only could the child be harmed, threatened, groomed and molested, but the child will not have the individual attention of a parent, the child will be stressed being away from a parent, the child will pick up the habits of the children around them - of which 1 in 50 are statistically likely to be molested by someone.
It's simply insane to put a child into such a dangerous situation. A play group is perfectly reasonable - supervised by the parents.
Many tribal societies are actually quite violent. I'm not sure of any that aren't to be honest.
As for the instance when simultaneously the pill fails, condom breaks and abortion was not available. AND the mother knows she cannot afford to raise the child then the answer is simple: adoption. There's plenty of families who would love a child, have the resources, but cannot have children.
I feel like this has gone a bit off the rails. We'll have to agree to disagree to the topic of day care.
I will say this, I know of a woman who works in the federal government in a highly paid high level position. She doesn't have time for a partner, is getting old (40s) and wants a child. So she did IVF. Due to her schedule she had a cesarean and delivered 3 weeks early. At exactly 6 weeks old (3 weeks if by natural birth) this infant was put into long term day care from 6am - 7pm five days a week. She needs some 'me time' and so the child also spends some Saturdays in day care. The carers in this child's life will be her parent. Statistically they will leave her once every 18 months. Growing up in a day care center will be this child's memories of her childhood. Then she will graduate on to Government school. Oh, and the Government not only legalized and regulated long term day care, it also provides tax rebates and credits to pay for it. The Government pays parents to put their children into day care. Not because it cares for them, but because then they can get back to work paying tax to the government.
IMO this is child abuse.
1
-
1
-
kazooga 1234
Actually, a lot of private unions put their companies out of business (see: GM and UAW). Regardless, anyone can legally start a private union. That's perfectly moral.
Public unions are immoral as well as an oxymoron. Public servants agree to serve the public at a price the public is willing to pay for this 'free' service - like 'free' education. Therefor they do not need a union - as they don't work for a profit making corporation, they work for the public.
The reason why only Public Unions exist is because they have to bankrupt the cites, states and eventually the nation itself before they go away. As an example, see: Detroit.
In Detroit Government Teachers are paid 2-3 times the average pay, get wonderful benefits, wonderful medical insurance, insanely awesome vacation time off, pensions, and negotiated a bonus 13th month paid in full. While at the same time only 1 in 3 students bothers to graduate and of that 1/3 about 50% are functionally illiterate. See? A private company would have went bankrupt decades ago. But, Government Institutions don't go bankrupt until the city goes under (See: Detroit). Thus Unions LOVE LOVE LOVE forming within the Government itself (see: Government Teachers Union).
1
-
1
-
kazooga 1234
This is going off tract. However, Government Union members are actually paid handsomely, they have good benefits, all public holidays off, pensions, healthcare, and etc... Is this an effect of Unionization? Yes. Is it good for the Public they're supposedly 'serving'? Nope.
How do you expect a 19 year old to open a business, keep the doors open, repay the loans, somehow manage to raise his/her own family while competing in the market place (highly regulated market place) AND at the same time buy labour hours at a price that's a liveable wage for all his/her employees??? In effect you expect this kid to come up with an idea, start a company, somehow manage to make enough to keep the doors open AND live on .... and at the same time you think anyone he/she hired must be paid a 'liveable' wage? Are you insane!?!
As for why aren't their many jobs with 'liveable' wages?
(a) After 12 years of Government schooling most Americans don't know how to open a business and have no usable skill sets.
(b) We don't have 'free' markets, we have massively hyper-regulated markets, all these 'regulations' keep competition out of the markets (rent-seeking, licencing, regulatory capture, etc...)
Thus we end up with with not many people opening businesses to hire people and an over supply of labor-hours and so, like anything, the price is driven down on hourly labor.
Stop and think about it:
With 1 in 5 Government School graduates functionally illiterate, they don't command much per hour because no one wants to hire them for anything other than menial labor. But, if you're a programmer, or a medical doctor, engineer, etc... then you'll be paid much more per hour.
In summary:
It's the Government that's destroying our society by (a) hyper-regulating the markets in favor of a few big players and making it very difficult (sometimes impossible) to open businesses and (b) Government schools pumping out labor-cogs with not very useful skill sets (by the millions each year) over supplying the market with laborers.
The solution is shrink government, remove regulations and bring in Chartered schools to replace Government schools.
Obama saying he's going to give us a 'free' two more years of useless education at a crappy community college isn't going to change any of the above.
1
-
MusicMakeYouLoseControl
From: http://www.americanhumane.org/
Abuse Statistics:
Types of Maltreatment Children Suffer
Maltreatment can take many forms, and some children can suffer from more than one type. Since 1999, the majority of children confirmed to be victims of child maltreatment experienced neglect. The following are the percentages of children who experienced maltreatment in 2005 (USDHHS, 2007):
Neglect 62.8%
Physical abuse 16.6%
Sexual abuse 9.3%
Emotional/psychological abuse 7.1%
Medical neglect 2.0%
Other 14.3%
---
When you put your child into ANY situation where you are not personally there to care for that child, particularly if that child is pre-verbal, you are putting your child in some degree of danger. Sexual abused child are going to have behavioural problems. Physically abused children are going to have behavioural problems. When your child is spending 9 to 13 hours a day with children who are abused, those behaviour problems will be passed on to your child.
You don't think child molesters specifically find jobs in places where helpless children are housed? You don't think they're motivated to open day supervision centers? Or to work at schools? Sexual abuse in schools is one of the primary places abuse takes place when excluding the home.
So, no, it's not hyperbole, it's statistical facts. Day care and Government schooling may be the norm now, but this is a recent trend. In the past these would be considered harmful towards children's development.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jon Wise
They signed it for them - no one can legally sign anything for me, except for me.
So, again, the most reasonable solution is it should be you that is the one who should leave. Leave the territory and take your immoral debt and force with you.
It should be noted, empirical evidence shows that Anarchic areas of Somalia are more prosperous then the equivalent areas in Democratic Kenya. Which makes good sense, in the Anarchic tribes they keep the fruit of their labor (some cattle, chicken, grain) whereas the neighboring tribes in Kenya are poorer as they have to pay their political masters "representatives" some of their grain, cattle and chicken - leaving them poorer.
But, that's not my point. A rational evaluation of the argument is this: YOU support initiating violence against innocent people and I do not. Thus, the reasonable solution is YOU should leave. But, hey, why work within reason when neo-Tribalism and Citizenship/ownership is so much better.
It should also be noted, no one can just 'leave' their State. If you think it's so easy, try it. Try leaving the USA and moving to another area of the world - you can't just walk 'out' or 'leave'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Re: What is governmental right?
Ans: The Government has one right the people lack, the right to initiate violence against morally innocent citizens. Example: "modern" day Drug War or Slavery in the early 1800s.
RE: Rights of the people.
Ans: If you think positive rights are a good idea, you'd have probably supported Slavery in the 1600s. You know, because "all the modern nations were doing it" and if that's 'what THE people want' and etc...
Re: Science
Ans: Science is a methodology and it aligns best with a free market medicine not State run medicine. Once the US Government takes over medicine, it will slowly turn to crap - just as has happened in everything the Government tries to run (see: Government Schools and the 20 functional illiteracy in it's graduates, or the War on Drugs (no change in 40 years), or the War on Poverty (no change since 1963) or the War on Terror (fake war). The fact is, SCIENCE is a method of inquiry, and Government is a weapon of power. Two totally different things.
Re: Democracy
And: Nope, limited republic.
All Ethicists define immoral as initiating violence against morally innocent humans. Most people agree, via numerous arguments, that you should not lie, cheat or steal. You should not hit. These are the rights we have given to Government. The same institutions Regressive Retards want to provide them with pretty much everything, all the time. Well News Flash, Government isn't a factory, it must 'redistribute' everything you get for 'free'. The price paid for 'free healthcare' is a moral society.
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: sure the government provides services by redistribution what is your objective against that? It also raises it's money by working class contribution and sick people do not work so... It might even be reasonable from a selfish perspective to support health care.
My objection is it is immoral to steal. Further, the Government mainly raises 'fiat currency' (not money) by selling treasuries on the future labor of children who have not even been born. Again, this is immoral. Not only is it immoral, it should be illegal. It's certainly not 'democratic' in the sense that those children did not have a single 'vote' on how the money was spent, nor in most cases, enjoy ANY of the public goods. As an example, there are numerous football stadiums that have been built, used, demolished, and are STILL being paid off. This means kids in their 20's are paying for stadiums that no longer exist. Ones they have never even seen, let alone used as a public good. Another example would be welfare, 20 TRILLION dollars have been spent on welfare, and the number of Americans living in poverty is the same. While this is also a good example of Governmental 'service' (as in low quality for too much money) it's also immoral as those 20 TRILLION must be repaid by people who don't even exist right now. And what public good are they getting in the future? Oh yes, generational welfare and a culture of ghetto slums. Worse still, they didn't have a vote. Again, immoral, and theft.
1
-
RE: Seriously economics is at best a soft science and at worst a bunch of old men that try to obfuscate their narrative with scientifically sounding terms while just spreading their bias without applying the scientific methods in any way...
-oOo-
Yes, I agree. Not even science. Which is why we should end Central Banking and Income Tax.
RE: Also you're listing the failures of conservative politics there, war on drugs, war on terror, ruining public schools and health care. Aren't those the folks that normally align with your ideology? Just a little confused here.
-oOo-
I'm not sure how Government Schools are Conservative (or what that even means)? Okay, they're Conservative if you say so, they are still an example of Governmental failure. There are over 16000 schools in the USA, more than enough for a sample size to conduct scientific studies on literacy. The DoED have done so and shown that for Government School graduates, they have a functional illiteracy rate of over 20% (and this continues to climb). I would argue, by analogy, that the same would be true of Healthcare if it were run by Government. Right now 480,000 Americans die of medical error each year, if the Government were to run healthcare, not only would the amount of debt for future generations be astronomical, but due to the distortion in the price mechanism (perhaps humanities greatest invention after language) would result in horrid healthcare.
The solution to fixing healthcare, is to return to a free-market. What we have no is a form of socialism, one of the worse forms: Fascism. I know, it's how I make a living. I'd be more than happy to make less, and to work in a free-market, where I am sure the quality would rise, and the price would drop. As always happens. As a matter of fact, THIS, and this alone, is why we have hyper-regulated healthcare. To keep the price very high. It's called regulatory capture and the players (like me) are therefor rent-seekers.
Lastly, I have lived in 5 different countries. Not visited, but lived and worked. Including Australia and Japan. I know all about socialized healthcare, and I can promise, the USA is never going to have a socialized healthcare like Japan, and the one in AU is pretty crap and nearly bankrupting the country. You won't read of AU as a biomedical leader in anything. Worse still, not only do the Government statisticians lie, for example: putting medical error at less than 100, when in reality it's close to 80,000; but to pay for 'free' healthcare, other services are scarified. University in Australia, for example, only go 3 years - and is one of the least funded in the first world (very low resources compared to the USA). It must be, because healthcare costs a lot of money and therefor the money is removed from education to pay for it. Is this what you are in favor of? As for Japan, they have a thriving Private Healthcare market side by side with a high IQ homogenous society. This will never be replicated in the USA. Ever. Oh, and I'd mention, you may think 'let's cut from the military' (and I agree), but the result will be the same - a distortion in the price mechanism and horrible healthcare.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: might already cost you that "innocence".
I agree if, as an adult, you act in a manner that violates contract or property rights (with the body being a form of property ownership) then the owner of the property or holder of the contract can defend themselves, or enforce the contract obligations. I do not agree that simply by being born in a Nation State you 'agree' to some unwritten contract. For example: In North Korea Citizens have 'agreed' to provide Dear Leader / Government with their human organs, such as a kidney, if the need should arise. That's immoral IMO. Another example: In the USA, T-Bonds were sold (to the Chinese for example) 20 years ago. Some kid 10 years old then, is 30 now, and is paying on Bonds they never voted on, and for the most part, never enjoyed the services of. That, IMO, is immoral.
1
-
RE: "Also terms like "theft" or more general "rights", are things that are entirely made up concepts of a human society. So if the society collapses so do these rights. In other words when you're at the edge of life and death where you're survival instincts kick in, those concepts barely have any meaning any more and who are you to judge someone that demands services from you to full fill its most basic needs of survival?"
I agree these are terms we made up, however, I do believe an argument could be made that negative rights (like body ownership) have a basis in biology. Yet, we have LOST the right over our body. One example is the modern war on drugs. Another was prohibition. And still another is Income Taxation. While I agree that society may collapse, and at that point enforcement of various Rights may no be assisted by the State, I believe we would still have these Rights (biologically). Even now, a person can legally murder if they feel their body is being attacked or about to be attacked. I also believe we will live in a better world, when most interactions (or all) are voluntary. This can only happen when Government stops violating Negative Rights - which is must do in order to provide so-called Positive Rights. Healthcare being an example. Effectively, each time Government offers to provide a Positive Right, is a step towards the end of our Civil Society. Maybe one day, all needs will be provided by Government, and we will have no Civil Society. Why move in that direction? If people want affordable healthcare, then simply return to a free-market. End regulatory capture and return to sound money.
1
-
RE: Moral
A moral action must be an action that can be Universalized without creating a contradiction or violating a negative right (such as body ownership). For example, it would be moral to offer help, because anyone, anywhere, can do so, without violating another person's negative rights. It would be moral to offer to sell healthcare. It would be moral to offer to sell food, housing, a car, a pc, water. It would be immoral, for example to steal (violation of property ownership); hit (violation of property ownership) or lie (violation of contract). Because it is immoral for one person, it is immoral for all people, including those people who happen to be public servants.
1
-
Fiat currency is a medium of exchange that gains value through State coercion. The USD for example, gains value by being the medium of exchange that the US Government requires Income Tax to be paid in.
RE: Profit
Making a profit in a free-market, with sound (voluntary money) must be a virtuous act. How could it not be? The person making the profit does so by providing a good or service to another who wants that service or good. The person making the profit must uphold contract as well as respect private property. For example, suppose I own a farm, I grow an apple tree, I pick the apples, I sell the apples. My labor has provided people with the potential of an apple; IF people pay me money for my apple, then they (through the medium of money) are informing me that my actions are desired by others - assuming I can make a profit. If I cannot make a profit, then I will not be able to continue to grow apples, then this action is not of virtue to society and comes to an end.
Does that answer you question?
A person making Spoils on the other hand would be someone who uses the State to enforce a monopoly on the good or service they sell. Take modern medicine for example. You require a State licence to practice. The government restricts the number of licences causing artificial shortage of healthcare, this means the price for this State-caused limited supply goes up (and it has - greatly). Any money made would be referred to as "Spoils" and it would be unknown if the actions were virtuous or vice.
How does that sound?
1
-
1) I'm not arguing that the free-market is the *best*, but that it's the most *moral*. I'm not sure what 'best' even means.
2) I'm not sure where you are going by saying you don't 'own' your body as opposed to saying you 'are' your body. You can sell your kidney - at the point of sale, it's no longer you. People sell their hair and blood all the time. So, you do 'own' your body.
3) The question of selling water to a thirsty person is a bit contrived. It's very very unlikely to happen. However, IMO this question is relegated to Aesthetics and the action if voluntary is moral. In this sense, over pricing water to a thirsty person would be moral and then for me, personally, repugnant.
4) You cannot sell poison and pretend it's a nutrition because this is a violation of contract law and property damage as well. So, I'm not sure what the question is here?
5) As for defending your body, this was most a question of legality. For example, a Slave lost self-ownership, they would be killed if they tried to 'defend' themselves. Or, a person smoking a drug that is illegal. They can try to defend themselves, but they will be killed by agents of the State if they resist. So, these are questions of legality. Which is why we need to legally own our body.
1
-
1
-
Interestingly enough, in my experience, you have a lot of say over private monopolies whereas government monopolies you have pretty much zero say over. Mainly in the way the goods and services are agreed to. As I have worked expensively for both private and public institutions I can safely say the private companies work diligently to find new and better ways to provide goods to the public (or services) and they are really always close to the edge, a few bad years could mean the end of the company. So, the customer is always on their mind. I've worked in many many large public institutions, in multiple countries. It's always the same: the public is the last after-thought on the to-do list. They rarely care about what the public wants. What motives people is mainly to make more money by moving up without wasting any time providing the good or service the institution was designed to deliver. In many cases, the quality is so low, as to be ridiculous, but because there's no competition, no one notices and just accepted that low crap quality as the 'normal' good quality. Which is pretty sad. But, oh well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: Rights
It is true that 'rights' are something we agree to, in a way, like the rules of language (which seems to work well enough without a Government Agency to enforce - the grammar is enforced by society).
There is a biological argument that you own your body, because you have DNA that compels you to defend yourself.
There is a private property argument, that you own your body, and its actions. Without private property, you cannot have law, without law, you cannot have civil society.
RE: Healthcare
If you want low quality expensive healthcare, then support Universal Healthcare, just list the other things you want less of and what things you want to pay much more for. For example, an iPhone for $2000 and University degree is 3 years instead of 4 (like in Australia - where they cut back most social services (some to the bone) and reduced their undergraduate to a very very very poorly funded 3 year degree - in order to pay for "free" healthcare).
If you want high quality cheap healthcare, then you support a free-market with no federal regulation (replaced by private regulation, insurance, etc....).
Which do you want? Expensive shit, likely to kill you, or inexpensive high quality healthcare that you pay for out of your pocket?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Tim Morgan
AU is so expensive now, I doubt most young poor Aussies will ever be able to afford a home and start a family. Even on $15 life in AU is tough. Everything is about 50% more than in the USA. A $450,000 2 bed apartment in AU would buy you a house in the USA or Japan.
But, AU is different in that AU has had a 15 year bull market in resources (which has distorted all sorts of other markets) and AU has a massive immigration policy to keep the population from dramatically declining. My friend works for the AU Government and compiles population statistics and, currently, the replacement is only 1 in 2. I suspect by 30 years time 2 in 3 Australians will be born overseas. Then there's the problems with funding healthcare.... huge problems. When the models were built 30 years ago, no one thought many of the cardiovascular disease would be so treatable.
An AU colleague of mine, recently told me about an obese man she treated for AMI - FIVE times! When she, again, advised him to diet, he told her to piss off "I pay me taxes". I'm sure not the $380,000 needed to keep fixing him.
It's a huge problem, resources are already being cut from primary education to pay for the healthcare of massive numbers of unhealthy beer loving obese baby boomers.
With a drastically declining population, shrinking tax base, and possible end to the resource boom, I'm really not sure how things will turn out in AU.
But, yes, $15 - 20 an hour doesn't get you very far in AU. You need at least $50 - 80 an hour to live in AU. Or, and this is what generally happens, both partners work and many forgo having children. Or, if they don't marry, many live in share houses well into their 40s and 50s.
1
-
1
-
Japan produces a lot of pharmaceuticals as well as a lot of medical devices, like fMRI, etc... Japanese have the higher ratio of doctors to population in the entire world. You must pay for healthcare out of your paycheck. In that sense, Japan has single payer much like other countries. However, Japan also has private hospitals - a LOT of private hospitals. They ALSO have private insurance. In our family, the monthly payment for top tier (yes, you pay more you get more) is about $800 a month. That covers a family of 10 (grandparents, grandkids, etc...). Essentially, there's only a single working person in the house. Everyone else is retired (very very small monthly pension). Japan is VERY socialistic. The reason healthcare costs so much, is because it costs so much. There's no magic wand that is going to change this, regardless what Bernie Sanders will have you believe. Free healthcare will be extremely expensive in the USA. And single payer will too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
PolakFury I think it depends on who you spoke to in the USA. I personally think there will come a day whereby any human can move anywhere on earth - and I have no problem with people coming and leaving passport free, anywhere. We should eliminate passports.
However, at the same time, we would have to have a diversity of governments, with some being very very very small. Thus, in societies with large governments, they can decide how they want to deal with an influx of humans, those societies with small limited governments will find most goods and services are provided by free people within thew law, using an agreed upon currency. In a free society, people find out quite quickly if they are wanted in a community, as they'll be required to provide value to the people around them. Whether a fruit picker or a neurosurgeon. Which is good for both parties.
I admit, I really like Japan. I like that the culture is maintained - but, it's not really true. The Japan of 2015 is not the Japan of 1915 or 1815. That said, Japanese are good at ostracizing the people they don't want in their communities. This may or may not be to their own detriment. In my opinion, this is the best way.
It would be interesting to see how many women in KSA (whom we in the USA support) would like to get the hell out of KSA and come live in the USA. I find it interesting Americans like supporting KSA and bombing Iraq etc.... primarily because we don't have to deal with the consequences - IOWs, we bomb them or support their dictators and at the same time use our boarder to prevent them from leaving. Which is perverse.
