Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Pevvania wrote:Brekkie? 'Euro slang'? Noooooooo that's Aussie talk my friend.

Meh, you do both.

Pevvania

Hey Minerva why the embassy closures?

Teuberland wrote:Hey Minerva why the embassy closures?

Same reason pretty much every president before him closed a bunch of embassies: they're not useful anymore.

Condealism

Miencraft wrote:Same reason pretty much every president before him closed a bunch of embassies: they're not useful anymore.

Having embassies in itself can be useful for the simple sake of advertisement. Those few days constructing and closure signs go up can be used for attention, and the simple presence does the same. It doesn't kill us anyways to have them.

Rateria

Teuberland wrote:Having embassies in itself can be useful for the simple sake of advertisement. Those few days constructing and closure signs go up can be used for attention, and the simple presence does the same. It doesn't kill us anyways to have them.

Doesn't kill us not to.

Ok, by the power vested in me by no one in particular, I make all of you Secretary of Education. What would you require you schools to teach? How would you verify the students are actually learning that?

My requirements to graduate in no particular order of priorities:

- Read to a tenth grade level

- Write to an eighth grade level

- Math through basic algebra

- Basic science including an overview of biology, chemistry and physics

- Be able to balance a checkbook

- Have a basic understanding of consumer credit and interest

- The ability to fill out a 1040 EZ tax form

- Basic economics[1]

- Be able to fill out an application for employment

- Basic American history

- Basic working knowledge of state and federal government

- Basic knowledge of the Constitution and The Bill of Rights

- Basic world geography

- Basic first aid including CPR and Heimlich Maneuver

- Basic hygiene

What would you add or subtract from the list?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] This class must include a clear definition of where government gets its money, that effect on personal spending power.

The United States Of Patriots

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15589844_233964293700300_3110908858416607135_n.jpg?oh=ebff58145e709908711faf3e925128d6&oe=58EFC7D6

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:What would you require your schools to teach?

Nothing. If they can't even get spelling and grammar down pat, forcing them into a one-size-fits-all curriculum clearly isn't going to solve anything.

Narland

Cooking and life skills should be required

Narland, The United States Of Patriots

Condealism wrote:Doesn't kill us not to.

Eh. I'm leaning on keeping them for the advertisement. They don't have to actually be useful.

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:What would you require you schools to teach?

Nothing. They'd be bound to teach whatever the localities think they should teach. Y'know, the way it used to before the Board of Education showed up and ruined everything.

Narland, Condealism

Republic Of Minerva wrote:

You should be even worse, if you are the spawn of millenial parents. Lulz

Did you just assume my lineage?

Republic Of Minerva, Condealism

Rateria wrote:Did you just assume my lineage?

Honestly though this is a damn good question for just about every SJW ever. White people aren't all the same thing, yo.

Narland, Rateria, Condealism

Condealism wrote:Nothing. If they can't even get spelling and grammar down pat, forcing them into a one-size-fits-all curriculum clearly isn't going to solve anything.

Then what is the point of school?

Evil Genius Land wrote:Cooking and life skills should be required

Hmmmm... Ok. I would consider cooking. What other life skills?

Miencraft wrote:Nothing. They'd be bound to teach whatever the localities think they should teach. Y'know, the way it used to before the Board of Education showed up and ruined everything.

Ok. Make it your superintendent of local school. The one down the street.

What you you require to graduate from a school you are in charge of? What would you leave optional? What you you toss out of the curriculum?

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Ok. Make it your superintendent of local school. The one down the street.

What you you require to graduate from a school you are in charge of? What would you leave optional? What you you toss out of the curriculum?

I'm just going to politely decline this hypothetical; I can't come up with any answer to this situation that would have the school still exist in the first place, on account of how everything would be optional.

Miencraft wrote:I'm just going to politely decline this hypothetical; I can't come up with any answer to this situation that would have the school still exist in the first place, on account of how everything would be optional.

So what you are saying is that schools have no place in your world?

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:So what you are saying is that schools have no place in your world?

In the perfect world, yes, we wouldn't need them.

Of course, realistically, we can't get that, so the schools would exist as an option to provide information, like history lessons (which are critical) when the parents can't do that.