Sadly, we're not going to move towards a world with small limited governments. That's just not what the majority of people want. Most people secretly like using State violence. Which is why we'll probably end up living in a Police State. Oh.... wait. It's already here. To imagine in some States you're required a State Licence to sell arranged flowers or cut hair. Or fix a PC. Or get married. Or sell a weed.
How pathetic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
EddyBearr
You are absolute wrong. I'm shocked you could even suggest such a thing.
Here, I'll show exactly how you are wrong.
Suppose we have a cafe [1] owner, [2] barista and [3] customer. The owner opens a shop and sells coffee to the customer. The customer is free to buy the coffee at the price the owner is selling it at. They ONLY buy the coffee IF the price is at an amount they find they value the coffee MORE than they value their money. IF the coffee shop owner cannot make a profit, this means they are selling coffee at a price whereby the customer does NOT value the coffee. The owner needs to lower the price of coffee OR sell a better blend of coffee. The owner uses profit as a signal he/she is providing a wanted service to the public.
No profit means the service is not wanted. It can also mean that the business is not being run economically and that too much waste is being created. It can also mean the business is not being run satisfactory. Profit is the signal to the owner that the business IS being run in a manner that is sought out by the public.
Again, if there is no profit (or the business is non-profit) then this means the cafe is not being run correctly or the cafe is not offering coffee people want. Without profit, there is absolutely no other way to find out this information as people change their desire on a minute-by-minute bases.
When other people see profit is being made, if the profit is in excess, in a free market other people will open up competing cafe's and thus the profit will be limited by competition. IF there is no free market, then we refer to such a market as a 'regulated market' and the word 'profit' is no longer used by the words 'rent-seeking' (you could substitute the word 'spoils' for 'profit' if you like). Thus, making a profit in a FREE market is a virtuous act. It MUST be virtuous as people are more than happy to trade their money for your good and/or service.
I think YOU are referring to a 'Spoils' - and IF you are talking about any modern day market in the USA, then yes ALL markets are regulated and all businesses are to some degree rent-seeking.
Of course, David would like to see even more regulation. This ultimately destroys society by the way.
OK, there's one more player. The 'Worker'. The worker is no different than the owner. The worker is selling labor by the hour (a service) and the owner is buying this labor. In a free market, there are lots of businesses and they fight for labor hours thus the price per hour goes up. Of course, thanks to the Davids of the world, markets are regulated and the price of labor is low (public schools also produce laborer - which helps over supply the market and drive down labor prices).
According to your logic, IF the Worker were to make a 'Profit' when they sell their labor to the owner - this is bad.
That was YOUR logic. Which is to say you are not using logic. I'm convinced you have never had a basic class in economics. Have never had a class in deducible logic. And do not understand profit and it's role in a free society (we do not live in a free society, we live in a regulated not free society).
Sadly, the fact that most people no longer understand what a sound argument is, freedom, what civil liberties are - we are more than likely doomed to repeat history by a decline in our prosperity (of which we lose by the day).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
J GALT
Stop and think about what you're saying. IF most people do NOT want to help other individuals, then in a democracy, a representative government would not be able to enact laws that do help other's as that would run counter to the will of those that are governed.
Further, in a free-market based society (no, not a free-for-all Regressives like to Strawman) the only way you can get along with other's is by offering them something of value. Thus, even if you didn't like other people, you'd still be stuck having to deliver value if you wanted to interact with others.
The very oxymoron that sits at the center of Progressive Ideology is that we need to use force / the State, in order to coerce some people, into helping others. All that has happened is the State has morphed into a Warmonger littered with Welfare ghettos where, instead of individuals helping one another, individuals say "I pay me taxes" and wash their hands of it.
Too bad to, we could have organized a really wonderful society. But, instead we all get to live in the Regressive Police State we currently inhabit - and will for a long long time to come. Decades, if not centuries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
1) No one said 'free markets' are 'free for alls'.
2) Chinese are not slaves, any Chinese who does not want to work in a factory can quit, and finally, China is becoming one of the richest nations in the world and just passed the USA. China is watching it middle class explode in size and scope while ours implodes. Hell, many Americans only wish they could get a job in a Chinese factory.
3) Corporations do not take 'your' job anywhere. It's not 'your' job. You sell your labor, someone may or may not want to buy it.
Your argument would be like a Starbucks barista saying you're taking "job" away because you choose not to buy a coffee from Starbucks. No, you choose from whom to buy your coffee just as business owners choose from whom to buy their labor and services from.
It's thier business - THEY choose who they buy materials AND labor from. Again, NOT YOUR job.
4) You have some travel guides? Oh, good for you. I on the other hand have lived in 5 different countries. Some for over a decade.
If Americans want to become prosperous then we need laws that protect private property AND we need to return civil liberty to the people and put government back in its box. Until that happens, you can vote in whomever you like, but the country as a whole will continue to become poorer. This nation was founded on the principle of LIMITED government, basic common law and sound money. Now we have UNLIMITED government, millions of upon millions of lines of regulations and fiat currency used to by the State to bail out the rich and pay for never ending war.
All thanks to Regressive Socialists.
1
-
***** The USA never had a problem of people staving to death - ever. We've NEVER had a history of mass starvation with one exception the Progressive Central Bank caused Great Depression in the 1930s. As a matter of fact, regulations were very very limited in the 1800s, there were no social safety nets, and this is correlated with the greatest creation of wealth in human history as well as the second industrial revolution. It led to the modern world. movies, radio, private universities, electricity, cars - all of this came during the time when Government was limited.
A Chicago census found Black Americans in 1910 had a higher literacy rate THEN as compared to NOW, one hundred years later. That was BEFORE public Government schools. The difference was 85% then compared with 50% now.
So, sorry, but history simply show's you're wrong. Starvation was never a problem in the USA. Either was literacy, either was job creation, either was finding work. People moved to the USA to find prosperity because we WERE prosperous.
Today, after 100 years of Progressive Socialism and 60 years of hyper-Regulations, yes, there's serious problems with the unsound structure of society.
So, the solution isn't to attempt to pull the table cloth out from under the dishware. No, the first step is to recognize and admit we have a problem with too much Government.
Then we work towards finding private community based voluntary free-market solutions to our MANY government caused problems.
Solutions MAY include:
1. State based debt-free currency competition.
2. Competition in pedagogy using vouchers.
3. Winding back ALL regulations that result in rent-seeking and regulatory capture.
4. Ending income tax, the drug war, the wars in the ME.
5. And other ideas that society will come up with as it attempts to meet the needs of other's through free-market trade instead of relying on the use of State violence.
But, none of this is going to happen. What's instead going to happen is we're getting many MANY more regulations, we'll lose our personal privacy, the NSA will be expanded, the internet will be regulated by the State (one day you'll need a State licence to log-in to the internet and a State licence to be allowed to create a website, you know "For the Good of Society" and because "You use the Roads".) We'll see decades more War (and new ones) and there'll be a lot less meaningful highly paid jobs. Luckily for me, I have an irreplaceable skill-set. I can move pretty much anywhere in the world. I cannot be replaced by a machine. So, I'm okay. But, for those who live in our hyper-Regulated Progressive Police State, many will simply have to sign up as Cannon Fodder in the Progressive Wars we fight to 'Bring Freedom' to the World.
So, lucky you, we're getting much more State and you needn't worry about scary things like being free to chart your life's course, having personal privacy or 'starving to death'.
1
-
*****
The Civil War was initiated by the State. So, this is an example of State violence. Yes, people do starve during State-initiated War as the State's troupes generally burn crops. I was referring to post-CW (I mean, before there were Slaves, this isn't exactly a free society right?).
The Long Depression ended in 18 months. I do not recall reading of wide-spread starvation.
The Great Depression, caused by the Progressive's Central Bank, and then extended far into the 30s, did result in starvation - particularly when the State paid farmers to burn their own produce and bury their own livestock to push up prices. THIS is the level of stupidity of the State. Again, fault of the State, not the free-markets.
I'm telling you, we have too much Government. This IS the problem. And no, electing a new POTUS is never, ever, going to solve this problem. It will take decades, at least, to unwind all the mess the State has made of society.
You're correct, I don't need to worry. And, I don't need to move anywhere (although I do like living in Japan). I will do well with more Regulation. It's people like me who are tasked to regulate people like you. What I don't understand is this: I'm telling you, YOU don't need ME to regulation your life for you. Yet, you turn around and almost beg me to do so? Why? You can do things on your own. You're not a child. And get this, the more you're forced to do things on your own, the more you're likely to create a meaningful job, employ other people, and enjoy your life.
We don't need the State. We never did. Actually, we don't 'need' any State at all. But, I accept we will for now, thus I suggest a slow-winding back. My own focus now is to work towards creating a new pedagogy for the next generation. I think it may require another decade before it's complete. And then another 2 decades before results are obtained. And then anther 2 decades before fruit is born.
That's the time scale we need to think on.
Anyway, in the meantime we're getting much more regulation and the common person is going to get poorer in some ways but enjoy technological advances which improve other aspects of life. So, you needn't worry that anything I'm writing about is going to happen any time too soon. No way. Americans now despise freedom. This level of hate for the individual and civil rights and freedom usually required 4 generations (or 80 years or so) to dispel. When people are starving for a good 2 decades - THEN they'll see reason. At least a good reading of history suggests that's the case.
1
-
1
-
*****
Well, to be fair you've been cordial. I was referring to the Depression of 1920–21 (18 months). As for the Long Depression, this did not result in mass starvation. The USA has never had mass starvation (outside of when the State caused it).
That aside, you are in luck. We are not going to be gaining more civil liberties in the coming decades.This year alone millions upon millions of more regulations were added to the 10s of millions from before that. And, we'll also see more loss of personal privacy via the NSA and etc... (well, to be fair, not much is left to lose anyway).
I happen to be one of your Regulators. While I also happen to think that you, as an adult, are more than capable of living as a free person within the Law and with minimal regulation of your life. You seem to think otherwise. You want people in my position to Regulate your life for you. Okay. You're in luck. That's one of the things that I do. As I said, I am one of your Regulators. And believe me, you'll be hard-pressed to find people in my position with my attitude. Most think like you. That we should regulate you because, quite frankly, you're seen as imbeciles at worse, children at best.
So, I suppose this is the deal: You keep paying your taxes and obey your betters in society. And, that's the way forward for you. If you're clever (I gave the keynote address at a top 10 University where I was awarded a full scholarship prior to completing doctorate work) then, perhaps you may become a Regulator. If not, well, I guess that's life.
What you should NOT expect is to live a more prosperous life in the coming decades. You see, regulations in general hinder job growth because it favours rent-seekers and regulatory capture, leaving low paying low skilled jobs as greeters, waiters, ditch diggers, etc....
So, outside of those who are highly skilled in very specialized fields, then things in the USA are not going to get any better - at least in my opinion, we'll see.
Summery: You both should be very happy with this arrangement, after all, this is what you want.
Your role is to obey your Regulators.
Our role is to Regulate you for your own good.
Enjoy the State, you'll be seeing much more of it in the coming decades. That much I can say for sure.
1
-
J GALT Your statement regarding good government (oxymoron) reminds me of an Iranian who once told me: Once we get the right Ayatollah then everything is going to be perfect. The same was told to me from a Chinese about their Dear Leader. I'm sure E. Germans and N. Koreans thought/think the same thing.
It's called magic-thinking. Humans, particularly the simple ones, seem to default into magic thinking. Probably why so many people believe in Gods.
Because, your premise of getting the good Government is no different than E. Germans, N, Koreans, Chinese and Iranians: If only we could elect the right people elected THEN *magic happens* and poof we'll have "good" government.
I have a question: Why is it, do you think, the Communist's in Germany, China, Korea, etc... all seem to elect the wrong people and end up in dirt poor crap-hole dictatorships? Whereas, when the USA had extremely limited Government (mid to late 1800s) this is correlated with the greatest growth in ANY society in the history of humanity ushering in the second industrial revolution and the post-modern era.
Here's another question: How much is my tea cup (in my hand) worth, to me? You needn't see it. That's not going to make any difference. Take a guess. Is it worth $1, $80? $500, $5000 maybe there's no price I would sell it for. Maybe it was a personal gift from a dead relative who's memory is more important than what I could buy with money. Go ahead, tell me.
See, you really don't get it. Your understanding of how things work in the real world is superficial. Child like. The fact is, you can NEVER know until the day I sell my cup. I need the freedom, in a free market, before that can happen.
We need LIMITED government that protects private property, sound money and free markets. These are the ingredients to a prosperous society.
But, you just keep praying for the magical "good" Government to poof into existence out of the void. See how that works our for you.
1
-
1
-
J GALT You've yet to post anything intelligible. It's one post hoc magic-thinking rationalization after another.
I'll tell you what, you go get a book, open it, read about induction and deduction, valid, sound, cogent and strong and then attempt forming a thoughtful argument. Because, until then, you literally just spout childish babble.
Seriously, here's some terms for you to look up:
Deduction,
Induction,
Validity,
Soundness,
Axiomatic,
Cogent,
Strong,
Weak.
Do you know what a basic Venn diagram is? Basic set theory? How about rational? Empirical? David Hume ring any bells? Locke? Russel? Kant? No, not bells. This strongly suggests you can't even begin to analyse an argument - ha! You don't even know what an argument even is. Do you know what an alpha value is? Could you apply bayesian inference to an argument?
Look, I'm paid a decent 6 figure salary purely to analyze and write arguments. I promise you, all you're doing is babbling. The reason you're babbling is because you have no idea how to reason. You don't even understand the different types of reasons. Having a discussion with you is like attempting to explain basic Nernst potentials to a toddler. Of course you don't understand any of what you're reading, of course it all seems to make no sense. You simply lack the lexicon and cognitive experience to understand what you're reading.
Again, according to the DoE the average American has a literacy rate of between 7th and 8th grade. Now, ask yourself, are you average. Be honest with yourself. At best yes.
So, instead of wasting bandwidth - go read a book.
Note: Your conversation has been useful. I need test material to explain formal fallacies. You're been an ample supply. Kind regards.
1
-
J GALT Here's some facts about the government you worship:
- Invaded Vietnam and murdered millions of women and child over a lie.
- Rinse and repeat with Afghanistan and Iraq.
- The US government is currently the largest polluter in the world.
- The US government consumes more limited energy than any institution in the world.
- US Government schools graduate functional illiterates at a rate of 1 in every 5.
- The US government spent $100 billion building yet another NSA spy center, not to spy on a few goat herders, but to spy on you and I. Which is against the US Constitution.
- The FDA certifies boiled in ammonia off cuts of nose, ear, feet, snout processed and food colored (aka: Pink Slime) as edible for human consumption. I wouldn't feed that to a dog.
- The US government just bailed out the very same richest 0.1% that you seem to worry about.
How upside down is your world view?! The USA government just bailed out the very rich you complain about. Right now, those rich your whine about would be poor. But thanks to the US government not only are they not poor, not only did no one go to jail, but they're the richest class of humans in history and getting richer by the day.
- The US Government is spending $600 billion to lose the war another year. Up to $100 trillion has been wasted on the military since 1949 alone.
Now, in case you were confused. That list, is NOT an argument. It's a list of evidences that government doesn't not work for the social good IN my opinion. I'm not going to bother crafting an argument for you because you don't understand what one is. If you read that list and think that's all good for society. Well, then that's your opinion and we'll just have to agree to disagree on opinion. But, the list is factual - feel free to look up any one of those points.
Again, the progressive government you worship just bailed out the richest 0.1% most corrupt humans on earth. It also wages a never ending war killing women and children with low-grade radioactive material in Iraq. You may think we need more of it. I OTOH think it should be limited to a VERY SMALL role in any society.
Not that what I think or you think matters, because you just happen to be in luck. We're getting much more Government. You should feel good, each year the reach of government into our personal lives expands. Soon you won't have to worry about having these conversations, as the government will ensure they do not occur 'for the Good of Society".
Lucky you.
1
-
1
-
J GALT
Here, let me take this as an example:
You wrote:
"Economics is neither science nor discipline and as such has no connection to reality and the physical world and is therefor both invalid and fraudulent."
This is NOT an argument. This is you babbling. That aside, let's clear up a few of your premises:
1) Economics actually IS a discipline.
2) Micro economics can apply the scientific method. Behavior economics can apply the scientific method. Macro economics cannot apply the scientific method.
3) Of course economics has a connection to reality. Economic activity is buying and selling, this can be studied and described in the real world.
4) You're unsure of what the word invalid means. See, an argument needn't be true to be valid.
Let me repeat that one more time in case you missed it. An "argument" does NOT have to be true to be valid.
Let me repeat one more time to make sure you get it: An argument, does NOT have to be truth conserving in order to be valid. Validity is purely an aspect of argument form and is irrespective of whether the concluding proposition is truth conserving or not truth conserving.
Are you starting to understand now? You are babbling. You're not arguing. You're babbling. An argument can be both VALID and FALSE. This is very very common. This concept is so basic as to be akin to not understanding how to speak a particular language and then expecting to have a meaningful conversation in it. You are babbling. You're babbling on and on using words you do not understand the meanings of.
5) Fraudulent has nothing to do with an argument's validity. Fraud is an aspect of contract law. Again, you're jumbling up a bunch of words into a Word Salad.
I'm honestly sorry for you. But, it's not too late. You can still buy a book on basic intro to Logic (I suggest Hurley) and study it. After you feel comfortable with Venn diagrams and set theory (you know, the very basics) then come back and analyze your points and then you can have a good laugh.
Okay? Does that seem reasonable? I'm giving you good advice. You can either take it, and maybe improve yourself, or you can live our the rest of your life babbling to people. Which is it? That's up to you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You mean like Greece, Spain and Portugal?
Are you sure you're not picking countries based on some personal bias?
I think you'll find countries like Germany and Norway that have no national minimum wage are in some way freer than we are. I think you'll find counties will lots of natural resources like Canada and KSA are wealthy due to those natural resources. I think you'll find homogenous countries like Japan or Korea have advantages. But, across these all, I think you'll find the USA is actually LESS free than you think it is and is more highly regulated than most of these other countries in many respects.
Lastly, maybe you don't know it, but regulations are there to protect corporations FROM YOU not to protect you from them - the law protects you from them. Just something you may not have known. Regulations allow them to pollute your property or occasionally sell you food that's off and not have to worry about you suing them - as they've 'met the regulation and are FDA certified' (as an example).
Regulations are NOT there to protect you. They are there to protect corporation FROM YOU. Sadly, they disenfranchise the poor from working and competing in the market place. There will come a day when we have less money and when that day comes, you watch as the government turns on the poor first. The government get's paid by taxes. If push comes to shove, they will protect their personal income at the expense of poor who cost tax money.
Our nation was the freest and the most prosperous, now we are hyper-regulated and sadly, turning into a third world kangaroo republic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
silat13 Private unions are virtuous. No one in their right mind would suggest people should not have the civil right to self organization. Public unions OTOH are a menace to society. A good example of this would be Government Teacher's Unions.
American Government Teachers are some of the highest paid teachers in the world. Yet, at the same time, 1 in 5 students that graduate from a Government School with a diploma (barely worth the paper it's written on) are functionally illiterate. In Detroit, it's 50%. Yet in Detroit Government Teacher's Unions secured a 13th month bonus paid and many are paid 2 - 3 times the average yearly salary of the people in Detroit they're supposedly serving. Only 1 out of 3 kids in Detroit bother graduating, it's such a waste of time. Many of the Government School teacher's themselves have a poor command of the English language. Some are outright functional illiterates themselves.
This is why Government Unions exist - to protect them from the Voters who'd otherwise throw them out on their arse (if they were paying out of pocket). No sane person would pay $20 a year for such pathetic 'education' culminating in a degree not worth the paper it's written on.
When citizens do attempt to provide good high quality education through private Chartered schools, these same Government Unions try to use every dirty trick in the book, even the Government itself, in their attempts to retain their monopoly position in the education market.
This same story plays out across ALL aspects of Government. Which is why you'll stand in line at the DMV for hours on end, just to get a stamp from a functionally illiterate Government Union-member who's job could be replaced by the free-market and a computer in the matter of weeks at 1/10th the cost to the tax payer.
Government Unions are essentially there to protect Government employees from the Tax Payer, who would otherwise, fire the lot of them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
israel blasczak LOL you have never actually run a business have you? You are clueless. What? You think the shareholders just like paying large salaries to 'bosses' for the f*ck of it? Why don't you stop and use your brain, if the shareholders (otherwise known as the owners of a business) could FIRE all of the over paid bosses - and somehow still run their business and make a profit, they would in a minute. They don't because they can't.