But I can't come up with anything that would justify them having requirements to complete your education.

Narland, Condealism

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:

Hmmmm... Ok. I would consider cooking. What other life skills?

I would put economics under life skills as well as basic first aid and hygiene

The Ambassador To The Clfr, Rateria

16 hours ago: Rotgeheim ceased to exist.

RIP.

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, Condealism

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Then what is the point of school?

Exactly.

Narland

Miencraft wrote:In the perfect world, yes, we wouldn't need them.

Of course, realistically, we can't get that, so the schools would exist as an option to provide information, like history lessons (which are critical) when the parents can't do that.

But I can't come up with anything that would justify them having requirements to complete your education.

Ok. If we take the requirement of attending school out of the equation, what do you think would encourage students to stay in school and get what they need before getting fed up with it and bailing on the whole thing?

Condealism wrote:Exactly.

You see absolutely no point in education?

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Ok. If we take the requirement of attending school out of the equation, what do you think would encourage students to stay in school and get what they need before getting fed up with it and bailing on the whole thing?

There's no good way to do that. Just offer the best education you can and if the parents really want to force the kids to show up they'll take care of that on their own.

Rateria, Condealism

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:You see absolutely no point in education?

There is no point to formal education. Any valuable skills you could learn, you can learn better and earlier through other means. As it stands, formal education offers nothing useful and only serves to waste everyone's time.

Condealism

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:You see absolutely no point in education?

I see absolutely no point in schooling. A true education is its own reward.

Miencraft, Narland, The United States Of Patriots

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Then what is the point of school?

Hmmmm... Ok. I would consider cooking. What other life skills?

taxes loans basic mechanics thingsthat no matter your job requirements are good to know how to do for your self

The Ambassador To The Clfr, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots

Hey does anyone play Trainz rail simulator?

Teuberland wrote:Hey does anyone play Trainz rail simulator?

I have a copy of Trainz 2006. It was fun but I never figured out how to actually drive trains yourself so I just screwed around in sandbox all the time making stuff.

Teuberland

Miencraft wrote:I have a copy of Trainz 2006. It was fun but I never figured out how to actually drive trains yourself so I just screwed around in sandbox all the time making stuff.

The realistic mode takes a bit of practice, but on DCC mode you simply move the dial clockwise to move forward and counter to slow or move backwards.

But yeah that's basically all I do.

"Woman should be able to abort fetuses at any time, for any reason, or none at all."

Agree or disagree?

Republic Of Minerva wrote:"Woman should be able to abort fetuses at any time, for any reason, or none at all."

Agree or disagree?

Disagree. Society should not have to sacrifice the rights of one subset of humanity for those of another; there has to be a middle ground somewhere.

Miencraft, Pevvania, Narland, Teuberland, The United States Of Patriots

how in the world did adopting a laissez faire policy decrees economic freedom. why. Nationstates. why.

Rateria, Condealism

The United States Of Patriots wrote:how in the world did adopting a laissez faire policy decrees economic freedom. why. Nationstates. why.

Because Max Barry is a statist noob

Miencraft, Rateria, Condealism, The United States Of Patriots, I Am Totally Not A Puppet

Pick one: withdraw from the UN or abolish the minimum wage?

Pevvania wrote:Pick one: withdraw from the UN or abolish the minimum wage?

Withdraw. It's more important that we get our independence back.

Plus technically lowering the minimum wage to 1 cent isn't abolishing it so we could just do that afterwards...

Narland, Kumquat Cove, Condealism, The United States Of Patriots

Condealism wrote:Disagree. Society should not have to sacrifice the rights of one subset of humanity for those of another; there has to be a middle ground somewhere.
only in extreme circumstances such as rape or if the life of the mother is in danger otherwise they decided to have sex they get to deal with the consequences

Republic Of Minerva wrote:"Woman should be able to abort fetuses at any time, for any reason, or none at all."

Agree or disagree?

It's insane to argue that a fetus lacks rights a day before delivery, so for the quickest answer, no.

On a deeper level, brainwaves and heart beats begin around 6 weeks in pregnancy (http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PHI/305.002/fd.htm). I could probs find a better source, but it's convenient enough. Both of these functions are considered the end of life, biologically and legally, when they cease to function. Thus, these points should be considered to be the beginning at the very least, as one can continue to argue that since an embryo continues to develop from conception onwards that abortion would cease the development of a life. That being said I argue the former as it is a more solid stance and a better based one.

Miencraft, Condealism, The United States Of Patriots

Miencraft wrote:There's no good way to do that. Just offer the best education you can and if the parents really want to force the kids to show up they'll take care of that on their own.

Ok, I can go along with that. It kind of follows under the heading of Darwinian selection. But these days parents won't even make their children behave in a restaurant. Do you see any possibility of a large segment of the population becoming unemployable in anything but the most basic of shovel operation type employment?

Miencraft wrote:There is no point to formal education. Any valuable skills you could learn, you can learn better and earlier through other means. As it stands, formal education offers nothing useful and only serves to waste everyone's time.

Like the old days where trades were passed from father to son? That could work, but at that point I see our children being sentenced to a class system where they will never be anything more than their parents. Without an education in general knowledge, there are big pieces of life those future generations will miss out on. Look at the child of a carpenter. He will learn basic math and some algebra. He will know wood, hand tools, power tools, fasteners and some structural engineering. His on the job experience will add to that knowledge. All of these things are good.

But it will lead to a near stagnant society. There will be very little in the way of the technical leaps and bounds we are seeing today. It isn't that the idea are not there. But the knowledge to take that idea to reality will evaporate without a general education with which to build a specific college education.

Teuberland wrote:Hey does anyone play Trainz rail simulator?

I love trains. But a train simulator that allows me to drive them became boring after a few plays. I miss the Railroad Tycoon series. Wish I had the time to play a few games.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:"Woman should be able to abort fetuses at any time, for any reason, or none at all."

Agree or disagree?

Disagree. The instant that fetus stands a reasonable chance of survival outside the womb using today's neo-natal medical knowledge and equipment, abortion is off the table. Until that time it is up to the mother and no one else.

Teuberland

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Ok, I can go along with that. It kind of follows under the heading of Darwinian selection.

No, nothing so grim. The world has never seen such a rapid dissemination of information across such a vast selection of means of obtaining it; no barrier should exist to keep an eager learner from their chosen studies. There is no longer any point in herding hundreds of kids into a building and forcing them to regurgitate a common curriculum of arbitrarily-selected "knowledge" in sync - aside, of course, from controlling them.

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:But these days parents won't even make their children behave in a restaurant.

As a consequence of the obsolete nature of compulsory schooling, many modern parents seem to be convinced of the notion that schools, and other such institutions, will inculcate "good behavior" into their children - and they are not entirely wrong to assume so. The way things are now, it takes a village - or a government - to raise a child.

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Do you see any possibility of a large segment of the population becoming unemployable in anything but the most basic of shovel operation type employment?

That is certainly a possibility, considering that is the present reality. The lessons school teaches may be satisfactory for preparing an individual to perform the lowliest of jobs, but is insufficient, in and of itself, in making such an individual marketable or in any way capable of advancement.

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Without an education in general knowledge, there are big pieces of life those future generations will miss out on.

I will be sure to inform future generations that mitochondria are considered the powerhouse of the cell, never to end a sentence with a preposition, and to report any transgressions to an authority figure. They will surely be able to make use of such common knowledge.

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:But it will lead to a near stagnant society. There will be very little in the way of the technical leaps and bounds we are seeing today. It isn't that the idea are not there. But the knowledge to take that idea to reality will evaporate without a general education with which to build a specific college education.

Throughout history, great innovators have seldom conformed to the conventions of their respective societies. They exist in spite of what we consider "a general education," not because of it.

Miencraft

Pevvania wrote:Pick one: withdraw from the UN or abolish the minimum wage?

Por que no los dos?

Pevvania, I Am Totally Not A Puppet

Condealism wrote:Throughout history, great innovators have seldom conformed to the conventions of their respective societies. They exist in spite of what we consider "a general education," not because of it.

My favorite example is that many of the most wealthy and successful technology moguls of the modern day were college drop-outs, or just flat out didn't go to college.