Likewise, 'workers' lack the skills and motivation (sometimes IQ) to run a business - that's WHY they are workers. No one is forcing you to work. You think it's easy to open and run a business - DO IT. YOU and your worker friends quit and go open up a business. HAHAHA - but then you'd have to face reality. That you ARE a worker. You need someone to tell you what to do, how to do, and organize for you to do it. Otherwise you'd do nothing productive.
So? Take the challenge and go open a business. BE the boss you think you can be. LOL Then let reality show you differently. Oh, and to give you an idea, I work 60+ hours a week, constantly travel, constantly think about the business. I am paid well, but I must provide value to earn that pay. You start providing that much value, you get to earn that much pay. Again, try it out, if you think it's so easy :D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I do both. I run a business with a partner and also work for a company - where I'm paid quite well. All up, my life IS work. How does flying to China, waking up at 4 am, preparing presentations, meeting a driver at 7:00 am, working till 6:00 and then returning to a hotel to begin preparation for the next day - do that for a few weeks. Then return to work on your business all weekend. Anyway, like I said, in a few years, I'll open a school for children - probably somewhere in Asia. If you think you're firing me and magically The Workers are going to run the business - you are living in la la land. It isn't happening. The Worker has no idea how much work the boss put into their lives to develop the skills to be a boss. When you start mathematically modeling cellular signalling, let me know. Until then, you will work. Just as I used to work. If you're smart you'll continue to build capital in yourself and you'll known when you're being given some good advice. The OP here is so far off the mark, as to literally be on another planet. Living in fantasy land is not the path to a successful life. Wishful thinking is just that - wishful.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Subliminal Sanity
Monsanto owns patents on corn and soy not chicken or vegetables like carrots, broccoli and potato and rice is dirt cheap. a 20 lb bag for $12. If anything Monsanto is probably driving DOWN the cost of chicken as the feed stock is cheaper.
That's not my point, my point is how f*cking patronizing David is to just suppose, almost axiomatically, that the poor buy the most calories per dollar or are too stupid to know the difference between fresh CHEAP food and fast-food. I grew up poor, $40 a week poor, we NEVER ate fast-food, ever. The nearest grocery store was a LONG ways away too. But we always ate simple, cheap, fresh food.
The Government also gives milk, eggs and cheese vouchers. Together with chicken and vegetables, the poor have never had it so good in terms of food choice.
Having grown up with the poor as a poor person, I can safely say, most of the poor are poor because of they way they think. If they spent half as much time trying to get a job as they do trying to scam the State, they wouldn't be poor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
darkstalkerknight63
LOL, you're accusing me of being racist? My family isn't white you douche.
Oh, and "Drinking the Kool-Aid" is a figure of speech and refers to a person holding an unquestioned belief - like your idiotic belief more money will fix Government Schools even thought the USA spends much more than most OECD nations (5.5% GDP vs Japan at 3.4% GDP). The problem with education is the structure not the money.
The phrase "Drink the Koolaid" is a WELL KNOWN REFERENCE to the 1978 Jonestown CULT deaths whereby the CULT LEADER Jim Jones had his entire CULT (women, children, mother's and fathers) drink cyanide-laced koolaid and commit suicide. Only an absolute moron could have lived at any time in the last 30 years and not have known this information.
Sounds like you're the Racist.... and an idiot.
Oh, and for the record, referring to someone as 'Conservative' isn't an argument (not that you'd understand what one is, but I thought I'd let you know). And 'race' - it doesn't exist. I must be the only non-white, atheist "Conservative" who is in favor of legalizing drugs, and ending discrimination against gay marriage that you've met.
When your Progressive cult asks you to drink some kool-aid, my advice to you is to ask for seconds.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Fritz Karl Many States were abolishing property taxes in the 1850s and none had an income tax on hourly labor.
That aside, your argument is non sequitur. Just because a form of society did not exist in the past exactly as it does today, does not mean it cannot exist. You cannot and do not know what can or can not 'work' (Problem of Induction).
Essentially you're using confirmation biases towards your own idea of normal to cherry pick observations (many faulty), and not creating an argument (deductive or inductive) but simply to comfort yourself. Well, you're in luck, the State isn't getting smaller, it's going to get bigger. So, if you're really good at doing standardized testing (I'm quite good at these personally) then you'll do well. If not, then maybe not. Either way, we are getting more Statism, not less, much much more. Which is too bad, but that's life. That whole rise and fall of nations thing.
1
-
Classic David sophism.
Quote: "normal bump bump bump OR 'just' call them a name"
NOW, let's play the David Game and try to sell subscriptions JUST LIKE FAUX NEWS. Quotes below.
Yes, we need to keep an eye on the David Pakcman show. So, called Presenter, I don't know, David Packaman Show co-host Luis, says it's NORMAL to physically attack people and verbally abuse children in the hallway. And the other issue that's concerned here, the so called News Man, here who suggests that Bumping and Name calling here is NORMAL for children, isn't that making the problem worse and legitimizing it in the eyes of children. VERY VERY concerning.
Ending: "We have to figure it out somehow"
Then: Sell Sell Sell
AND why wouldn't David and Lois peddle their shit just like Faux News - just read the comment section.
Yes, this IS a problem. It's sad to see BOTH Faux News and the David Packman Show neglected to do some research into the topic other than enough to spin off a segment to sell shit and make money. The 'solution' is changing the way children are educated. Putting children in a 'grade' by age is moronic. Children should learn according to their aptitude - not their age. One could just weight them and base their grade on their weight. Its meaningless. This also creates an environment where children CAN and WANT to bully - because it's unnatural to have so many children with so few adults. The solution will involve ending Public Schools and replacing them with more natural learning environments. A good first step is alternative schools like Montessori. But, hey, why read a book when ad hominening the Faux News Strawman is so much more profitable,.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Look up the history of the AMA. It was designed to 'regulate' medicine by giving its members a near monopoly. And it did. That is a fantastic example. A second example is the creation of the Federal Reserve. Again, created by banks for banks. Not to mention, regulatory agents must have some professional experience as to what is being regulated. You cannot have a competent regulatory agency that has never worked at the top of the industry. Don't be silly. What? Regulatory agents just poof pop in from the ether???
As for Progressives, they've been destroying and undermining America with their socialistic policies since the late 1800s. Progressive are the reason why we have a central bank and income tax. The central bank of NY worked with the BoE to repeg the pound sterling to it's gold price pre-WWI (the BoE had printed a lot of bank notes to pay for the first WW), this resulted in an arbitrage whereby anyone could purchase American stocks and make a profit. Money poured into the USA, the stock market rose, and then collapsed due to malinvestment, leading to the Great Depression and WWII.
The fact that Progressive Socialism has been destroying Western Society for over 100 years is not in dispute - just open a dhistory book. And eugenics was perfectly in line with Progressive ideology. While eugenics is not necessarily "bad", and most scientific evidence shows there's a significant difference between IQ and various human populations (northern E. Asians for example, have a higher IQ than souther E. Asians for example), the problem is Progressive Socialists is they want to use the State to do something about it. Either by enforcing gender and race quotas, or, as was the case 50 years ago, sterilizing some blacks and retarded whites.
Progressive Socialism is pure evil and is why we need to de-regulate, to end much of their agencies that have been put in place by these sociopaths. You say that 'terms change' - okay, but the fact is PROGRESSIVES from 100 and 50 years ago created many of the regualtory agencies now in existance, and they need to be shut down for the good of the nation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kennethmcneil3478 LOLOLOL.... Oh, I cannot wait to watch as the Party of Hate goes bat-sh*t insane. It's actually a good feeling. Like a fever before the immune system kicks in. I know a lot of Progressives, and a lot of them hate White men - including, White men. Sad thing is, White and E. Asian men (as a group) are the net positive taxpayers that fund everything. IOWs, according to the BLS, Progressives hate the very people needed to fund their insane asylum. Anyway, let's watch. Perhaps the Progressives won't go crazy and demand YouTube channels are banned because NPCs were Muh Disrespected IN A VIDEO GAME! But, we both know that's not likely to fit their MO. I mean, it's been less than 12 hours and a YouTuber has been banned for hurting an NPC. AN NPC!? LOLOL I mean, you guys don't waste any time do you? ((seriously, that is INSANE))
Let's watch as the man-hatred and anti-White racism bleeding from the rank and file of the Social Justice Party boils over for everyone to see :) See how that works for you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1. Yes, I agree the Japanese have a mixed public-private healthcare system.
2. Yes, I agree, Japan has price-controls. Pretty strict too. Their use of shame and punishment is sometimes fun to watch. For example, a few years ago a group of doctors were caught requesting tests (more or less to make money off the system). The Japanese actuarians caught them. The government responded by lowering the price for this test for 3 years in a way that would punish all doctors (who had to continue to prescribe the test, but now eat the costs - any deviation would be investigated). As well as publishing the names of the offenders :)
Sometimes people even commit suicide due to public shame.
It's really something.
I suggested such shaming to a colleague in the West once. He was abhorred at the idea. "We don't think like that". Well, I do :) I say shame them. It's why we evolved shame. Oh, and their families have to feel the pinch too. That's how it works in Japan.
Sound pretty good to you? Want to see some doctors swinging from a rope now and again?
3. Yes, the American healthcare must become more lazzes-faire. As of now, the reason why it costs so much and sucks so bad (for what you pay - and will continue to get worse) is due to (A) massive regulatory-capture and (B) rent-seeking through licensing requirements. If these were ended then free-market healthcare would be much much much better, and cheaper. Did you know there was about double the number of medical schools 110 years ago? The AMA put an end to that little problem.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Thomas Smith
It was the link to his book that was important (though the author was also an interesting researcher). Essentially, wealth, health and prosperity are mostly due to population genetics, particularly IQ. As it so happens, the general IQ of America is literally cratering. As I said, 2035, at best. IMO.
Look up the experiment Mouse Eutopia. A perfect socialists' wet dream society - it ALWAYS led to extinction of the population. Without exception. By 2100 the USA will be 30% White, and mostly composed of low IQ humans (including most of those Whites). It is impossible for such a thing / place to exist. IOWs it is extremely unlikely there will be a true functioning Republic if such demographics come to pass. A Dictatorship would be more stable under those condiotions and more likely (historically more common too).
And the other higher IQ population, E. Asians (me and mine) mostly find liberal democracy unsavory. I'm the exception. Not the rule. Even in the USA E. Asians favor State rule over individual liberty. "America" really was just a European and American/Western suited ideology.
You'll see. This is playing out right now.
* Note: Eugenic manipulation of the human genome could completely alter the above scenario. And probably will as reproduction becomes licenced. But, such a socialistic society would become, a police state. Which, America pretty much already is in many respects.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Firstly, deregulation would be best for the Japanese healthcare industry as well. I'm not sure if you understand what I mean by deregulation. I don't mean "no regulation" but instead privatization of regulation. An example could be the American Heart Association (AHA).
Secondly, health outcomes (among other variables) strongly correlate with IQ (which is mostly genetic). IS it possible for the USA to have an average IQ of 105-7? Not without population replacement (which, ironically, is actually lowering the average IQ). You continue to suggest America can do things "The Japanese Way". Well, sorry, but you cannot. Just as Iraq and Afghanistan will never be liberal democracies.
Thirdly, Japanese health professionals are much more respected and given much more autonomy (and are in my experience much more competent and trustworthy) compared to healthcare workers in the USA (or Australia and New Zealand). It's quite common for Japanese doctors to take things into their own hands. It's also a very patriarchal profession often passed from father to son (private practices). Doctors are also mindful of their reputation and they understand that if they do something wrong, ALL OF THE WORKERS will pay the social standing price.
Anyway, if you think you have some magical understanding of health care - put together a plain and start a business. See? This is why we KNOW for a FACT that Universal Healthcare will not (and actually does not) offer savings in the USA (or anywhere). IF it's such a good idea, then it will work at a level with 3 million, 30 million or 300 million. So form a healthcare co-op, set the prices, and start serving up all these savings. Get doctors to join voluntarily and make this dream of yours happen. OHHHHHHH that's right, it won't work without using the State to violently FORCE everyone to do what you think they want to do already. Gee, how weird, you live in a democracy, you think everyone wants Universal Healthcare, but for some odd reason, it won't work unless you threaten to shoot people. You're a Typical Socialist (see: Venezuela). You're a far removed from the ideals that America was founded on, so as to be non-American. This is why I am sure the Union will collapse within 15 years. It's no longer a Nation. Another gift from the Left.
1
-
RE: American
Yes, my family is American Japanese. We can return to the USA any time we wish. Or remain in Japan forever. Or migrate to a couple other countries.
RE: EPA
No, you are wrong. If a company were to move next door and begin to pollute your property, you would be able to sue, regardless if there happened to be a regulation governing that particular chemical. You have the right to initiate litigation and you have the right to a trial by jury. This actually happened quite often in the early 1900s. Which is why business owners invented something called Incorporated (to protect their personal assets). To be fair, many business owners were being sued frivolously and juries were easily persuaded by rhetoric. It's the same story today, someone like Steve Jobs gets rich, people get jealous, and this creates an opportunity to legally steal from him. Back then this happened through frivolous lawsuits. Now it happens via income taxation. To fight back business owners/corporation CEOs invented the EPA. Once the EPA passes a magical "Regulation" then their polluting your property (within regulated parameters) is legal. THAT is the REAL reason for the EPA. We ALWAYS had the right to sue - and it wasn't hard to find a jury to convict for property damage. Now that is no longer a possibility.
Again, you are naive. You believe this fairytale about government being there to protect you. NO, the US Constitution was created to protect us FROM the government. Which part of LIMITED government don't you understand? You have little understanding of the history of anything or why modern institutions even exist.
EXAMPLE: The actual argument for the EPA is to PROTECT businesses from frivolous lawsuits. This is a real concern as a jury of idiots could, in fact, destroy a needed business. Not to mention competitors would buy off jury's and would secretly initiate lawsuits against their competitors hoping to destroy them through litigation (they still do this by the way). The story of the EPA being here to protect you is just a line of B.S. sold to the simpleton voters so they'll shut up and worship government.
Like I said, if Universal Healthcare was profitable, which it MUST BE in order to exist without draining resources from other services (like education) then ALL YOU NEED TO DO is to put together your business plain and make an offer to the doctors. Universal Healthcare in Japan works because it is offset by other factors that act overall to lower standards of living across the nation. Japanese regularly get up and work from 5 AM to 10 PM - and have done so for generations. Japanese have very little vacation time. Japanese society is extremely homogenous and utilizes shame and social cohesion to prevent fraud. Japanese have a high IQ and are relatively healthy. While some of these align with some Americans (mainly White and Asian - for example the long working hours) not all of them. A better comparison for you would be Australia. They pay for their universal healthcare by reducing 4 year 16-week-semesters with wetlabs bachelors degrees to 3 years of 12-week-semesters and very little wetlab experence. See how it works? Which is why Australia has no international industries and essentially is a mining farming nation no different than a 2nd world nation (other than it has had a majority white population).
Sorry, but you do not get something for nothing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: I am tired of our laissez-faire "fuck-you" economics.
This is essentially like saying "I am tired of paying for goods and services I consume. I want to steal them from the people who work hard to provide me this stuff.... you know, because of Progressive Socialism".
But, regardless, as I said, provide an example of ANY major economic activity that is unregulated in the USA. To give you an idea: haircutting is regulated (and licensed), even some States require a license to sell arranged flowers, while you could BBQ chicken and give it away at a party, if you charged a dollar for it, you'd be in violation of so many regulations your head would spin. ALL economic activity in the USA is in some way or another interfered with by their State, everything from Babysitting to Surgery. All of it. Your notion that the USA is a free market is ignorant at best, moronic at worse. You want medicine to be run by the State? Like I said, look at the VA Hospitals run by the government - they're a mess (and they actually have access to capitalistic goods the help make them somewhat manageable, imagine if ALL healthcare were run by the Government, it'd be a total FUBAR).
Anyway, like I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.
1
-
Who pays tax in the USA:
The top 1 percent of income earners, those having an adjusted annual gross income of $480,930 or higher, pay about 39 percent of federal income taxes. That means about 892,000 Americans are stuck with paying 39 percent of all federal taxes.
The top 10 percent of income earners, those having an adjusted gross income over $138,031, pay about 70.6 percent of federal income taxes. About 1.7 million Americans, less than 1 percent of our population, pay 70.6 percent of federal income taxes. Is that fair, or do you think they should pay more? By the way, earning $500,000 a year doesn’t make one rich. It’s not even yacht money.
But the fairness question goes further. The bottom 50 percent of income earners, those having an adjusted gross income of $39,275 or less, pay 2.83 percent of federal income taxes. Thirty-seven million tax filers have no tax obligation at all. The Tax Policy Center estimates that 45.5 percent of households will not pay federal income tax this year.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/10/18/rich-pay-fair-share-numbers/
The FACT is the USA became the richest nation in history WITHOUT a national currency OR an income tax. People in the late 1800s probably had a (relative) higher quality of life compared with the dumps that the Democrats have made out of the cities they have run for the last half century (See: Detroit, Chicago, Philidelphia, Boston, etc...)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, the bottom 45% do not pay income tax.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/45-of-americans-pay-no-federal-income-tax-2016-02-24
They do, for some inexplicable reason, get to vote (for free-stuff paid for by other people who ARE in fact forced to pay income tax). These people make up the 'core' of the Progressive Socialist movement in modern day America.
I once calculated that if the USA were to impose a minimum literacy standard required in order to vote (competency in English) that most Democrat party would collapse. Really, if you cannot competently read or name the vice-president, you should not be allowed to vote. I'd go a step further and suggest a minimum IQ of 90.
Listening to you complain you want the American government to be more like here in the East, does illustrate one thing: How unimaginably difficult it must have been for the Framers of the US Constitution to organize and fight for individual liberty. It's utterly remarkable what they were able to achieve. Not that, that matters, for whatever reasons (probably genetic as well as religious belief) the 'modern' American is 180 degrees OPPOSITE to the ideals those (much more intelligent) men fought and died for.
Which is why I suggest peaceful succession. This is the best option, isn't it? That way you can live where State violence is used 'for the good of society' and others can move far far away from those who think violence is the solution / Socialism.
A Win-Win :)
Will it happen? Probably not. Probably there will be another civil war of some sorts. That's my guess. While this may appear to be hyperbolic, I'd stop and consider the fact Trump was elected and will win again in 2020. AND he's relatively progressive and somewhat socialist - regardless of who he plays on TV. Just wait and see who comes along in the early 2030s. I'm positive it will be shocking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I didn't say a Civil War II would end with the States intact. Obviously, some states, like CA, would have to be divided north from south.
As for will there be a Civil War II or not. I think the USA will begin to collapse by 2035-ish. If there is war, then maybe there's a place where Western Culture and westerners can thrive (and who knows - perhaps even flourish)? If there is not a war, which is also a possibility, then over the next two centuries whatever was left of Western culture will have become a page noted in a history book. At that time, most of what was the Western World will be composed by low IQ populations (say around the mid-80s to low 90s) and probably pretty religious (I'd venture to guess mostly some branches of Islam). Economically the world will be dominated by Asia and our culture will be the dominant culture. Yes, you'd probably receive some form of free healthcare, but you would NOT have the freedom to vote. NO, the idea of individual liberty will have gone long ago. I would guess at the time the 'Social Good' as maintained by 'Experts' would become the norm. Why? Because this is more in line with Eastern culture and it makes managing low IQ populations easier while ensuring ruling families maintain their elite status for generations.
But hey, you'll get some form of free "Universal" healthcare.
LOL
And this would be more than worth to pay for civil liberty for........ some people. If you were to ask me, I'd prefer the USA go to War to protect what was fought for. But, as I have arranged things, we live here in the East. And unlike the West, the East will be here culturally, well into the next millennium. That's the way we think.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
LOL
Yes, and I'm sure if you polled Venezuelans they'd all say they support free healthcare, and food, and housing, and everything else under the sun. Americans can poll for free-sh*t all day, every day till the end of time. You're not getting free Universal healthcare. You may get overpriced poorly provided long-lined Government-run healthcare, and it will be complete sh*t like everything else the Government touches.
Luckily, we will ALWAYS have a private healthcare option, and those of us who believe in paying for what we use will pay for it and received decent healthcare.
I've lived and worked in 5 different countries, four of which with Universal healthcare. With the exception of Japan - it was all sh*t. Want to know how much "Universal" health care cost us in Japan? Our 'Free' healthcare costs (for a family of 4) about $8800.00 per year. How does that sound to you? Pretty good?
Think your idiotic Pew Poll mentioned the actual COST when it polled people for if they wanted some free-sh*t?
Well doufus? Did they?
And that was the price for a year of healthcare in healthy monoculture hard-working Japan. You know, the same Japan that pays LESS for Government school, yet massively out competes America in terms of literacy and numeracy.
So?
Guess how much it would cost to have anywhere near 'free' healthcare in the USA? About $12,000 - 18,000 a year.
So suck it . You're NEVER getting free healthcare.
Note: As an example, we'll use Australia. Yes, they have 'free' poorly run Government healthcare that costs around 1.5% of your income per year. Of course, the Government run hospitals are the LAST place you want to end up if you can afford not to. Oh, and to pay for it, they cut their BA/BS degrees from 4 years of 18 weeks to 3 years of 10-13 weeks (of very poorly provided for low-quality education). Nothing comes for free. Did PEW mention that Gen Z will have have to go without educational standards to offset the costs of poorly run Government healthcare? Probably not.
Now, buy your flight and get out of our country.
We do not want or need you here :)
Trump 2020
MAGA :D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Saqwana
The the USA was the richest society in history by the end of the 1800s, and had no income tax and did not use currency by fiat but instead used gold, silver and private paper. Therefore, you are wrong. Income tax was not needed. That said, your argument is fallacious (historical) and the EXACT SAME argument was used to justify human Slavery.
As for CEOs supposedly forcing people to sell their labor, give a real world example. We'll use Toyota as they buy a large amount of labor. Explain how the Toyoda Family (CEO) is forcing ANYONE to work in ANY factory ANYWHERE. Instead of talking nonsense provide actual evidence. Because as it stands, you are again, completely wrong.
Note: the CEO of Google, Amazon, Ford etc.... are ELECTED by shareholders. If you have a retirement fund, you probably own top 500 stock - as do most Americans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GOOGLE ACOUNT Science Denialism is inappropriate.
1) Panizzon, Matthew S.; Vuoksimaa, Eero; Spoon, Kelly M.; Jacobson, Kristen C.; Lyons, Michael J.; Franz, Carol E.; Xian, Hong; Vasilopoulos, Terrie; Kremen, William S. (March 2014). "Genetic and environmental influences on general cognitive ability: Is g a valid latent construct?". Intelligence. 43: 65–76. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2014.01.008. PMC 4002017. PMID 24791031.
2) Bouchard, Thomas J.; McGue, Matt (January 2003). "Genetic and environmental influences on human psychological differences". Journal of Neurobiology. 54 (1): 4–45. doi:10.1002/neu.10160. PMID 12486697
3) Plomin, R.; Deary, I. J. (February 2015). "Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings". Molecular Psychiatry. 20 (1): 98–108. doi:10.1038/mp.2014.105. PMC 4270739. PMID 25224258.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The US GOVERNMENT is stealing vast wealth, occupying countless countries, and uses YOUR income tax dollars to do it.
If you're wondering about HOW an anarchocapitalistic nation would arise, well, obviously we'd need to raise an entire generation (or three) of children peacefully. Thus, no public schooling - as that's a waste of time, no income tax, no force, no spanking, no hitting, no superstition, etc... to think logically and with reason and raised non-violently.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
No, you don't have a 'real' back injury. You claim to have one. Once you get onto disability, you can move into a government paid for apt with some friends, sell a bit of weed, buy an Xbox and you're done and dusted.
The statistics are quite clear, as welfare has been cut, disability claims have skyrocketed. It's quite obvious people are working the system just as they were prior.
But, and here's the kicker, when we go broke, which will probably be before 2015, this will all end.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Most people are happy to live under an Authoritarian. To suggest "the right" are more so, is making a claim at the edge. 90% vs 90.01% <-- OH LOOK the right is more Authoritarian! See my point? Secondly, religious people are more likely to place their faith in God and happy to let him put you in hell after you die, and less likely to support the State, whereas Athesits are more likely to place their faith in the State, and happy to support it killing you, in the here and now. As an example, Kyle supports 'Universal Healthcare". Well, everyone wants a system where anyone can get affordable healthcare and where the poor are given support, even 'free'/charity. How does Kyle want to achieve this end? He wants to use the State / AUTHORITORY to use violence, coercion (including death theats) for the 'Good of Society'. His support of B.Sanders is a great example of his support of an Athoritarian System based on violence and theats of violence against members of society. So, my guess is, you have been indoctrinated and support Universal Healthcare - like a sheep. Oh, and for the record, I have lived in 3 countries with Universal Healthcare, and work in Medical Research. The LAST thing I want in the USA is Universal Healthcare. But of course, I'm not an Athoritarian, so I cannot support the use of violence by an Athority against morally innocent people. Unlike Kyle, Hilary and Bernie. So, again, I'm going to laugh when Trump wins a second term. Lets hope after removing ObamaCare his Secretary of Ed begins dismantaling the DoED :) Why? Because we're not Athoritarians, we don't want to use the State to provide ANY goods or services.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Firstly, "Tax the Mega Rich": Compared to the rest of the world, YOU are 'mega-rich'.
Secondly, that's an admittance you want to use Authoritarianism (the use of violence, in this case, the income tax) in order to provide a good or service. By definition, you're an Authoritarian.
Thirdly, you're confusing money with goods and services. You can tax the rich all you want, but unless you have more goods and services (in this case more doctors and medicine) then all the money in the world will not help you. One doctor can only do the job of a single doctor. AND the AMA restricts liscences through regualtory-capture (rent-seeking) which the State (you think is going to help you) actually enforces to keep the price UP!
The BEST way of providing HIGH QUALITY goods and services is a free-market. Not only that, but it's a non-Authoritarian solution.
Fourth: bonus, if you crap on about how 'crazy' it is to want to eliminate income tax / authoritarian based goods and services, then you're both an Authoritarian AND a Traditionalist. Essentially, you're a far-right socialist.
1
-
1
-
On the topics of using the State / Athority to provide a good or service / Universal Healthcare. As I said, I have worked in many countries with Universal Healthcare. Let me give you an idea of the 'cost' for two. In Australia, it cost me around $1500 a year. HOWEVER, to offset the real cost, Australia has a very very shit higher-education system. For example, some Universities only have 12 week semesters, they're only 3 years for a bachelors degree and they're very very very poorly resources. THAT'S where the cost is paid (that and millions of international students paying full fees / buying AU Citizenship). In Japan we paid around $8500 a year for a family of four. Now, Japan is a VERY health conscious country. They eat well, exercise and are in general much healthier than in the USA. Unlike AU, Japan actually invents and produces most of its medicine and much of the world's technology. How much to they pay in welfare? Our grandfather lived on $150 a week in State housing. He chooses suicide as an honorable way to die when in hospital and had a major problem. That's the "FREE" part Bernie doesn't tell you about. I estimate in the USA it would cost around $12,000 to $18,000 per family to meet the same standard as Japan (which also has a thriving private hosptial market in addition to Universal healthcare). So, again, I think, I know a bit about what I'm talking about. You people just want free shit. And you're happy to support AUTHORITARIANISM in order to have someone take it for you. Just admit as much and move on.
1
-
I didn't say 'taxes'. I said INCOME taxation. Yes, you can volentarily pay a tax, and would in a free society. The income tax is a compulsion and wasn't even legal in the USA during the entire second industrial revlution - a time when everything from movies, X-rays, cars to planes and electricity were invented. Income tax is a poorly designed, horribly inefficient redistribution system that is based on violence, but worse - doesn't even work half the time. Certainly no where what was proposed a century ago. It's outdated and should be eliminated. We can PROGRESS and do better. If we did not have the income tax, we'd all live MUCH more prosperous. This is a fact. As a matter of fact, when Nation States when to increase productivity, they create tax free zones to jump start the economy and then (like the leeches they are,) the bullshitters like Bernie then use the State to regulate and steal/tax to increase their power in society - as we can see is happening to Uber and is what they want to staret doing to the internet. You think politicians care? Well, I've worked with many, and I can promise you, the only think that out shines their incompetance, is their incincerity.
1
-
1
-
All income taxation is predicated on violent coercion which is to say Authoritarianism. Not all taxes. Just some, like income tax. Other taxes are paid voluntarily. This is a simple fact. As for 'infrastructure', the USA had the largest economy, plenty of infrastructure - including roads for which we built cars, rail for trains, electricity all BEFORE income tax. We don't need to use violence, but unfortunately most people are authoritarians who think 'our economy will not work' if we don't use violence. I did move, we live in Japan where taxes are much lower. As a matter of fact, I see more and more skilled Americans leaving the USA. Let's see how that works out for the US. My guess, we are at the early stages of the break up of the US. I for one would be very happy to see a legal volenary agreed separation of the States into new Nation States, including those without income tax. I'd happily return and train medical doctors, volenteer at the local schools, help educate children in classical aristolean logic. Until then, I'm happy to not live in the US.
1
-
1
-
You have issues. Firstly, Kant proposed Anarchy as the only moral system, so I have no idea why you feel disgusted by it. What? Moral systems disgust you? As for me, I'm not an Anarchist. I would like to believe we could live in an Anarchy, and perhaps one day in the far future, but today is not that day. We simply need to return to a limited State, sound money, and basic common law. Interestingly, THESE are what the US Government proposes other countries do to increase the GDP and corresponding prosperity. I watched as China, where I work sometimes, became a rich nation - by ridding themselves of most socialism. The freer and more capitalistic they become, the richer they become. While you hear stories of slave factories, in reality Chinese are more than happy to work and their kids are actually living better than many in America. I know many Chinese who now have no desire to go to the West. See, they know that Socialism is (and will) destroy the West. While you probably don't know it, it's clear for many in the East to see, the West has peaked and is in the process of collapsing, due to people like Bernie Sanders. Not Steve Jobs or Elon Musk etc.... those people create wealth. It is people like Sanders who will (and are) leading the West to destruction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The suicide rate is higher in America than China. Although the numbers are so small as to be meaningless. It's arguing 9 is so much better than 11. Kind of silly. I don't know about Shenzhen; when I work in China, I work in Shanghai and Nanjing. As for Japan, I consider Japan, Switzerland and possibly Luxenberg (and a few other nations), to be the sole remaining first world Nations left. America is barely holding on to "Nation" statue. A Nation is a mental State. A Nation State, sure, that can be maintained by force - but they all fail when the people do not align with the State. Given the horrible cities of the USA, I would have to rate the US a high second tier. The fact that American children cannot walk around cities without being murdered, or the messes that are Detroit, Chicago, etc.... pushed some areas below the level of third world nation. As for Asia vs European culture, Europeans peaked along with the wonderful civilization they created sometime during the Enlightenment. That time is long gone. My guess is more Chinese have read Western Literature compared with so-called Westerners. That said, the West will not become Asian, it will simply be eclipsed by Asia and begin to bend under this influence. The fact is, Asians cannot become Western and Westerners cannot become Asian. The underlying genetics would make this impossible. While the curves greatly overlap, the differences create the different cultures we see today.
1
-
The problem with your analogy is historical. Firstly, for most of history, it has been the Chinese that had been the most prosperous nation of people, not the West. That isn't to take anything away from Greco-Roman history, and if you asked me personally I'd say Greece was cultureally superior for many objective reasons, e.g. number of discovered syllogisms for example. Secondly, the Chinese have invented many things that have progressived human civilization. E.g: paper, gun powder, vacines, etc... Lastly, openess is not necessarily a strength. As a matter of fact, history would suggest tradional values are what maintains society, this is by virtue of there BEING traditional values. What we call 'traditional' are simply those values from those societies that lasted. To suggest Japan is far behind the west, when you're using a devise dependent on Japanese technology, made with Japanese silicon, run using many Japanese patented inventions, is laughable. Yes, Japan is not perfect, I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that relative to the West, Japan is cultureally superior. This I evidenced by the fact a Japanese 6 year old can walk alone in ANY city of Japan. Whereas the same is not true of an ADULT in the USA. What's the point in having an iPad and the internet, if you're not free to allow your children to walk safely in your own cities? Second example is the functional illiteracy rates. In the USA it's 21%, in Japan it's 0.8%. Next comes drug abuse, and etc... These are why I place Japan in a category of first world, for which the USA simply doens't fit due to the run down cities of the US and sad collapse of culture. I'd also note, in the future, people may suggest what brought about the breakup of the US, was its excessive openess and they may conclude, diversity was not their strenght, but their weakness.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yes, the USA is very socialistic. The government can even determine who you can legally marry, if you can buy raw milk, shoot you for selling a weed the founders themselves smoked, government schools, and etc... It's not even Constitutional for the US Government to require us to have a driving license, yet we must obtain one. No, I'm not suggesting we don't have standards, and yes I believe in a free society (think the USA in 1890 for terms of reference) we should have drivers licenses. Think about this, you suggest even now you consume food that may not be safe, and that's even despite having FDA / federal regulations. See, the way I think about this is that BECAUSE we have an FDA, there's no incentive to create a better free-market private means of regulating food safety. It simply doesn't exist. I COULD exist, in a free society, but is less likely in ours. This IS the socialism I'm referring to.
I don't disagree with many of your suggestions. Yes, they're very good ideas when working in this system and dealing with the problems of this system. They're not as good as what the free-market would deliver. For example, why ban bank bailouts? Why not just let competing currencies outcompete the USD? The primary reason we have an income tax is to prop up the USD. Without income tax and with competing currencies, banks may not even exist? Or some different means, we have never considered, would be developed to ensure goods and services (including talented people) are able to create new products. Maybe the banking system is like trying with a war with rocks. If you're forced to use rocks, you never invent F35's.
I bought some stock in a green energy company, they're probably the best in the world at making green liquid fuel. It was probably the worse stock I even bought :/ lol
The solution IMO is pretty simple.
Limited government that will be in charge of enforcing the law.
Common Laws that protect property and uphold contract
Sound Money
Civil Liberty
These are the keys to success. We don't need to come up with a complicated system to look after politicians - simply get rid of most of their power. They're a waste of time and money for the most part. Things generally work best without them. They are most of the problem. It's in the Authoritarian nature to be a problem - which is why most fail in the free-market / free society.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm liberal, I was raised on welfare, foodstamps, state aid, etc... having had this experience I can tell you that welfare is crippling the USA - not helping it. As liberals we do what we FEEL is right, however, we should now know that these are failed policies. Our cities are rotting and being destroyed because of them. Also, the monetary system is gamed by the rich - and they won. They own the POTUS (bush, obama, etc...)
Sadly, we all lost. In the end, we only have ourselves to blame.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm American, she's correct, the USA is slipping into a thrid World sh*thole.
I don't care if she's Chinese, German, Indian or even another American. I personally blame the narcissistic Boomers. I watched them bankrupt General Motors, turn universities into jokes, turn education into propaganda factories.
Our cities are violent crap holes: Chicago, L.A., Detroit, Memphis, Boston etc.... are all thrid World dumps. And banning people for talking about the side effects of C19 as hate speech and firing people? America isn't even American.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm a strong atheist, however, the evidence suggests that this is actually not normal - and is probably related to a wider genetic collapse occurring (dysgenics) due to decreased positive selection. There is some good evidence that we atheists have a higher mutational load leading to slight variations in our immune systems as well as regulation of developmental neurogenesis. In fact, it seems reasonable now, to suggest normal humans have been evolutionarily selected with brains predisposed to believe. Sure, the type of belief may differ - but even then there is probably a relation to the genetic disposition. Some evidence for this includes poorer immune systems, higher rates of mental illness, decreased activity in some areas of the brain as well as asymmetry of facial features - all traits associated with atheism. Lastly, I find it sad to see how horribly Kyle here treats the legacy of Western culture. Of course, once Christianity is lost, and we build new colosseums, he will probably be one of the first thrown into a pit to be devoured by lions or killed in a fight to the death to the spectacle of the masses. Only then might he realize what we lost. Oh, I teach my daughter to believe in a superstition. Hopefully, she will find something good in it.
Note: Atheism correlates strongly with State Authoritarianism / Democratic Socialism. Of the two, I'd take my chances with LIMITED government and a society of people who are good Christians.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ulissesarredondo8674 How do you envision this Civil War taking place? In my mind, White Americans are going to begin voting along with their racial identity just as the Jewish Americans, Black Americans, and Mesoamericans, etc.... do for their demographics. And because Whites make up over 60% of the electorate, they'll pretty much dominate the government (State and Federal) by voting for the GOP. Thus, by the mid-2030s I imagine that they'll elect a far-right leader who will use the US military against the enemies of the State. THIS scenario is the likely Civil War to play out. And the 'insurgents' (if you could call them that) will probably be crushed and/or deported and/or repatriated back to wherever they came from to the cheering crowds of White nationalists. Civil War is not going to be some North vs South (or so I think). It's going to be a Dictator and through his Authoritarian rule, the military will be directed to 'make America safe again' (or something like this). I can already see it in the eyes of many Americans I meet. Incidentally, my family isn't White - and we moved from the USA already :) If you think you and some lefty soy boys or upper white class ANTIFA clowns are going to know how to deal with the actual US military - you're kidding yourself. I also like to remember: Any major US city has at most a total of 9 days (more like 3 for the larger cities) supply of food, and if the water is knocked out, maybe 2 days? After that, people begin to die of starvation and dehydration - a perfect time to be a Dictator. Then you'll see how much of an "ally" these ANTIFA soy boys really are. Anyway, just something I sometimes think about. As I said, we've already left.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
2....gold, silver, stocks, etc. Investing is different than a "tool for exchange"
Yes, I agree, those are not 'money' or even currency (well, gold actually is real money) . However, they share a common characteristic with money that being value. So, my point was we don't NEED a Central Bank to create Units of value for us. We do it now.
Right now, as we type back and forth, the Fed is selling your future labor to the Chinese. You WILL be put in a real cage if you don't pay them back. Nice huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
LOL - my gawd, you Progressives like Asia so much, come live here :D
Sorry, but the USA will NEVER EVER ..... EVER have the same type of medical system as Japan and Korea.
NEVER.
EVER.
You people live in a delusional la la land. A few notes: Japan has a thriving PRIVATE healthcare system (better than Korea's ;) and it is mostly built out of a patriarchy where father's pass their hospitals to their sons - who are pretty much guaranteed entry into medical school. Japan is pushing for LESS universal healthcare and MORE privatized healthcare. Japan attempts to use private healthcare in as many instances as possible ... WHY? Because it's better and cheaper / more efficient. Not only this, the Japanese healthcare system relies heavily (HEAVILY!) on things that do not exist in the USA: monoculturealism, genetic similarity, the family surname, personal family reputation and cultural shame (to the point of suicide) to keep people from scamming the system. Buddhism also plays a major role - as does Shintoism ... not to mention Chinese medicine and ideas of health that came from China.
You people simply have NO IDEA what you are talking about. It'd be like a Somali looking at the USA and saying to his idiot followers: We need a GOP and DEM political party system! I mean, look at how rich the USA is!
This is how stupid you people sound.
In Australia, the delivery of our child was priced at $12,500. This was delivery ALONE. About two to four hours of work. In Japan, we stayed in a PRIVATE hospital, for 5 weeks, plus delivery, the price was $5800. This included all food and daily check up and IV medicine (progesterone analog). You think you can wave your magic wand and POOF free shit.
Sorry - you will NEVER get it.
NEVER.
In Japan, 99.8% of Japanese read and write competently. In the USA, your "FREE" Public Schools cost 30% more and yet 21% of the graduates cannot read and write competently! They are functionally illiterate.
My question: Why are so many progressives so stupid? They must know everything costs something. They must know that free societies (deregulation and free markets) are the most efficient. They must know how incompetent and corrupt government regulatory agencies are. They can see what a mess public school is for 'FREE". Yet they cannot help but think healthcare, which is way more complex, is somehow (magic) going to be managed by incompetent public servants to provide high-quality cheap healthcare - NO. This is impossible you idiots. The solution is ZERO government, free markets, and deregulation. Note: Yes, we are also US Citzens :D AND we're voting 100% GOP this election cycle as well as in 2020 :))
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Monica Your response is somewhat interesting, have you thought about "Western Culture"? I mean, what it is. A historian I speak with defined Western Civilization as the legacy of the Greco-Romans (Philosophy and Law); Christianity (religious traditions, beliefs, and holidays); and European people (disposition).
Australia isn't "Western".
It's post-Western.
According to the demographic changes occurring, in time, Australia will probably become "Eastern" (my guess is Chinese given their large population dwarfs Australia and they're already building solid communities here). This isn't to say there aren't pockets of Western culture here and there in Australia. But, they're far and few between. It took me a long time to find a school that teaches the Trivium for example - yet, this was the primary education to teach "Western" culture.