Condealism

Condealism wrote:-snip-

I think the problem isn't formal education itself, but how it is executed.

Forcing STEM down the throats of students that have no interest in it is a relic of the cold war.

http://www.nas.edu/sputnik/dow2.htm

What formal education needs is more freedom, the Finnish are doing it pretty well I think.

No one could've predicted in the early 20th century writing on a chalkboard would give us nuclear reactors half a century down the road.

The results of formal education may not be immediate but they are very important, unlike providing more chairs to people like your father before you, and his father etc.

Is space exploration a worthy government investment? Why or why not?

Republic Of Minerva

Pevvania wrote:Is space exploration a worthy government investment? Why or why not?

No, the only reason people think it's a good investment is bc private space exploration is regulated to be inefficient. Private space exploration isn't all or nothing people, instead of NASA messing up a mission and wasting the money of taxpayers, private missions messing up (note: there would be less mess ups due to wanting to keep their investors) would only waste the money of those who chose to invest in it.

Miencraft, Narland

Merry Christmas Eve Libertatem. All I want for Christmas is:

1. FF w/o Australis--thank you PM,

2. KDE without Nepomuk/Baloo/whatever renamed sniffer they try to install for a backend to PIM--thank you Pali,

3. Gnu/Linux w/o Systemd--thank you Devuan,

4. ISP w/o data caps--still working on that on,

5. Trump w/o establishment following him into the WH--Christmas miracle needed.

6. Family w/o precious little snowflake drama over the holiday. Thank you very much--no names need be given.

7. Family, friends and community to be safe, warm and happy. Thank God.

Pevvania, Republic Of Minerva, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots

[B]The Day Before Christmas. [/B]

A road warrior's Chirstmas story

Twas the day before Christmas and all through the inn,

Not a creature was stirring, nowhere within.

The do not disturb hung on the door knob with care,

In hopes that housekeeping would skip this night's lair.

The clerk was all nestled behind the front desk,

Surfing the web for something grotesque.

Wrapped up in the sheets, plugs in my ears,

Just didn't silence the heater's loud gears.

When out in the hall there arose such a clatter,

I sprang from my bed to see what was the matter.

Away to the door I flew like a flash,

Tripping and stumbling, I stepped in the trash.

I fell to the floor, flat on my face.

Careening away from my battered suitcase.

When what to my wondering ears should hear,

A silence that was beyond crystal clear.

I lay for a moment in painful despair,

When a sweet woman's voice flowed through the air.

There is no fire, the alarm was false,

Seems there was no need for this morning's waltz.

Sitting up slowly I gathered my wits,

Thoughts coalescing in wee little bits.

One thing was clear when considered close up,

"May as well shave, shower and drive as long as I'm up."

Merry Christmas to all and to all a good day.

Rateria, The United States Of Patriots

Pevvania wrote:Is space exploration a worthy government investment? Why or why not?

Nothing is a worthy government investment Pev. Nothing.

Narland, The United States Of Patriots

Post self-deleted by Narland.

External govt (as opposed to self-government) is an affect of individual inability, incapability, indifference or turpitude and should only be given agency under very limited conditions.

If inability the self-governing person is fully capable to freely contract (negotiate) for that ableness--The original intent of the the federal Constitution, the state constitutions, the county/city charter, and neighborhood covenant in limiting their power of govt from defrauding people of the full exercise their own life, liberty and property and in altering or abolishing it (the contractual obligation of/to the state) as the person sees fit superior to the military and police powers.

If incapability the self-governing person has authority to freely contract (ameliorate the inefficiency of) such as the original intent of local and volunteer fire, hospitals, and food banks as always best done by volunteers in the community (the pubic as opposed and distinctly different from the gvt of the state) to be mustered or dismissed as circumstance may warrant without infringement upon the sovereignty of the individual.

If indifference, the self-governing person has the prerogative best done by nature in letting it take its course to be and let be with no recrimination for benevolent indifference (which should be the natural state of all governance lest it be tyranny).

If turpitude the self-governing person has right of voice, suffrage, vigilance and arms with soapbox, ballot box, jury box and ammo box to oppose any harm in that order for justice to be met to turn over such individual to whatever form of establishment of justice is most appropriate.