Most Australian Citizens are not religious (or not practicing Christians), do not understand Greek philosophy, barely know the law outside of house flipping and following the speed limit, and ... frankly, are not Europeans.
As for me and my family and our leaving - of course, we're planning on leaving. What does that have to do with anything? We can come and go any time we please. And we do. Being Japanese, our culture would naturally be derived from China (say 85%) and modified in Japan over 2000 years.
Our leaving or staying in no way changes the fact "Australia" as most people would have thought of it being "Western", is gone.
Yes, the Australian State exists, it is multicultural, in time it will probably become Asian culturally and eventually will be dominated by the Chinese - like the rest of Asia. And in a long enough time frame, it will become Chinese culturally.
I wonder, are any of the languages you speak Aboriginal? No? Maybe they should 'leave' if they don't like it. LOL
Anyway, just consumers ..... sharing space.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Scott Sloop Whatever, firstly, I'm an Atheist. Secondly, I live in Japan - I don't really care as much as you probably think I do. Lastly, history is replete with the ruling elite, Monarchs, Kings, etc... setting up the pins in their favor. It's not hard to imagine that Christians pose a problem, as they are a strong voting block due to their size. It's easy enough to support the more corruptable among them and then, set up a well placed "pool boy" here and there, and see if they take the bait.
This is why we have the phrases: "Set the pins up and bowl them down" and "Take the bait".
Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Which is why its best to foster the careers of the corruptable.
Another example would be Buckley, the so-called father of the 'Conservative" movement (oh, and just coincidentally was gay, I'm sure that was never held over his head).
Another example would be the WMD in Iraq - notice how no one went to jail over these fake claims and all the right people came out and said what they were told to say. And people got rich off the war.
Another example would be Melania's supposed "friend" who just so happened to "join the team" and just "coincidentally" somehow just started recording her - you know because that's what "friends" do. Then they write a tell-all book.
But, whatever - believe what you wish to believe.
I have no doubt that some conspiracies are true or that Trump is going to curb-stomp Biden in this election. And Trump will also be furthest to the Left that you're going to see in a POTUS ..........in your lifetime.
Let's see who is correct. I bet it is me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here, I'll ask you a simple question:
If the government can by fiat create all of the currency that is needed to fund all of the needed public institution, like schools, roads, sewer, hospitals, etc... only do so without selling bonds, without interest, and without going into debt, at the same levels and rates as we do now - then why is it, do you think, we don't?
Do you even know what money IS?
I'm petty sure you don't.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here's your argument:
All civilizations had Slavery.
All civilizations were patriarchies.
All civilizations had Kings and Emperors.
All civilizations had income taxation.
Oh, except, some civilizations didn't have slavery (China), some civilizations weren't patriarchies (ancient Japan), some civilizations didn't have Kings and Emperors (the Greek Democracies and the Roman Republic), and some civilizations didn't have income taxations: THE United States of America - until 1913, when the Progressive Socialists put this country on the road to ruin and passed the 16th Amendment. What did we get? We got the Federal Reserve Central Bank, they brought us The Great Depression and WWII. And all the other Wars as well as the Welfare Ghettos that litter the USA. We had NO income tax and ushered in the Second Industrial Revolution: cars, planes, roads, medicine, telephone, movies, x-rays, all without income tax.
Anyway, keep marching in your free-shit army, as one of the low-level peons you'll be the first your high on the hog generals (like that demagogue millionair hypocrit Bernie) serve up. In the meantime, our best hope is Trump. He'll go down in history as one the greatest (and last) POTUS. All because you people don't want to pay for what you take. SAD
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Children healthcare is not free and lunches are not $2.
Healthcare costs whatever the goods and services required to provide it cost to produce - to extract from human labor, the environment, etc... My point is you began by virtue signaling. Your point of Universal healthcare is a relative point - relative to the USA I assume. Or your point of a $2 lunch. You do know that Japan spends LESS per student than most countries? Certainly less than the USA (about $3500 less per student per year). So? How is it that Japan outperforms the USA? Could it be E. Asian genetics and higher inherent IQ? I will return to this video and watch it in its entirety since you took the time to reply to me. But think of this: To subsidize your child's free healthcare, maybe 10 young female Japanese work 50 hour weeks and are unable to even afford families of their own, because they're the ones paying. Starting to see the problem here? To subsidize a school lunch, maybe 20 fathers have to work weekends, not being there for their daughters - many of whom fail to thrive in life. Just stop and think. You have a HUGE platform. If you were some small nobody channel, then this would be a non-issue. But you are big channel and you need to do some research and stop and think about some of these issues. They're quite important. Just maybe what you think is a good thing, is in fact a harmful thing.
Someone pays - and if it's not the buyer, then it's often a lot more.
Perhaps read this, its not long: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom
(plenty of PDF's of the book are available online).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The weirdest thing? YOU want someone from the outside to drain the swamp. THAT someone IS Trump. He's been attacked by the DeepState, FBI, CIA, MSM .... relentlessly. Yet, he has the money, power, personality and will to fight and keep fighting. You're not getting free stuff so, if you want a swamp drainer, vote for Trump. Stop acting like a baby who lost his favorite toy. Sanders scammed you, he is a millionaire off your donations (which he used to buy his own retarded books and hand them out to suckers for "free" and TV ads from his buddies).
Incidentally, you can actually get an undergraduate degree for pretty much nothing - internet classes are all over the place. It's not free, people have to be paid (well, some are sort of free). As for healthcare - yes, that's a mess. Deregulate it and it'll become much cheaper.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnpliskin8759 Your response is idiotic and uninformed (just like this click-bait BS video title).
WIKI:
Shouldice was founded in 1945 by Dr. Earle Shouldice. While private hospitals are not allowed under Ontario's Private Hospitals Act, Shouldice is one of seven private hospitals in the province grandfathered under the Act. The hospital has been continuously family run from its inception but is partially publicly funded.
NOTE: The entire reason WHY this hospital is a World Leader is BECAUSE it is PRIVATE and family run. If it were a public utility, it'd be crap like the rest of Canada's broken healthcare system. Now, this doesn't mean the USA's healthcare isn't broken - it is broken. We need to deregulate healthcare, beginning with rent-seeking, AKA: the AMA licensing that restricts doctors and specialists thereby raising the price of their services (this is done on purpose); state-limited services (for example, preventing new MRI clinics etc...) and using state regulations to prevent competition.
What we need is MORE freedom of competition, MORE liberty - as was the purpose of the founding of the USA.
Maybe you don't get it? Progressives are the types of people the Founding Fathers despised and one of the main reasons they fought the Revolutionary War. So, sure, live in Canada if you want to live under the King or Queen and her soy-boy PM. If you want to live in the USA, as a free American, then you should fight for the right to live freely. It's really that easy. Stop wanting free shit, and start wanting to LIMIT the state and fight (through the vote) for your personal freedom and liberty.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, to be fair it really depends on the Chinese individual. Yes, I met some Chinese who think Trump (and the USA by extension) is a joke. But most are conservative and family orientated. Thus, they see Trump as attempting to save what's left of "Western" Civilization (which, isn't much actually). To them, the idea of allowing millions and millions of unfettered illegal migrants is horrifying - such politicians in China would be hung as traitors (to the roaring cheers of the populace). Thus, you can see how they may see Trump in a different light. See, most people in the East, see that Western Civilization is coming to an end. It's collapsing. Assuming you don't travel and work outside of the USA - it's probably hard for you to see this yourself. As I've lived and worked in 5 countries, I can clearly see the collapse occurring. Like a slow-motion trainwreck. The outcome of which, is, inevitable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh, since I'm following up with being called 'dummy' (which must be lay-speak for 'science') and other useful comments like 'wtf' - you know, for the thought-crime of being skeptical (aka: science-minded).
Here's the published data from Japan:
Estimation of seroprevalence of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) using preserved serum at an outpatient setting in Kobe, Japan: A cross-sectional study.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.26.20079822v2
Here's the key takeaway: "By applying this figure to the census of Kobe City (population: 1,518,870), it is estimated that the number of people with positive IgG be 50,123 (95%CI: 34,934-69,868)."
This would mean 4 old-people died, out of 50,000 infected. It should also be noted hospitals in well-managed nations did not find themselves "overrun". That only happened in SOME hospitals in countries where there is a culture of everything being done half-assed (Spain, Italy, New York, etc...).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ScoopMeisterGeneral Without looking up a definition, I will write my opinion of what I mean by (or what I think when I read) the word 'socialism'. In my opinion, 'socialism' is all of the goods and services that are provided for by a government. The key to 'socialism' IMO is that the government is providing the good and/or service.
The government could be of a Nation State (e.g.: Japan, Mexico, ...). Or, it could be of a City State (Singapore, Ancient Athens, ... ). The government could be ethnocentric (e.g.: Japan, Mexico, ....). Or of a multicultural society (e.g.: Australia, Canada, ...). It could be a republic, a democracy, or a theocracy.
All societies that have governments have some elements that are socialistic. The only societies that would have no elements that are socialistic would be those that are totally anarchical (these don't exist). As to whether we call a society 'socialistic' or not, is somewhat arbitrary. I think its more useful to look at specific instances and ask: Is this good/service an example of 'socialism'. If most goods and services examined are answered in a 'yes', then perhaps one could feel confident calling that society 'socialistic'.
I have a question: Do you consider the Venezuelan economy to be an example of Progressive Socialism?
1
-
@Capitanu Gherea According to Progressive Magazine's article entitled "An Interview with Hugo Chávez" they praise Chávez led (through government) economic reforms.
https://progressive.org/magazine/hugo-chavez-interview/
None of these seem to have anything to do with providing goods and services through non-governmental means. Exactly the opposite. In time, these policies led to huge distortions and the collapse of that economy. As a matter of fact, when you ask Venezuelans, most seem to hate their government provided services today (15 years ago and they'd have said the opposite). If we take The Progressive as an authority, it seems they think Venezuela's economy was a Progressive form of Socialism.
As for Progressive, it used to mean something like statistical (which itself means State mathematical analysis). Now it's just used as a slogan. As an example, Progressives were often eugenicists. Why? Because they rightly saw the IQ test as an objective measure of intelligence and then used this data to set government policy (in this case, sterilization of low IQ people). Google Progressive Eugenists and you'll find most were also 'Socialists". For example, they wanted their policies used in Government schools and most were somewhat anti-Private Education.
Funny enough, The Progressive Magazine lists 'Free Speech" as one of their ideals, together with Social Justice, not today apparently.
1
-
1
-
@kyleglaub6394
1. I agree that Nationalism is different from Socialism (which is why we have two words) - but they were still Socialists. Perhaps not "Progressive" Socialists, but Socialists nonetheless.
2. I have lived and worked in 5 countries. Take Japan as an example. Japan has Universal Healthcare. How much do you suppose it costs for a family of 4 each year for full coverage (the kind that Bernie's demagoguery is selling). I know the cost, because we pay it. Well? I'll tell you: $8800 per year. Did Bernie or Kyle mention this in any of their rants about free healthcare? Now, given Japan is homogenous and culturally healthier (way way way less drug abuse) - I would guess the same healthcare would cost Americans around $12,000 - $18,000 per year. Do you want to pay that for your free healthcare? No, you don't. You want FREE healthcare. Right?
3. We also lived in Australia. Healthcare was $1800 per year (family of 3). How'd they pay for it? Well, a doctor's visit would run about $80 for 15 min. Many of the things covered in Japan was not covered in AU. Oh, and University in Australia is only three years. See, the money has to come from somewhere. So Australians probably have the worse University in the English speaking world. Not to mention, the public hospitals in AU are way below the standard in Japan.
** Again: Did Bernie mention you'd have to lose a year of higher education to pay for the FREE healthcare? Did Kyle mention how crap those three years would be? We're talking community college level of support. Which is why Australia doesn't have a high-tech or biotech industry to speak of. Their total exports in biotech and medicine is only about 110 mil per year. Mostly to SE Asian countries. AU is dependant on countries like Japan to make all their major medical devices. IS this what you want to have happen to the USA?
As an aside, both Japan and AU have private medicine. In Japan, there's talk of full privatization of medicine because it's so much more efficient. Which is why, in Japan, they try to privatize most medicine, leaving only rare treatments to the public hospitals. Which is probably the best one could hope for with regulated medicine.
Lastly, the demographics in Australia show that the 'White' population is being and will be replaced be E Asians (my people). Think of this as the cost of the FREE medicine you want. Is it worth it? Seems fine by me :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I know exactly what they mean when they say "FREE". They're using the word "FREE" as a low sophistic attempt / low quality lying rhetoric. Your 'argument' that this is a case of semantics is incorrect. Everyone understands WHY they are using the word FREE. No one is arguing that they are changing the definition of the word "FREE" to mean something else. This is not a case of 'semantics' LOL. To suggest that it, is trivial, base and insulting to the word 'argument'.
Not to mention, to you, and me :)
In short: They are LYING. Which is why it's low sophistry. High sophistry involves truth-telling. Something they are not capable of doing because the people they lie to prefer being lied to and will DEFEND being lied to (as you are doing).
As an aside, I have lived in 5 countries. Of those, Japan has had the best healthcare system. It's a mix of semi-free-market and universal healthcare. The Japanese government prefers a free-market whenever possible - as this is the most efficient. The Japanese government also uses intense shame (which can and does lead to inducing suicide in some cheaters) as a means of helping to control price. As an example, a few years ago a group of cheating-doctors were foundout to have cheated the healthcare system - and so ALL doctors in Japan (in their profession) were punished financially and the names of the cheaters were published as to the reason why this was happening to the non-cheaters. This utterly destroyed the professional lives of the cheating-doctors. Many lost their businesses and ALL were professionally shunned. Some did the right thing and committed suicide. I include this story to ensure you have an idea of the lengths the Japanese go to - to control health care prices. Do you imagine this happening in the USA? Not in a thousand years - you know, because 'diversity is your strength' LOL.
Also, the Japanese (my family incidentally :) are generally health-conscious and quite price-aware. Japanese society is monocultural. I mention this because it's important for you to understand that Japanese health care is necessarily more efficient than that of the USA - and will always be so.
It means the prices are LOWER in Japan and will always be lower and the outcomes are HIGHER in Japan and will always be higher.
Following along so far?
Good.
How much do you think we paid for insurance in Japan for healthcare?
I want to know: HOW MUCH does the "FREE" universal healthcare cost for a family of four in Japan?
I want you to know, so that when Kyle says "FREE" - you will know what price he referring to (you know, when he outright lies to your face).
Well?
What?
Want to know how much we pay for "FREE" universal healthcare?
We pay about $8800.00 USD per annum.
I happen to work in healthcare (I'm a doctor) and so I have a rough idea of the cost equivalent in the USA (of which I am also a citizen). It would run somewhere between $12,000 and $18,000 per year in the USA for a family of four to have the equivalent of FREE universal healthcare like in Japan. So, now that you know a tiny bit more about healthcare - perhaps you can now understand why Kyle and Bernie are lying through their lying mouth-holes to your face. Defend them if you want to. But, you're defending lying.
I'm not wasting any more time on this conversation.
Have a nice weekend :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Just stop and think about this: Company X asks, "Ōkami-san, will you sell us your stock in our company". I say no, they offer more. I say yes. The stock has gone up ... AND? What? People see the stock is going up and buy it? Okay. AND? You still have to offer someone (the company) a bid on stock. You do understand how stock is bought? It's not that difficult, but you still have to have a broker place a bid and there has to be a seller or you have to up your bid. Also, why is this "artificial"? It's actually, not artificial - the exact opposite is true. It's a 'market'.
Lastly, who cares about the wage gap? Why is this a big deal? Americans make much more than Africans - so what? Is it the job of Americans to lift the wages of Africans? Surgeons make more than Janitors. Again - so what? Or, let's use X-men the movie as an example. The top stars get MILLIONS more in their wages compared to the lowly janitor. HUGE wage gap. AND? So what? It's simply a difference in the value each brings to the company. Janitors can be replaced easily. There's only one Robert Downey Jr.
Anyway, none of this suggests we're in a bubble - and 'bubble' isn't a term you'll find in an economic text. It's just some BS newscasters use to sell commercials. Or Progressives like Thom Hartmann use to sell books. Having also lived in Japan (where the standard of living keeps going up - even though 'economists' have 25 years predicts THIS year, to be THE year is all collapses because of 'bubble'. Yet, here we are, nearly 300% debt to GDP and life in Japan has probably never been better for most people here ;D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: North Koreans assimilating
Actually, Koreans do not readily assimilate. Many have resisted assimilation for three generations (by refusing to change their surnames to a Japanese surname). They are neither accepted fully by Japanese, nor (sadly) by Koreans (as many cannot speak Korean). The best option in my opinion, for anyone, is to take a Japanese surname and raise your children 100% Japanese, with the exception of their being bilingual. Unfortunately, the Japanese government started allowing non-Japanese surnames. In my opinion, this will only perpetuate the problem.
RE: Refugees
I do not know the overall details of individual refugees. We accepted a little less than 20 last year. They are given a VISA. They are not given more benefits than otherJapanese. Which means they are epected to get up at 5:00 AM and work to 7:00 PM like everyone else :D While it is true that most try to find 'their' community hidden somewhere in Japan and hope they make a new life as an economic migrant, many do not find Japan a place for them (some do). After their VISA expires many are sent back to their home country. In a recent case, a refugee application was turned down and the UN was contacted by the refugee who began to sue on his behalf. That refugee was placed on a plane and flown back to his home country by the Japanese government. The UN is not above Japanese Law and is, for the most part, filled with incompetent bureaucrats.
The fact is, most Japanese are somewhat xenophobic. Also, most Japanese are completely naive and have no idea what the globalist have in store for our country. They'd love nothing better than to infiltrate our banking system and begin persuading people that a 2 mil dollar mortgage is the best thing ever. We generally do not like to take on debt. While the bankers would love it if everyone was massively indebted to them - forever, so far this has not been the case. I watched this happen in the USA as well as in AU. I'm sure that's the case in Sweden.
The real reason for immigrants is purely to ensure housing prices remain stratospheric. They are NOT economically beneficial in most cases (in some cases sure, a specialist may be). Luckily, E. Asians are pretty good at math :) Plus, there are more of us than them (billions in China), and we have more than enough very high IQ Citizens that can see through their little games with ease. Thus far, our elite have prevented them from taking a foothold here in Asia.
Again, I'm saddened to watch Sweden collapse. BUT, there are two good outcomes:
1) They can serve as an example of what not to do.
2) If they get their act together, then they can serve as an example of how to fix this problem.
Lastly: Sorry to hear about your problem with epinephrine (was this used as a neurotransmitter for your sympathetic nervous system in some way?). I wouldn't have thought it so difficult to get any medication in Japan. Perhaps there is a Japanese-made Epi analogue?
1
-
1
-
1
-
I would not say that most Asians (in Japan anyway) talk about politics. If anything, maybe Chinese are sort of more interested. In my opinion, Japanese could easily be swayed to believe anything. If the government and media wanted to, they could probably convince most Japanese to think a multicultural republic is a good idea, or that a fascistic ethnostate is a good idea. In truth, most people are pretty clueless. That said, E. Asians are (in general) xenophobic. E. Asians are also (in general) good at math, and stingy. So, it'd be pretty hard to talk E. Asians into helping people who don't work (as seems to be the case with the German and Swedish tax payer). E. Asian might not say anything, but they quickly vote those types of people out of office. Actually, E. Asians (particularly Japnese) believe being two-faced is GOOD. Not bad. It's better to lie to your face, make you feel good, and then do the right thing behind your back. For this reason, making 'true' friends in Japan is nearly impossible (sorry to say this, but it is true).
E. Asia also has a couple other things going for it. Our general IQ is high. Our languages are difficult. Japanese and Chinese are probably some of the hardest languages to master. We work hard. Combined with a very low welfare support system, many lower IQ people will not thrive (and will want to leave). We also use shame and punishment effectively. Our prison system is not like yours. We actually want to 'rehabilitate' people / turn them into productive citizens. Prison in Japan works very effectively at totally dismantling the 'self'. You could think of it as a form of brainwashing - actually, it is. We also have a low tolerance for crime and conviction rates are nearly 100% once an accusation has been levelled against someone. We would rather see a criminal do the right thing and hang themselves than feel sorry for them because they were poor. We would blame them and their parents before feeling sorry for them.
We just don't think like the modern Westerner. I believe it's because you have a guilt-based culture (Christianity) and we have a shame-based culture (family worship). You can try to tug at our heart-strings, we'll pretend to care, but in reality, we see such an action as very shameful and will despise you.
All of these things somewhat protect our society from invasion of both people and ideas.
Luckily, our banking system is self-sufficient and has not be co-opted by foreigners. CitiBank recently gave up and left Japan (as an example). We don't need foreighn credit and we're self-sufficient by nature.
I guess we'll see how things turn out :D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, firstly, the Progressives of 1920 would be against the Progressives of 2020. Two quite different ideologies. Yes, I would be 100% in support of ending the Progressive Central Bank and Progressive Income Tax - for the very reasons the Founders laid out when they decided it was a horrible idea. But, what does "Progressive" mean? It used to mean to use the Scientific Methodology to set policy and then to use State Authority to enact it. Thus, Progressives were in favor of objectively measuring intellect via IQ tests and then sterilizing those who were 'unfit' to reproduce. This is a 'Progressive' policy. You know, where the use of violence against morally innocent members of society is done "for the good of society" because "you use the roads". So no, I wouldn't be against "Progressivism" in the sense that I think we should accept scientifically cogent arguments for good evidence to make strong arguments. I would be against "Progressivism" whereby we use an Authoritarian State to enact and enforce these policies on people. If Kyle wants "Free University" - he should become a teacher and set the example. If Bernie wants "Free Healthcare" - he should study for 28 years and offer it. These people actually do not "DO" anything. What they want is to have power or access to resources (without paying for them). Again, I would say I find the political sensibilities of the Founders to be amazing. To bad too, because I doubt the USA will last as the multiethnic empire we have become, for another 25 years. Possible? Sure - but I doubt it. History shows that all multiethnic empires collapse into smaller nations, that we now call States. It will be interesting to see what the Han Empire that is now spreading across the world does. Will they learn from history? Or will they repeat it? I wonder: If the Han decide to use genetic tests to determine intellect (which they're getting close to producing) and then they 'vote' (1.3 billion is a lot of people) to enact a "Progressive" policy of sterilizing humans that are considered mentally defunct (say 1.4 SD from their average of 107) will most Progressives be on board with this? I mean sure, like all Progressive policies, it will require an Authoritarian State - but, the outcomes can be demonstrably shown to be for the "good of society". Anyway, interesting times. Incidentally, have you ever lived in the East? I find most people don't like it much. Some stay, but the vast majority of immigrants hate living in the East after about 5 years. The East does not build societies that people from the West find accommodating. Two totally different world-views built of very different populations of humans derived under different environmental pressures.
Progressive Socialist Democracy facilitates actions that lead to its own demise - which I find kind of ironic, given that's why we have the word "Conservative" ;)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Curtain Reveal??? LOL Bernie's going to ENDORSE the establishment. That's what he did with Hillary, that's what he will do with Bidin. My guess is, they have so much dirt on him, it'd make your head spin. So, he's allowed to play the game, but when he loses, he has to play by THEIR rules and endorse the crime syndicates who run the country. Don't forget, Bernie made $12 mil as a public servant who accomplished nothing. The only way we're getting the change we can believe in, is by voting in our own Oligarch, like the God-Emperor. Trump is doing well so far. But by 2032, wow, I can only imagine the sort of civil war that GE will wage :)))
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
LOL
I specifically stated, "I posted the article that I first read." You SJWs are indeed NPCs, aren't you? You just go back and forth, blabbering about the same thing repeating yourself over and over / doubling-down. As for Lizzy lying to Harvard about being Native American: "Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren acknowledged for the first time late Wednesday night that she told Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania that she was Native American." Further, I also read this: "Harvard University reported in federally mandated diversity statistics that it had a Native American woman in its senior ranks at the law school. According to both Harvard officials and federal guidelines, those statistics are almost always based on the way employees describe themselves."
It should be noted, Lizzy is LESS Native American than the AVERAGE American with ancestors dating back 10 generations. LOL
Lastly, we're all hoping that Trump passes an Executive Order whereby anyone with 1 fragment of DNA can claim that ethnicity - just as Lizzy here did. How's that sound? LOL.... you have to love the NPCs, they're not that bright :D Bye Bye affirmative action, yay! SJWs did something good for once. Now we just need to end income tax and repeal the 16A :) Just as the Framers intended. Feel free to move to Europe and live in your 'democratic' paradise - I hear Portugal and Greece are quite nice places this time of year. Oh, you can come to E. Asia too - but, only on vacation :P I promise, in the long run, you just wouldn't like it here, thankfully, we don't buy into your SJW nonsense :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1) IQ indirectly measures brain function, it specifically measures abstract thinking of verbal and spatial reasoning.
2) A person with a low IQ will not only learn slower, they will not be able to learn some concepts.
3) People with low IQ correlate with low impulse control, low foresight and many other negative traits, such as resorting to violence (socialism) when confronted with problems in life.
4) Low IQ societies have never been shown to maintain democratic institutions, cannot create modern societies and almost always end up run by a high IQ dictator (or at least higher than the average).
5) Low IQ people in high IQ societies are able to flourish because high IQ people make it possible for them to do work that is productive (such as working on an assembly line), make no mistake, without the high IQ people in plentiful supply, society will be poor.
6) Low IQ people also correlate with low hand-eye coordination.
7) IQ tests are an indirect measure and so there was for a while an observed increase in IQ. This has been reversed for over a decade. It's more likely that it only increased because children were being tested so much in public school that their IQ's were over estimated. That trend has ended. Further, immigration of people with low genetic IQ has lowered the over all average IQ. In the USA it is about 96. At 90 democratic institutions fail - which is why most don't work in many of the largest cities in the USA (see: Detroit as an example).
8) I do agree with need to return to free-markets. That will never happen in a low IQ society. Thus, we will have to deal with the low IQ aspect of our society. Or give up on democracy and free-marekts. Free markets in a low IQ society will not create an iPhone-20. This is a fact.
9) Malaysia has an overall low IQ, thus they are poor. But the Chinese in Malaysia, with high IQ, are the richest in their society. Because of their higher than average IQ. The same is true in the USA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't know what the future holds, no one does (Hume's 'Problem of Induction"), however I have an idea. And the idea I have is that Western Civilization is collapsing. For example, David Hume may have written some of the best pieces of English literature after Shakespeare, yet what would your average Westerner know of his work? Little. Yes, Western Civilization continues to change - and is currently in the process of collapse. Why? Well, given the critical role of Christianity, as the state of belief collapses in the West, so too does Western Civilization. Marxism was a small part of Western culture which refers to Western Europe and America, it was not a part of what is considered Western Civilization. One could argue it's anti-Western Civilization. Happy Holiday's IS another wedge in the War against the West, which is collapsing right in front of your eyes.
While anecdotal, every Chinese I speak with (I sometimes work in China) as well as all Japanese (I live in Japan) believe we are watching the fall of the West. No one in the East looks to the West any longer - other than an example of what not to do. As well as now we're reconsidering the long-term utilitarian nature of democracy. This view of the sad state of the West has been the norm for years. We're all hoping you don't nuke us or invade other countries in your death throws. What I find interesting now, is other groups of people are saying as much. A Colombian last month, a Polish the other week. A Russian before that. Almost everyone sees the Western Civilization coming to an end. So yes, we don't know what the future holds, I argue the evidence suggests the West will collapse and be replaced by Eastern dominance in 200 years, and clearly evident in 50. You will look to us for your future as once we did you. Oh, and I'm a strong atheist. But I also strongly support Buddhism and Shintoism. Why? Because I support Eastern Civilization. It's something I value. Not so in the West.
1
-
Marxism wasn't even novel, it played a role in Russia and Eastern Europe, which is not considered a part of Western Civilization. Christianity on the other hand, is synonymous with Western Civilization - the two a linked. As one collapses, so does the other. I've lived and worked in 5 countries, including the USA. The collapse you don't see, started quite awhile ago. It's just that you have normalized to it. For example, it's common to see 6 year olds walking alone through any major city in Japan. This would likely see you arrested and your child taken away in the USA, who's major cities are not even safe for adults to walk in. This is evidence of collapse. The drug abuse, lack of social cohesion, phony wars - all signs of a society in the midst of collapse. We in the East (I know this is a shocker to you) see Trump as your last chance. But hey, what would 2500 years of continuous civilization tell us? I mean, the USA is all of what? 2 centuries old? Yes, the Second Industrial Revolution was very important, though not as important as liberalism, free-markets, limited government, all of which are rapidly disappearing. China is a freer market than the USA. In Japan it's common to open a business in your house - in ways that would never be legal in the USA. Don't think I don't see this with sadness, many Asian do. Demographically, socially, morally - all point to a future collapse. Lastly, even your notion of 'global' markets is odd to us. We see things differently. There is no global economy per say. There are nation states competing for shares of trade. And in this competition, most things are being made by us. Much of it is invented by us. For you to buy our products, you must sell your land to us. As is fare. I fail to see how this is going to benefit you in the long run. Particularly as we come to dominate your internal markets. Given enough time, we will control your markets, just as we do other countries in the East (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, etc..). We will dominate your medical schools, law schools, computer companies. At some point, we may war with you and slice off parts as new nation states, as happened in Malaysia. These things take centuries - but are all but destined to occur. Again, I find it sad, we all do - and I hope one day we help to restore and preserve what was best of your culture for your children to inherit. I know you think we are interested in integrating. It's somewhat true, but not as you see it. Because there will always be a home for us in Asia. This will not be true for you. You're selling your homeland. I was recently with a Chinese Canadian, she was digging for her Canadian passport while waiting in line in China, and was told she could come in - without showing any form of idea. Why? Because she's ethnically Chinese. This was just a year ago. She'd never been to China. And while she it completely for multiculturalism in Canada, she is equally opposed for it in China. The same is true in Korea and Japan. Anyway, continue to watch as the years role by. You'll see.
1
-
1
-
Sound of Sleep
I'm fairly certain sushi has had a greater impact on Western culture than Marxism. If you want to think of Marx as having had influence, then I'd suggest you mean Plato. Western Culture has in some regards been a discussion between Plato and Aristotle. Marx would of course fall squarely on the side of Plato. Sickeningly so. Of course, Marx didn't even bother to raise the son he had from the servant he raped, a more disgusting person would be hard to fathom.
RE: Nationalism. When I said Nation State I meant that modern concept you refer to. Nation on the other hand is people. Jews are a nation. Once the Nation is destroyed, the Nation State follows. Not the other way around. This is one reason I am confident in my belief the USA will not last as it was conceved through this century. It is no longer a Nation of people. Which is sad.
Re: London and New York are cultural centers? Sure they are banking centers, but I'm baffled as to what culture you think eminates ffom London? It's a dirty city that's barely English speaking in many quarters. As for the USA, our appreciation of what the word culture means is vastly different. "Pop Culture" is a marketing slogan not actual culture - as people in Italy, China, Iran, etc... would understand that term.
Re: Christianity. Western Civilization as we use the term does not solely refer to GraecoRoman influence. And Christianity has had a much role to play in shaping it. When Christianity ends, so to will what we refer to as The West.
Ask yourself, how is Easter Culture not Western? And Communism is not Eastern culture. Which is why it is rapidly falling away in the East.
1
-
Sound of Sleep
Re: Immigration of highly skilled, high IQ people with a European Western background did indeed change the USA, in some ways for the better. That has ended. As the USA imports more people from non European non Western nations, the net result will be the end of the Nation soon followed by the ending of the Nation State. Sadly, Americans will have no where home to return to. Asians on the other hand will have thriving nations of people where we can return to.
You respect other cultures? Yes? Okay, we in the East are not going to "Diversify". It is never going to happen. It runs counter to our culture's. The opposite is true in fact. As a matter of fact, any politician who suggests such ideas, repugnant to our culture, is quickly and thankfully removed from office. I would also note, we East Asians have the highest IQ after Jewish Europeans, and ours is spatial whereas theirs is verbal. I mention this because it also says something else about our nation's futures. Our languages are difficult and our cultures extremely demanding, together with very low social benefits, these themselves act as a massive barrier to entry. There is no "do your own thing". This concept does not even exist. And if explained would be considered repugnant. Also, your culture is based on Guilt, probably from Christianity. Ours is based on Shame. Probably because we never had a Christian type belief system and shame is a default for civil society. This is something you probaby don't even appreciate or notice about Western Culture..... while also claiming Marx has had a great impact?! How crazy IMO.
We took 16 refugees last year. In 3 years their Visas will be reviewed and most will be deported. To give you an idea, one man from Pakistan appealed to the UN. The UN said we had to re review his case. He was placed on a plane and sent to his nation where he will live out his days with his people. Without review. Thankfully. How he ended up in Japan when the Law says refuge is to be taken immediately neighboring country is beyond reason. Obviously he wanted what our people made. That's disgraceful to us. He should feel shameful and understand he will never fit in here. Ever. Our culture is not like yours. And it will never be like yours. I don't think you reallly understand what Western Culture is. And it's sliping from your fingers. Once gone. It will be gone. Not something new. Just gone.
I don't see a future where Western Europe and America are the economic engines of the world. E Asia and Eastern Europe with possibly a new Nation State deriving from present day USA seems reasonable to me. I also imagine Chinese culture will play a dominate role in the West, which will begin to adopt our ideologies as we come to dominate the world economy. Which again, I personally find sad. But these things will take centuries to play out. Its probably inevitable.
1
-
Marxism is not even original, many of the better ideas can be found in Plato. Yes, Platonic Ideals wreaked havoc on the world, with one dead-beat-dad Karl Marx trying to claim some once of credit for them himself. Which, given his repugnant nature, is only to be expected. I disagree that London or New York are cultural centers. I find London to be dirty and outside of the British Museum (where I can see fantastic art from other cultures - including Japan) not worth the time. But yes, a legacy of the British Empire is it's banking systems, exemplified by London and New York. I personally think these will fall to the wayside as banking goes completely online. Maybe you can give me an example other than Hip Hop (which I thought originated from Cuban influence on blacks in Harlem). Modern day Hip Hop is anti-culture, certainly nothing to be proud of. It's a blip in history, that will probably be forgotten in 20 years.
"Culture" as I envision is embodied in shared beliefs and Holidays, like Christmas, or going to heaven, versus being reborn. These are 'culture', not so much Hip Hop. We eat with chopsticks, that's a culture. We invented spoons, knives and forks, but they are not suitable to our food mannerisms. But anyway. Christianity is as much Roman as Middle Eastern - one could argue more so (most Jews of Europe are actually Italian by the way, this has been shown using genetic testing).
I do agree that there will be something left in 200 years. And I doubt it will be much like what we think of when we say "Western Civilization". But who knows? For example, without outright genetic manipulation, I doubt an average IQ of 90 will be maintained in the USA past this century. It's dropping precipitately as your society diversifies with low IQ immigrants. Thus, most institutions (which are somewhat shells as we speak) will no longer function. Democracy will no longer function. While I believe general induction will shift to the East, where it's already made a home. Without a shared belief, and without public institutions that can function effectively, what is left of the West? What? I can only imagine you will be ruled by E. Asians. Mostly Chinese, though maybe Japan and Korea could play a small role. Most likely via simulated Western institutions for a time, like 'democracy', this will give way to more traditional Eastern system of rule.
I am sorry, but society is a reflection of demography and for all of the periods you refer to, Western Society was mostly European. Why not visit the old colonies that are no longer 'European'? Like Hong Kong (98.8% Han) - there's nothing left of "Western Culture". Or visit some of the areas of London where there are a minority of English, they're not "Western" in the least. And this is inside a so-called Western Nation. That is unthinkable in the East. I mean, unfathomable. It would never happen. All ex-colonies returned to China, are now nearly 100% Han Chinese. As for Japan, though we are occupied, we are not Western. Some things to consider.
Note: I'm not sure what you think of Marx, but the man was a loser, his writings gibberish, and he was personally a rapist and dead-beat. Read Plato instead.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I didn't say the USA was in decline, I said Western Culture was. The seeds were being sewn, they bared fruit with WWII. These things take time to play out. Asians were dominated because (A) China was in decline already and (B) A Chinese Emperor from millennial prior eliminated Deduction in favor of Legalism (C) the West had the benefit of free-markets, sound money and private property, the Chinese had regulated markets, fiat currency, and limited property rights. Fast forward to today, the West has hyper-regulated markets (more so than the East), fiat currency (that just about collapsed in 2008, and probably still will), the East so too, but the East is much more inclined to move to a newer form of money, if anything to be rid of this lever of control from the West and as for property rights, they're nearly the same. That also leaves IQ differences. IF the East could implement free-markets and gain that efficiency, together with a sound currency and better property rights, then it will rise to lead the world. That why I said, one day, we will return to your your culture. We'll protect it for you. Or, at least what is left of the West in a few hundred years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm not suggesting Japan is a heaven, I'm suggesting that a population with a high general IQ, societies like Japan is (and Sweden used to be), are able to develop a level of prosperity due to their homogenous high IQ populations. Yes, it's a normality curve, there will be low IQ people in Japan. But regression to the mean will mean their kids will likely be of normal IQ, and thus the next generation is not stigmatized as much as if it were a population made up of very different people. The problem with Reason TV is they seem to think that the efficiency of the price-mechaism is ALL that is required to produce a prosperous society. This is not true. It IS tree that free markets are efficient - but they cannot do a single thing about IQ. You can make Somalia a free market - sure, they'll probably be more prosperous than Kenya, but still be very low socioeconomically. This is what is happening to the USA through immigration of low IQ people. AND get this, low IQ people don't do well in free makrets - and vote accordingly. Thus, at some point, ending free markets, and Western Civilization with them (assuming freedom is part of Western Civilzation).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
An IQ test is a scientific test, and they're pretty good. IQ tests do not prove anything - Science isn't about 'proofs', it's about making indirect inference based on good (repeatable) evidence. IQ tests do this - and they provide good information about (in this case) brain function. We use tests all the time - if you want to attend medical school, you'll take a test - the test doesn't 'prove' you'll make a competant doctor, but is an indirect measurement of your mental capability and intellect. It should be noted that brain function can also be measured with tensor MRI and even reflex tests. The Flynn effect (which has actually been known since the 1800s) was probably measuring children's experence taking standardized tests, it appeared to be increasing intially (the Flynn effect has been reversed for 10 years) , in reality it was just kids getting better and more experence at taking tests - IQ itself is mostlikely going down (due to genetic diversity) as an average of the population. Even Flynn recently suggested that yes, the fact the IQ has been dropping over the last 10 years suggests his original conclusions may not be accurate (he's obviously very obtuse when he answers these questions - we all saw what happened to Watson). Anyway, this has been acconted for and the IQ scores are still very accurate. You apparently do not know the field that well and you're also conflating deductive arguments with inductive science. Which is okay, you just need to study this topic more. You also need to drop your cognitive biases, it's obvious you would like to believe IQ is not genetic and has little effect on society. In reality, IQ is probably the single best measurment to determine socioeconomic outcome (and it's mostly genetic). All studies show if you control for IQ, there are no effects of racism or nationality, as an example. Which should be great news, because it means the world is more objective than assumed. But, it also means the world is unfair - because some people are genetically more intellegent, while others are not, and until we can change their genome, their children will remain so, and live a lower standard of living (unless supported by high IQ societies). It's why Libertarianism is failing, while it is true a free market is efficient and leads to prosperity, its ALSO true that free markets sort on IQ, creating a genetic population of low IQ who are poor - and these people vote against the free market. The best way to protect freedom, is to decrease low IQ individuals from entering your society (which is why Japan is doing - knowingly or not). It's also what AU used to do, but not now. The same was true of EU. In the long run, these societies are going to suffer the consequences of large low IQ populations.
1
-
1
-
1) IQ tests are scientific.
2) Firstly, it's not 50 points, the tests need to be standardized at 100 for a given year. Pre WWII Chinese and Japanese scored around 104, children born after WWII score around 111. The difference may be due to nutrition, as well as an inflated ability with test taking (or both).
3) Tests from 50 years ago may not be valid, the tests today can still be valid - one does not preclude the other.
Thinking so is faulty reasoning on your part - which is okay, you simply need to learn basic reasoning, I would suggest this book if you are unfamiliar with reasoning types (for example, it's clear you are unsure as to what science is and is not, as well as what claims it can make and cannot make) maybe begin with this book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1550268.Socratic_Logic
Lastly, IQ is so robust that once it is controlled for there is NO effect of race AT ALL in the USA in terms of socioeconomic outcomes. THAT is very very powerful information. Of course, it's completely ignored by the MSM because it doesn't fit the narrative they're trying to sell.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: "Nothing you posted answers my questions. So I will have to assume that the alleged Japanese IQ numbers are fabrications."