Anything beyond this is suspect--including passing laws forbidding the leaving of the atmosphere without US govt permission and then authorizing NASA as the sole monopoly authorized to send people to the moon. The free market could have gotten a man to the moon within the Kennedy decade. It would not have been derailed by LBJs disastrous war on poverty that crippled the space program (not to mention the harm it caused the American economy until Reagan). The free market could have continued unabated and on schedule--moonbase, expositions to mars, and possibly (but very unlikely) an interstellar probe en route would be commonplace today. Our poor would not have been blighted and made that much poorer by the urban plantation system. The retardation of technological innovation when combined with bureaucratic waste is quite sad.

Pevvania, Rateria

[nation=short]Narland[/nation]: that's a great point that I hadn't considered before. The War on Poverty, coupled with the Vietnam War, totally hijacked federal economic policy. Thomas Sowell wrote a good article about how it actually entrenched the poor in poverty as opposed to aiding then out of it as had been occurring for the two decades previous. African-American poverty was cut almost in half from the 1940-1960 period, only for this progress to stall until the 1980s.

It's such a shame that the worst programs result out of the best intentions. It all goes back to 'the seen and the unseen' that Bastiat and later Hazlitt talked about. Every politician should be required to read a copy of Economics in One Lesson before taking office.

Narland

On an unrelated note, I'm glad that the has-beens and neocons that have been jockeying for power in Trump's administration have been largely left out in the cold. Christie, Giuliani, Gingrich and Cuckabee should stay well away from the White House.

Narland, Condealism

Pevvania wrote:On an unrelated note, I'm glad that the has-beens and neocons that have been jockeying for power in Trump's administration have been largely left out in the cold. Christie, Giuliani, Gingrich and Cuckabee should stay well away from the White House.

I'm not impressed with Trump's picks, but at least none of them seem to be any worse than his running mate.

The Clinton supporters reactions on election night those were priceless seriously it looked like they thought the nukes would drop then and there

The United States Of Patriots

Brazilian ancaps are fuggin everywhere now

it spreads

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Brazilian ancaps are fuggin everywhere now

it spreads

HEY MAN COME TO BRAZIL!! BRAZIL LOVES YOU!!

Republic Of Minerva

Police navy dad everyone!!

Can you sell yourself into slavery? This is the question that Nozick believes you can. But I am unconvinced, and I'll tell you why.

In the same way a government cannot bind itself through legislation, a person cannot void their natural rights through a contract, that includes the right to life, liberty, and property. And because one utilizes these natural rights to create and enter into a contract in the first place, it also makes sense that these contracts can be terminated at any time and for any reason, making slavery impossible. For if the ability to enter into a contract rested on self-ownership, surely that self-ownership would be able to void a contract just similarly, your self-ownership cannot be voided, even if your other external property can be. Now let us not confuse debt thralldom with actual slavery, because the conditions laid out for both are different — by terminating a slave contract you do not infringe on anyone else's property in any way whatsoever, in the same way choosing to leave your company or the nation doesn't infringe on the company's/nation's rights (except if you are a US taxpayer, lol). But if you take out a loan, and not pay it back by voiding the contract, you would be violating another's claim to property.

Miencraft, Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Can you sell yourself into slavery? This is the question that Nozick believes you can. But I am unconvinced, and I'll tell you why.

In the same way a government cannot bind itself through legislation, a person cannot void their natural rights through a contract, that includes the right to life, liberty, and property. And because one utilizes these natural rights to create and enter into a contract in the first place, it also makes sense that these contracts can be terminated at any time and for any reason, making slavery impossible. For if the ability to enter into a contract rested on self-ownership, surely that self-ownership would be able to void a contract just similarly, your self-ownership cannot be voided, even if your other external property can be. Now let us not confuse debt thralldom with actual slavery, because the conditions laid out for both are different — by terminating a slave contract you do not infringe on anyone else's property in any way whatsoever, in the same way choosing to leave your company or the nation doesn't infringe on the company's/nation's rights (except if you are a US taxpayer, lol). But if you take out a loan, and not pay it back by voiding the contract, you would be violating another's claim to property.