I linked you the citations from Nature.com anyway, I'm done with you. Don't bother replying, I don't have time for you and will simply delete your response. As a matter of fact, I laughed and didn't bother reading past this sentence. Have a nice weekend, and enjoy believing whatever nonsense post-hoc justifies your cognitive biases. In the meantime, science will continue to prove IQ is mostly genetic and once controlled for, describes and accounts for socioeconomic disparity. In short, some groups of people are simply stupider than others - and on average they are more prone to violence, irgnore science (which they have a hard time understanding) make less money, do not raise their children well cost a lot of money and I'm mostlikely speaking to one right now. Oh, and of note: Western Societies have made great advances - I'd argue that late enlightenment was indeed the pinicle of human civilization, and while it was a relatively few number of people, they made great changes (I love reading David Hume for example). Those days are gone, as the genetics of Europe is changed, their once great societies will die out once and for all. Sad, but true, with people like you cheerleading the way. Oh, and Europe was NOT multicultureal in the genetic sense, but it will be. Something we won't have to worry about in thr East. I imagine in a century, we'll own most of what's left of value in Europe and probably have to save the people from extinction.
1
-
1
-
One more time, I know this VERY simple concept is hard to get when you have cognitive biases. Yes, high IQ people can act violent and immoral, yes high IQ people can believe all sorts of crazy idiotic things (see: North Korea) and yes high IQ people can create and maintain poor societies (see; North Korea). Okay, good, we agree.
Also:
(1) IQ is mostly genetic.
(2) In FREE MARKETS people are in general sorted according to their IQ / biology. Genetic low IQ people are sorted into lower socioeconomic stata while high IQ people are sorted into high income strata.
(3) Therefor, in a multiculture of mixed biological people, people with the low IQ (genetically) will end up in ghettos and working the lowest paying job (as an average). They will of course vote AGAINST free-markets. WHY? Because it harms their social mobility in free societies. As they become a larger voting block, they vote to end free-markets and freedom altogether. Luckily for MODERN DAY Japan, it is a monoculture of homogenous people - thus, a genetically low IQ person will marry a person from the society and often their children will regress to the average. In this way homogenous monocultures do not form ghettos - unlike in multicultures. Enjoy your multicultureal ghettos - that's something we do not have to worry about here :) Oh, and get this, in time, as multicultrealism fails, the USA and EU will return to homogenous monocultures - sadly, it'll probably be through either war or sterlization of low IQ people (which the Europeans AND Americans both used to do less than a century ago).
1
-
Most of Japanese Civilization is based on Chinese Civilization. There is some tenuous connection to Greek Civilization through GreccoBuddism via Alexander the Great's conquest of India. It should also be noted, When in Roma; DO AS THE ROMANS. If you think Rome was a multicultural society as we know it, you are wrong. As for your rant about you being Black - I don't care. I'm referring to avergae statistics of low IQ people - some of whome are black, others are Asian and other still are white. Low IQ isn't a skin color you dolt. As for the USA being more "dynamic" - okay, I don't care. We would prefer a less dynamic homogenous society over a 'dynamic' ghetto filled multicultreal society. In Japan a 6 year old can walk safely down ANY street and get on a bus or train to the city ALONE. In the USA, if you're an adult of the wrong color in the wrong part of any major city - you'll be beaten, mugged, or shot on any day of the week. There are ghettos in Chicago where 50% of the high school GRADUATES cannot even read or write. So, you go ahead and keep your "dynamism'. We don't want it - and we don't you are your ideas in our society. Easy enough to understand? If you think E. Asian (China, Korea or Japan) is going to become multicultureal - you might want to think again. It isn't happening any time too soon. If anything. Lastly, you talk about MULTIculturealism and then you crap on about how great Western Culture is compared to Eastern. THAT is how asinine your thinking is. You say one thing, and then contradict yourself in the very next breadth. A sign you have not been trained to thinh. And you'll note the book I posted was Socratric Logic (Western). We in Japan have read and appreciate the great accomplishments from Europe and the USA - those were in the past, mainly 1800s.
1
-
1) IQ tests measure intelligence.
2) I am referring to general averages of populations - not individuals. You're the one making your posts about you.
3) Japan is not on it's 'deathbed' LOL and the population growth is higher in Japan than in Germany and Italy and is not much difference from most of the West. Yes, there's a large older population - and guess what this means? It means we are inventing much more robotics to do low end work. It also means houses are... CHEAPER :) and it also means that employers have to pay more to find good workers. You're being lied to in the USA, a decreasing population of high IQ people is a good thing for many people. Sure, not everyone, but most are doing better year after and that Japan has had a rising standard of living per year for 80 years.
4) But guess this, WE DON'T CARE. I imagine this is hard to believe from your so called multicultural - but we value our culure of our individual selves and will happily see our standard of living lower rather than accept mass immigrants. Guess how many refugees we took last year? 14 in total. They will have a 3 year visa after which we will either deport them or they apply again. A person from Pakistan recently appealed his visa refusal to the UN, in the meantime we flew him back to Pakistan and told the UN that he will NEVER be admitted into Japan.
5) Japan isn't 100% homogenous, there are some foreigners, while most leave, those that stay become Japanese. Maybe you don't get it, here there is NO other culture - it is not accepted. We do not want it here. Thus, 'democratically' other cultures are not tolerated and never accepted. That's true of ALL OF E. ASIA.
1
-
One thing that I find hillarious is this: China has 50 million men that are looking for wives. Many are setting up Chinese communities in Africa. Where they are out competing Africans because they have higher IQ and come from China, a growing economy. Welll well well, seems African nations are not too happy with their most beautiful women choosing Chinese men as husbands. Too bad for them - I mean, it's multiculturealism. And, it won't be Chinese who become African culture - nope. Chinese, like all E. Asians see themselves and their culture as something to be kept and cherished. Thus, Africa will become Chinese. Yes, it's going to take time, but this will happen. And I know for a fact, China is working diligently on genetic modification of humans specifically for intellegence. Just where do you think most of those genes will come from? The West? Africa? Or E. Asia. My guess is, you're not going to like 'multiculturealism' when it's no longer Western culture that's dominate. Best start practising your chopsticks :))) Oh, and you need an IQ of 95 at the least to read Chinese :D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Chinese were conned into importing a "Western Philosophy" called Communism. So did Vietnam and Korea - they paid the price for that. Now we see people like YOU telling the East we should import another idiotic "Western Philosophy" - this one called Multicultrealism. Don't expect the Chinese to make this mistake twice, it isn't happening. As for 'cycles', the cycle (assuming there even are any) take 5 generations (short cycle) and 500 years (only the north hemisphere and only between China and Europe). The 500 year cycle suggests the East will rise for the next 250 years while the West collapses into a dark age. This does appear to have a biological basis as it only occurs for people who have been under winter as part of the selection pressure. IOWs, northern people have been selected to deal with harsh winters - this is something people living in warm climates have never experenced. Unlike, say in Africa, death cyclical and not some random bite of an insect. This allows for good selection pressure as humans can be selected to predict future events. It's also probably why Asians have epicanthle folds and better spatial reasoning (artic ice plains). I do agree that Nigerians appear to be different from many other Africans. I believe subpopulations of Nigerians have very high IQ. It would be interesting to measure their IQ and sample their DNA to see if it is some of the same as the DNA selected for in E. Asia. It would also be interesting to know why this occured in Nigeria and not in other countries of Africa. It should also be noted Native Americans (the true owners of the land called America) have a lower IQ than the E. Asians they are derived from. This shoes that high IQ people can become low IQ people in a relatively short period of time. Not that much of this matters, in less than 100 years we will genetically engineer humans so that all humans born have high IQ. At that point even I will have a low IQ (my IQ is 133). Also, people will not have to have other phenotypes, they will be able to look as they wish to look. At this time, Western society will begin to model itself on the East - probably wanting to emulate Japan as our culture is high culture. Zen meditiation and deep insights that the West has yet to appreciate. Lastly, I already said, later Enlightenment in Europe was the pinical of human culture, it's been all downhill in the West since then.
1
-
Yes, I know China has some populations of Africans in China (I sometimes work in China). Currently Chinese are unhappy because African people living in China are more prone to emotion, more prone to lash out and appear to be more likely to act violently in a social situation - all of which is not acceptable. African people are also loud and Asians find this behaviour to be obnoxious. That said, it's not ALL Africans - it's SOME and just as with IQ, when describing a population, it's a normality curve, with some people on the top and bottom of the curve. I would worry a little about half-African children in China as they will have to compete against high IQ people and may end up at the bottom of the socioeconomic strata as has happened in USA. But, if as you say is true regarding Nigerians, then perhaps they will have high-IQ and in that case everything should be fine for them. In Japan it's not uncommon to see black Americans selling drugs for the Yakuza. It's irritating to me, but people say that for kids wanting to buy drugs, they know who to go to on sight. Which is too bad. But, as I said, there's a normality curve for all biological phenomena. I'd also so this: There are things I would like to change about Japanese culture, particularly regarding corporal punishment (which is common in E. Asia). But this will change organically from the inside, naturally.
1
-
Actually, African people (men and women) have much higher testosterone levels compared to E. Asians and this hormone, when introduced into a body, leads to aggressive behaviour. Therefore, actually, we do have evidence for biological function - direct evidence. Of course, not all Africans act like this, and not all E. Asians have low testosterone. It's a normality curve. Funny that you seem to be complaining about Chinese living in Africa, given you support "multiculturalism" (and are American, not African - so it's none of your business). I don't care about Chinese living in Africa, and I really don't care about Africans living in China. I just find it typical of minorities to support (1) their immigration to rich nations in the northern hemisphere and (2) not to want the same in reverse. Take a look at the ghettos in the USA, the conflict between India and Pakistan, the near-genocide of white South Africans after all they did to make South Africa a rich nation and the developing minority ghettos now appearing in Europe - even in Sweden. SWEDEN for god sake. It's clear to us in Japan, that this is another idiotic idea (like Communism and like international free-markets and like the Central Banking system) developed by short-sighted Westerners - and, in typical fasion, will only be resolved in social strief, blood and war (probably civil war in the USA). And here you are at the end, whining about Chinese living in Africa. Whereas you began by suggesting "Multiculturalism" (the in-thing in the West) is the ideal. Oh how quickly you changed your tune when it was whites or asians moving to Africa - and you're not even African! LOL Well, guess what? It's happening to African whether Africa likes it or not, Chinese are there to stray and they'll be supporting a military to ensure they get what they paid for - and there won't be a EU or USA to stop them. Will this happen in 10 years? No, try 50 or 100. We Asians like to think it terms of 100 year periods in the short term. Guess where it is not happening? In Japan :)))
Have a nice weekend, and thanks for proving my point for me.
1
-
1
-
You can argue with the science, but that just makes you a science denier. When people ignore science, they create conspiracy theories. As for 'white' supremists websites, why would I waste my time - Japanese are not white. Is this one of your white supremist websites? http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028960200137X
"A review of the world literature on brain size and IQ by Rushton [Rushton, J. P. (1995). Race, evolution, and behavior: a life history perspective. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction] found that African-descended people (Blacks) average cranial capacities of 1267 cm3, European-descended people (Whites) 1347 cm3, and East Asian-descended people (East Asians) 1364 cm3. These brain size differences, containing millions of brain cells and hundreds of millions of synapses, were hypothesized to underlie the race differences on IQ tests, in which Blacks average an IQ of 85, Whites 100, and East Asians 106."
This is a sceintific article, the scientists measured brain volume and found Asians have the greatest volume at 1347 cubit centimeters. They infer this is why we have the highest IQ. That may or not be correct, it doesn't matter to me, the point is there are clearly biological difference. These biological difference lead to cultureal differences. It's really pretty simple. Lastly, our culture IS to remain as a monoculture - IF you respect all cutlures, then you will respect ours. See, we don't care about you, Africa, blacks, whites - or Chinese :))
1
-
LOL
Japan is a clean safe country with high technology that only continues to to get better after year. The standard of living increases each year in Japan. Thanks to our low immigration rates we are able to afford housing for young people - many of whom are starting families :) We are also able to invest in robotics - and maybe you didn't notice, it's not us, but your country who is wasting trillions and trillions of dollars on phony wars that cost millions of lives. You can think Japan is a shit hole for not wanting to be multicultureal, so what? :) Maybe you missed the point here? E. Asians are not a guilt based culture, we're a shame based culture - it is you who are shameful. I'm simply being honoest and presenting linked articles to back up my beliefs. Where I am wrong, and perhaps it is androgens and not specifically testosterone, then I will admit it. Being right isn't important to me, knowing the truth is. And the truth is, multicultureal socieites is an oxymoron. For example, some peopel are indeed white supremacists in the USA. Well, as a supporter of "Multiculturalism" you MUST respect their culture - but in reality you do not. You probably do support that black supremacy group BLM. You also probably support racist policies, like favoring Blacks to enter University over more qualitfied whites and Asians (as is done with SAT standards in the USA). It seems to me, what you really support, is what you perceive is good for you. Which is only natural. Well, Japanese culture of homogeneity is what is good for us. This is something you are able to grasp :D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
LOL Firstly, we don't care. Maintaining our culture is more important than some arbitrary measure - certainly not by some journalist with the God's only knows what story to 'sell' in New York Time / Fake News. I have heard of this 'unprecedented population collapse' all my life - yet the standard of living continues to improve every year :)) Think about this: In the USA about 1 in 5 high school graduates lack the ability to read and write competently. That's 20% of the GRADUATES. In Japan the number is so small as to be immeasurable. In Japan that number is less than 0.1% (tiny). Yet, somehow 'we're' the society that's deteriorating! LOL Also, as I stated, it's NORMAL to see 6 year old children walking alone throughout Japan - taking trains, busses, walking to school. There are NO GHETTOS. In the USA it's dangerous for a child to even ATTEND many public schools! Let alone walk to school! The drug abuse in the USA is off the charts. The USA is also turning into a Police State (Reason has done many pieces on this). Heck, it's dangeraous for public school teachers to work in some inner city public schools - they're also likely to be stabbed. This would NEVER happen in Japan without making national news and being on everyone's lips. In the USA this is a typical day in a typical city. Do the poor in the USA really appreciate all that the tax-payer is proving them with for free? No! They think they deserve everything and then some more - for free! Yet, somehow 'we're' the society that's deteriorating! Again: LOLOLOL You're living in a collapsed society right now! But just like North Koreans, you're so propagandized you don't know it.
Secondly, we don't care :) Maintaining our culture is more important than some short-sighted pretend 'economic growth'. I'm my oppinion, and I've lived in 5 countries (including the USA), Japan is the best - and has the best culture. But this is a culture really only the Japan CAN have. It's built out of our DNA. Honed for millenia. We think everythign should love THEIR culture and they should feel 'at home' in their culture. Anyway, you'd have to be an E. Asian society to have our culture. And we love it and cherish it and will fight to preserve and protect it from Multiculturalism :) As for the West and it's insane flirting with it's idiotic new shiny idea called "Multiculturalism" (which is an oxymoron) - my guess is, I wouldn't want to be around when the SHTF. Which, seems to happen once every 3 generations or so in the West.
I have theory about Europeans, I think that the environment made them (like us) very aware of the future, very soiable and very hard. I think they have a Mr. Hyde waiting in their mind and will be unleashed when times get tough. Why? Well, imagine the winter that was so harsh that you knew you and yours would die, if you helped your neighbor. The neighbor who lived off the welfare of others. When that winter came: you'd bolt your door and wait and watch as his family froze to death. Because if you didn't - yours would die. If he hollared and demanded to come in, I imagine he would have been killed on the spot. A sacrifice to a Northern God. I wouldn't want to be living in the West when the times get tough - and they will get tough. It's probably not going to be too pretty there. Maybe Trump is a sign that winter is coming :D Did you know Trump is sort of a hero to many E. Asians. The Chinese really appear to like him - a lot. Something to think about ;)
1
-
1
-
LOL
It is true that Japanese copied China and, we think anyway, modified and improved (value added). This is what you have to do when you're a small population next to a large economy. We developed a culture of value-adding. So, Chinese would invent silk, we would buy, improve, and resell. That's pretty natureal and is the basis for the modern economy. I wonder, prior to the Europeans colonizing Africa, had africans developed a long standing culture of reading and writing? How about the wheel? What were Africans known for? And when I say Africans, I don't mean Egyptians or Phonesians. These populations of humans are different from Nubians (which can be read on their temples, not to mention Ramese had bright stright red hair). Yes, ourseif of a few places on Earth, most people copy other people. That aside, we're happy to maintain the culture we developed (including copying - which IS infact a part of our culture - as I mentioned). Incidentally, Japan, Korea and Taiwan (soon China) make most of the technology used in smart phones and own the patents. At one time, Japan Inc made the largest share of profit from an iPhone sale (outside of Apple Inc). While not the same level 10 years later, Japan continues to be a place of R&D for Apple. You probably think of Apple, Disney, etc.. as "American" companies - that's just not the case. Much of the research, production, manufacturing, etc... is done in E. Asia - including to a large extent, Japan. The silicon used in the electronics device you're using, mostlikely came from Japan. So, you can think we 'copy'. But that's not the whole story, copy, value add, and resell is the story.
All E. Asians I speak to, from China, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore - NONE of them see the West as a leader. The West doesn't even see Western culture as something to maintain and value. In time, as Western population become less Western, their influence will wane and along with it their prosperity. Inviting millions of relatively low IQ people, most of whom end up on generational wefare, is not really a path to success in our opinion. But, eveb if it were, we're stil choose monoculture. Which we see as a wonderful thing to be preserved. My guess is, the Americans will too soon. Which we see in the election of Trump (whom most E. Asians admire for how he is trying to save Western Civilization).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Build the WALL and deport the illegals. So-called Dreamers/illegals should have the opportunity to apply for a work visa as well as a university visa (just like everyone else). Their parents should be deported and the Dreamers will, of course, have to repay the tax they've illegally utilized in public services. Lastly, immigrants should be restricted from voting for a minimum of 3 generations. I say this as an immigrant myself - I have no problem with legal immigration (I've worked in 5 countries) and I certainly support restricted voting rights, it makes zero sense to allow people to vote who have not been a part of the country for generations. If possible, I would also request deportation if, by the third generation, they have not intermarried into the dominant group. For example, if you moved to China, you should be married to a Chinese by three generations. If that has not happened, then they should be deported back to wherever as its evident they have no intention of becoming a part of the NATION of people with who they live. The alternative is going to be what we will probably soon see: Civil War.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Again - if the parents had stolen money (which they are by the way) then NO the children do not get this stolen money as an inheritance. In this case the parents illegally came into a country and stole tax payer funded: roads, education, medical services, and sometimes welfare. In addition they have stolen jobs from other Americans (particularly blacks and legal latinos) and because they need a home, fuel, food, etc... they act to drive up prices of all these goods and services while driving down the price of labor. The parents are here illegally and must be deported. As for their children, if they're 8, yes, they go with their parents back to the country of origin. If they are adults, then I suggest they apply for a school or work VISA (if given sponsorship). If they are not working or going to school - then they go with their parents.
I sometimes do work in China - guess what? I apply for a VISA to work there. I don't get to walk into their country and start doing my thing and expect the Chinese to pay for me and provide me with whatever I want. No, I'm not a citizen and so I will go to jail if I illegally enter their country (the same thing would happen in Mexico by the by). What planet do you live on? If YOU want to sponsor an illegal economic migrant YOU do it. You open a business and you pay for thier VISA. If not, then don't expect us to pay for your virtue signalling. Which is what you are doing. A cheap form of 'look at how great I am'. Put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is. Or shut it :D
1
-
1
-
Squatting in a house while a family is away on vacation is a violent crime? Suppose the family only spends 1 summer in 10 at the vacation house. And suppose a person moves their family into this house and lives there illegally for 9 years. You think they now have a right to the other person's property? Further, illegal immigrants use publically funded roads, bridges, schools, sometimes welfare and etc... The 16th Amendment to the US constitution has given the Government the right to use violence against any Citizens who do not pay income tax. Thus, illegal immigrants who utilize publically funded goods and services do so under the protection of State violence. IOWs, if I do not want to pay for the goods and services illegal immigrants consume, I am the one who the State will punish. I am the one who the police will take to prison for not paying my tax. This IS violence. THAT was the whole reason why the US Constitution required an Amendment - prior to Amending it, such an act of violence was illegal. So, you are wrong, they are using goods and services that are provided to them under violent coercion.
As for Charter Schools. Some have failed. Others are thriving. As a matter of fact THIS WAS THE WHOLE POINT. We WANT the bad schools to fail and leave to be replaced by good schools. This is why we want to end all Public Schools. And get this: We are WINNING. The Nation IS in fact turning to the right. The Zylons are even more Right-Wing than Millenials. Your time is fast coming to an end, we're returning to MAGA! :D
1
-
At the federal, state, and local levels, taxpayers shell out approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. That amounts to a tax burden of approximately $8,075 per illegal alien family member and a total of $115,894,597,664. The total cost of illegal immigration to U.S. taxpayers is both staggering and crippling. In 2013, FAIR estimated the total cost to be approximately $113 billion. So, in under four years, the cost has risen nearly $3 billion. This is a disturbing and unsustainable trend. The sections below will break down and further explain these numbers at the federal, state, and local levels.
LINK: https://fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@VanillaPeach-y7l For China, I work there about 3 weeks every year and have done so for over 10 years, mostly in Nanjing. For Japan, I lived there on and off for about a year or so and visit for about 6 weeks ever two years.
In regards to China, I live in a hotel and am treated as a foreigner worker - which in my experience has been reasonably well. Sure, an occasional ask for a picture (not all that common in the city).
In Japan, sure, sometimes a woman will move to let me pass on a sidewalk or some kids will point and smile and maybe say Herro.
I think the main thing is you ARE a foreigner and so you should be expected to be treated as one. This may not be the case in the USA, AU or NZ due to rapid and massive migration that has occurred in the last 25 years.
Even I have insulted Americans when I accidentally thought someone who could not speak English that well, was not born in the USA (in one case they were born in SF and spoke with a Chinese accent; in another they were Arab and from Boston and I just simply didn't think they were American).
It happens.
IMO it's normal and should be expected and if you can't move on with life then move to an area where people look like you, sound like you and share your values. I've lived and/or worked in USA, JP, CN, NZ and AU.
You'll NEVER be treated like your part of an in-group of people that you're not a part of. It'll never happen. You may be treated kindly, or indifferently, or even as a friend by SOME people. However, in a multi-ethnic area of a country you will be treated mostly indifferently and that's fine for some people. Pay your money and live and let live. It really just depends on what you're looking for. Expecting to move to KSA or JP or Tibet and to be treated like a local is asinine. People don't act like that IRL.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh, this is probably worth also noting here: The Obama Justice Department (DOJ), wrote and supported the phony "Trump Dossier" which was used by Obama's administration to apply for a fraudulent federal wiretap via the FISA Court and used to illegally spy on Trump. Do we hear of this by the MSM? BARELY A PEEP. Let's remember that this Obama crooked Administration produced the fake dossier that led to the appointment of Robert Mueller - the entire foundation of this case is based on a disgusting unconscionable corruption of the justice system. All because Hillary didn't win. Pretty sick if you ask me. Sore losers led around by the nose.
Anyway, maybe the corrupt Democrats get Trump impeached. Perhaps they could even get the VP removed from office? Hell, maybe they can figure out a way to get Sanders and Warren to replace Trump and Penice. Who knows? I only wish such a thing would occur. But, whatever should occur - it's quite clear to moderates like me, that electing moderates like Trump isn't working. Maybe it'd be best to let the left make a mess of things for a decade or so? Full open borders and unmitigrated immigration, let in millions, give away free everything: public schooling, healthcare, jobs, housing, food, university, all of it. Tax the top 1% at a 100% rate. Give massive tax breakes to millionaire demogogues like Bernie Sanders and the Clintons.
Let it all go to hell.
Then, say by the mid 2030s, let's see who (what-ever-is-left of) the American voting public elect as Dear Leader? Which type of dictator will those Americans want rulling over them? Someone from the far left or someone from the far right? Either way, that'll be that and we can call this whole experiment a failure.
Done and done.
All because Democrats are butt-hurt Bill's wife didn't win an election because most people, in the States that count, simply don't like her and don't want another corrupt democrat or corrupt republican and wanted someone new from outside.
Pretty sad way to go out, but, honestly - I don't really care :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lastly, think about this: If the government (supposedly that's us) could legally create all the money needed for public institutions, like roads, schools, hospitals, military, etc... AND DO SO debt and interest free, without income tax - spending the money directly into the economy, why is it, do you think, they don't? Suppose the amount was the exact same as we borrow now, only interest free, debt free.
So? Why don't we do that instead? I'm curious what you think.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GordieKat As an aside, causation is almost always correlated. As a matter of fact, it's hard to come up with non-correlated causations. As an example, when a cue ball hits a numbered ball, and the numbered ball rolls forward, we attribute the cause of the roll, to the correlated impact. So, while it is true correlation does not always imply causation, controlled experimentation is not always possible, or necessary. The evidence strongly suggests genetic disposition generalization distributions strongly correlate to, and probably are causative, to prosperity. Evidence also suggests socialism leads to social collapse.
I sometimes work in China. You should see how horrid socialism has destroyed that society. Wow, the end of socialism is sickening - a destruction of the moral fabric. I'm not sure if they can ever mend the damage socialism has wrought.
1
-
1
-
@GordieKat
Socialism literally starved 50+ mil humans last century. Most evidence suggests socialism leads to dysfunctional public institutions. As an example, 1 in 5 Government Schooled graduate is functionally illiterate (DoED stats).
As for genetically less intelligence people being taken advantage of. Yes, this probably happens. What do you think a Government institution can do? Not much. Evidence suggests they'd just pump and dump them through the public institution (they're probably most of the 1 in 5 illiterate graduates).
The ONLY workable solution is private: individual people creating charity, schools, business, foundations, etc...
That aside, thanks to a century of socialism, it's probably too late anyway. The evidence suggests massive dysgenics have occurred. As an example, the average IQ normalised to 1990 isn't 100, it's 94 to 96. At 90 society at the current statusquo cannot function (see Flint for an example). Democratic institutions will fail. This is going to happen. It's simple biology. The avg IQ is falling at a rate of 0.2 pt a year (genetically). Or to put another way: off a cliff. Look up the experiment 'Mouse Utopia' this is probably happening to us.
That people voted for RPOS is evidence of widespread dysgenics. She's literally an anti-White anti-male demagogue. My guess is, she'll be eating crow in another 15 years or so. Once it becomes clear society is collapsing and people are scared and desperate.
And remember: only E. Asian, Indian and European American men are net positive tax payers (on average). Everyone else is not productive enough to maintain current society. This is math. And each of those groups is undergoing massive dysgenics along with everyone else. Basic biology.
Yet you want MORE socialism?!
Good luck.
Note: My family and I left the USA. We're not White either.
1
-
@GordieKat All socialism requires authoritarianism. "Socialism" is, in fact, authoritarianism. If it were possible to enact the social program, institution, or service without State authority, it wouldn't be called socialism, it'd be called a charity, foundation or business.
Not to mention, democratic socialism (although the USA and EU are actually republics) may be worse than simply having a king or queen.
But anyway, my family is half-Japanese.
Incidentally, how much do you think a family of 4 pays in Japan for "Universal" healthcare? This is something RPOS (and Kyle) is promising for 'free' / net-positive tax payer / paid for by E. Asian, Indian and White men.
It's ~ 8600 USD per year.
Because Japan is homogeneous, healthier, and doesn't have an opioid (or other drug addiction) problem (when compared to the USA) the cost here is obviously going to be cheaper. We have a thriving private hospital industry as well. As a matter of fact, whenever possible the government tries to privatize healthcare as much as is possible because it's better and cheaper.
Therefore, the cost MUST be higher in the USA. Again, this is just math. I'd estimate Universal Healthcare will cost between 12,000 to 18,000 a year (per net positive taxpayer).
Why doesn't RPOS or Bernie or Kyle ever tell you the real number? Something you may want to ask? They just keep saying free. In Japan, they'd be voted out quickly for lying and they'd be shown to be liars by the media and actual experts who'd provide the costings. Yet, this never happens in the USA.
I'm shocked that genetic intelligence isn't well known. How crazy. There's a well-known study in Japan that shows the gradient of IQ from north to south in Japan. It's similar to the distribution around the globe at equivalent latitudes. Highest in the north. Lowest in the south. East and West are not significantly different. Though the populations are separated by 40,000 years.
Anyway, as I said, she's a RPOS.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GordieKat I'm not sure what you mean by 'force people to work' to survive. Humans require air and nutrients (simply by being an animal). So, we need to obtain air and nutrients somehow.
One could go into the woods and scavenge as a hermit. It's pretty easy to capture fish if you live on an island - very easy actually. And crab. But, if you want to live in a 'Civilization' then you'll need to work together with others. Morally that requires voluntarism. No, you don't get to steal from people - even if you vote to do so (and call it moral). You have to work together WITH people. The freer the society - the more opportunities and the better your life will be.
As an example, in highly socialistic countries people usually end up starving to death. Sure, sometimes they go through a period of what seems like 'plenty'. This is the time when they're undermining and destroying society.
Whereas highly individualistic and capitalistic countries have the opposite problem - obesity (like in the US) and drug problems (too much leisure time). Which is one of the reasons we have religion, to help keep people from being sloth, or from stealing. However, rich people always vote for socialism, and so there's less of a reason for religion, and so people degree. Both genetically and morally - the two go hand in hand. Again, we left the USA because its clear that the society is going to collapse. Probably transitioning through some form of socialism (my guess is Fascism and a Dictator or someone like a Dictator) and civil war.
To bad too, the Framers were brilliant in developing the US Constitution. But, as they say, up the stairs in hobnailed sandals, down the stairs in state provided silk slippers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GordieKat I haven't taken anything you've said as insulting. So you needn't apologize to me.
Also, your intuition isn't uncommon. This was "the" debate in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The problem has been written about extensively. While empiric evidence shows problems like "Tragedy of the Commons" inductively, there's also deductive arguments that show the price-mechanism is not possible with socialism (and ticking those boxes: dislike 1 - 10 like, do not work like a price mechanism. Further, the value proposition fails without money. Money is required to express subjective experience (like value). Lastly, supply-demand curves are required to allocate limited goods and services.
I'd say in addition, I personally have lived in 5 countries. So, I have anecdotal evidence, which while not strong, does inform what I investigate when I choose to do so. China for example, is an amazing example of tragedy of the commons and the full-on degradation of at least some social norms. I've compared private medicine in Japan, with Universal medicine in Australia. To give you an idea, in Japan a procedure cost my family $5800. In Australia the cost would have been closer to $60,000 - $100,000. The reason I estimate this cost, is because it would include 6 weeks stay in a hospital. Yes, even in a system of 'Universal" healthcare - you still have to pay. In Japan the full 6 weeks AND the medical procedure at a private hospital was $5800. In Australia - this wouldn't be an option (they'd most-like just say go home you'll be fine, and this probably would have resulted in a death). There's always LIMITED supply. Nothing is 'free'. Everything has to be accounted for and priced.
So, as I said, what the USA needs is a free-market in healthcare. Then you'll have cheap and good quality healthcare because you'll have MORE of what is now a limited supply. Thus the price will go down and the quality (due to competition) will go up.
Lastly, I'd say this: As society leans more on authoritarianism, it destroys civil society. That's where the USA is at now. Not as bad as Europe, but still pretty bad. So, I sympathize with you and understand that the USA is a total mess. The solution to the mess, is more freedom. Eliminate regulations, regulatory agencies, licencing, and taxes - let the people (who actually create the wealth) be free to do more wealth creation. That's the path forward. Will it happen? Probably not. More than likely the USA founding was a historical fluke. So, I think there will be war. Plus, this is the norm for people actually. Maybe that's just the way things are. Add to this the dysgenics of the last 100 years, and I don't see a bright future in the short term. In the long-term, yes, life will be fine, great even.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What does Trump have to do with the Left's support of State redistribution? I'm referring to the Progressive Era - from the late 1800s culminating in our labor-tax and central bank. That's not an 'American' ideal and therefore it's not 'Conservative'. It was a 'Progressive' ideal and it was pushed into Law by a Progressive POTUS. Thus 100+ years later we've seen nothing but continued growth of government and continual erosion of civil liberties. Of course, we're going to end up with a Dictator. It's baked in the Progressive Cake. There has never been a Historical example of Socialism not culminating in the erosion of Civil Liberties and eventual election of a Dictator. As a matter of fact, this must eventuate. I'm wondering, did Kyle ever mention this study: http://retractionwatch.com/2016/06/07/conservative-political-beliefs-not-linked-to-psychotic-traits/
Conservative Christians are in fact strongly associated with community and compassion - which isn't that surprising given that's the traditional GASP Christian ethos. Whereas Progressive Liberals are associated with psychotic traits (see: Pol Pot, the Socialist Workers Party of Dutchland, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, Communist China, Vietnam, and etc...). Even now we watch as Progressivism undermines our own society, and have you been to Europe recently? Lastly, I'm probably 'conservative' by some standards, but not by Japanese standards. I was married in a Shinto Shrine, lived in a Buddhist Temple, am a STRONG atheist, I lived in 5 different countries, and grew up in the mid-west of the USA. And I'm a research doctor. Anyway, carry on believing whatever it is you believe. It's clear to me we will eventually have a Dictator, and that the ONLY reason such a person is possible is due to Progressive policies that have turned what was once a LIMITED government - into the very classical Leviathan we were forewarned would happen (so many centuries ago). Things appear to be playing out, exactly as was predicted then. Which is why I find it comical you mention Trump. Give me a break - he'll be a footnote in history.
1
-
I live in Japan you 'little shit' LOL
Not only that, I was married in a major Shinto Shrine in a major Japanese city. I also lived in a Buddhist Temple for many years and prayed in the presence of the Buddha, though I'm a strong Atheist. I'm fairly certain you know little of this world, whereas I've lived on three continents, in 5 major Western countries and have worked in both Japan (of course) and China. As for Japanese 'Socialism'. LOL I'm fairly certain you know little to nothing - I'd go so far as to say, you know 'jack shit'. For example, do you how much we pay for 'free Universal' Healthcare in Japan? About $8500 a year. How does that sound - pretty good to you? This is of course, in a monocultureal country with people who are very health conscious. In this USA I'd suggest it would be at the very least double that cost for "Free Socialistic Healthcare". But, hey, I'm sure you know all about healthcare - I mean, heck, I'm only a doctor and I only work at a medical school, what would I know compared to a little troll like you? Anyway, carry on trolling.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What part of "income" taxation is theft did you miss? For example, suppose "The People" decided to tax you of 100% of your income - is that theft? Is 99% theft? When does it stop being theft? Never. Secondly, some tax is perfectly fine. For example, gasoline tax. You don't "have" to buy gasoline, but if you do, then this tax will pay for road upkeep - further, people who don't drive on the roads, are not forced to pay a tax for a good they don't use. The Second Industrial Revolution occurred at a time when there was no income tax. Yet, people were healthy, there was schools, medicine, X-rays were discovered, cars and aeroplanes, as well as electricity, was invented. The ONLY people who benefit from income theft, are the thieves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
How's this: Incarcerate and deport people who have entered the USA illegally. They should be charged for the goods and services they've consumed while illegally in the country, this can be paid off by working on The Wall. Seems fair enough. As for the people who've illegally hired them, they'll also have to stand in front of jury of their Citizen peers to determine what their punishment should be - perhaps joining their employees working on The Wall :D This is commonly known as "Law and Order", it's a pillar of this other thing: Western Civilization. As for my choice of an anime character for an avatar, I live in Japan, Anime is common. Guess what? I've come here legally. Guess what would happen if I were here illegally? I'd be an "Illegal Alien" and deported back to the USA (and billed for the expense). Want to know what I like about Japan? I like the fact that 6-year-old children are safe to walk the streets of any city, anywhere, anytime, without fear of being harmed. No, No-Go Zones in Japan. Why? Because Japan is a high IQ homogenous society. Oh, one more thing, I didn't vote Trump in 2016, but I will by mail in 2020 :) He's the best thing to happen to the USA in a century. Who knows? I may even move back one day? LOL
1
-
1
-
No one is oppressing you and most people of this world have never been better off - all thanks to the fruits of Western Civilization. This PC you're typing on, the math used to invent it, the logic circuits, and etc... ALL made possible through Western liberal free-markets, common law and sound money (of course this last one is a pillar kicked out). It should also be noted it was the West that ended Slavery in the world. The USA specifically, only practiced Slavery for a little over a single lifetime, about 94 years. As an aside, I never said you couldn't be in the USA. If you're a legal resident, then you're obviously welcome to live in the USA. What we would like to see is an end to the VISA lottery (which is asinine), an end to work VISA's the undercut American labor and an end to Welfare payments to anyone who has not paid into the system. You get, what you paid. No more, no less. That's fair and sensible.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ad hominin attacks suggest you have no logical underpinning to your argument. I notice it's the norm in politics. Which is why we have civil servants like Obama, Bush Jr., Clinton, Bush Sr., they're all the same.
-
Not that is matters much, maybe 1 person in 10,000 even know who Immanuel Kant, René Descartes, Francis Bacon etc... and a lot less would know anything of their writings or arguments. So, you should feel happy, you're in good company.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If we had a FREE competing market in medicine, including ambulance services - there'd probably be an Uber-like Ambulance available on the spot for $300 or cheaper. Unfortunately, some Progressive Socialists morons idiots 110 years ago thought it'd be a great idea to take away our rights as free people to freely provide medical services, and instead gave away those (stolen) rights to lobbyists like the AMA who bribed the Government - whom then (through restricted licensing and University scams) continues to limit the supply of medical services *(like ambulances) so that they can charge, quite literally, an arm and a leg.
In a FREE SOCIETY, you can bet your arse someone would be more than happy to take this woman to the hospital for WAY LESS than $3000.
I don't even need to listen to the other 90% of the video to already know Kyle here is going to call for more magical Government to provide more "free" Government crap. You know, because the same government that cannot manage our monetary system, makes up phoney wars (from Korea to Iraq), totally wrecked education and cannot even keep poison out of our water, is going to magically provide something 1000 times more complex: healthcare.
NO THANK YOU. Just leave. Move to Venesula, Cuba or Swedenstan. It's really easy. We do not want you or your socialism here. This country was specifically founded on principles ANTITHETICAL to you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
We can wait until 2020, 2021, whenever. My point is Kyle and Tom are not professional economists, yet they seem comfortable pontificating on the state of the 'economy'. Tom was utterly wrong - I mean, 180 degrees from what happened. He envisioned a total collapse - and in reality, the economy is booming. Kyle, like Tom, thinks we're going to see a total collapse, and (like Tom) he is going to be sorely disappointed. As for Peter, his book "How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes" is worth reading (lots of great examples for kids). Will the economy "collapse"? Maybe. Maybe not. I personally think "America" the idea collapsed in the 1910s and never recovered from Progressivism (from my reading of history). Our problems today, from healthcare to loss of liberty can all be traced to early Progressivism (which also required changes to the US Constitution as these were illegal and specifically against the Framers' principles). Anyway, a long slow economic collapse has ensured. IMO America ended with early Progressivism and we now live as Citizens 'of' the USA ('of' to indicate 'the property of'). Anyway, these are two totally different societies.
My guess is the USA will either come to an end in the next 22 years or a Civil War will occur (possibly leading to a ruling dictator). Or both will occur. I'm thinking a Civil War leads to a break up of the States into smaller Nation States. Or maybe some other outcome.
As an aside, you may want to read the experiments called "Mouse Utopia" - they're also quite informative and may help explain some of the behaviors we currently see happening around us. The solution, replacing the mice, isn't likely to end well for the original colony, nor the one brought in to replace them. Anyway, 2021, 2022, whenever - the economy isn't going to 'collapse'. So, let's wait and see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RE: Tariffs
Yes, I understand. A tariff is placed on the seller's product when they are imported into the USA. And, the consumer (us) pay more. Yes, that's what we need to have happen to products made in Mexico. You know, those long-standing Mexican companies like Ford and General Electric.
RE: The Wall
Yes, I agree, it's mostly psychological. It sort of says: We don't want you here illegally. I support a Big Beautiful White Wall :)
RE: Tax relief
I agree that taxation is complex and short-term and long-term behavioural changes almost unknowable. Generally, if you raise taxes (say on cigarettes) then you have a decrease in that activity as well as workarounds, like the black market.
I support a complete repeal of the 16th amendment and would like to see the USD compete with other currencies on a level playing field. I would also like to see an end to many of the Civil Services (particularly the DoE - what a complete waste of money that has been). I support massive deregulation and an amendment to the US Constitution making State licencing requirements illegal (rent-seeking is not a free society - this was actually proposed when the Constitutions was written incidentally).
So, I've given this some thought, we may have to disagree.
I'd suggest The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich von Hayek if you haven't read it. Because, we're on it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When a new minimum wage is passed, the stores have to cover the price, so the price of everything in the store goes up. Worse, if you weren't worth minimum wage - now you have no job! BUT, get this, you have to pay the higher price for everything!
That's how it works, in the real world. Which is one of many ways the poorest Americans are being screwed.
Other ways include: fiat currency inflation, regulations, licencing laws, public schooling/cog-factories, etc....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1