As a concept I believe indentured servitude would be close. In such cases the contract would not likely permanently void the rights of that person, but rather offer some form of financial or personal/social return. For example: individuals seeking passage to the Thirteen Colonies would enter indentured servitude under other individuals in exchange for said passage. Of course, this doesn't mean that the individual under indentured servitude could bind their descendants or other individuals into such bondage, unless those individuals also freely entered into such contracts.

Narland, Rateria

So the Browns get their first win of the season and the Cardinals best the Seahawks. Well damn.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Can you sell yourself into slavery? This is the question that Nozick believes you can. But I am unconvinced, and I'll tell you why.

In the same way a government cannot bind itself through legislation, a person cannot void their natural rights through a contract, that includes the right to life, liberty, and property. And because one utilizes these natural rights to create and enter into a contract in the first place, it also makes sense that these contracts can be terminated at any time and for any reason, making slavery impossible. For if the ability to enter into a contract rested on self-ownership, surely that self-ownership would be able to void a contract just similarly, your self-ownership cannot be voided, even if your other external property can be. Now let us not confuse debt thralldom with actual slavery, because the conditions laid out for both are different — by terminating a slave contract you do not infringe on anyone else's property in any way whatsoever, in the same way choosing to leave your company or the nation doesn't infringe on the company's/nation's rights (except if you are a US taxpayer, lol). But if you take out a loan, and not pay it back by voiding the contract, you would be violating another's claim to property.

This is what I try to tell opponents of the NAP. The concept of voluntary slavery is entirely paradoxical because you cannot simply waive your rights to self-ownership. Anyone who wishes to be a 'slave' to someone else is essentially just saying 'I'll do what you want, don't pay me'. When this hypothetical fool comes to his senses, all he needs to do is say 'I quit', and if the master uses force to make him stay, he's violating the NAP.

I've seen the NSG cucks try to use the issue of slavery against anarcho-capitalism, and even erroneously claim that Rothbard supported voluntary slavery. They are wrong.

Miencraft, Republic Of Minerva, Rateria, Condealism

Pevvania wrote:This is what I try to tell opponents of the NAP. The concept of voluntary slavery is entirely paradoxical because you cannot simply waive your rights to self-ownership. Anyone who wishes to be a 'slave' to someone else is essentially just saying 'I'll do what you want, don't pay me'. When this hypothetical fool comes to his senses, all he needs to do is say 'I quit', and if the master uses force to make him stay, he's violating the NAP.

I've seen the NSG cucks try to use the issue of slavery against anarcho-capitalism, and even erroneously claim that Rothbard supported voluntary slavery. They are wrong.

Rothbard literally said that you can't be forced to work. I can't remember the specific example, but he explained that although one may be working for a company, it's within his right to stop working. Of course, cases that he would have to work is to repay any crimes or if somehow someone proves you not working violates their property rights (very unlikely, but who knows).

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria

Hey!

Republic Of Minerva, Rateria

Pevvania wrote:So the Browns get their first win of the season and the Cardinals best the Seahawks. Well damn.

Go Steelers!

Pevvania wrote:On an unrelated note, I'm glad that the has-beens and neocons that have been jockeying for power in Trump's administration have been largely left out in the cold. Christie, Giuliani, Gingrich and Cuckabee should stay well away from the White House.

I think Huckabee is pretty dapper but Christie doesn't deserve anything

Republic Of Minerva

Adawn wrote:I think Huckabee is pretty dapper but Christie doesn't deserve anything

Didn't Christie decline a position in Trump's administration?

Rateria wrote:Didn't Christie decline a position in Trump's administration?

Either that or Trump didn't want him...It's really hard keeping up with the Trump's these days :p

The Aradites wrote:Rothbard literally said that you can't be forced to work. I can't remember the specific example, but he explained that although one may be working for a company, it's within his right to stop working. Of course, cases that he would have to work is to repay any crimes or if somehow someone proves you not working violates their property rights (very unlikely, but who knows).

That sounds about right. In The Ethics of Liberty he writes one or two chapters that define contracts. He essentially says that someone can sue/press charges if a contract between them and another party is broken and incurs losses. But he distinguishes the violation of a legitimate contract (i.e. a supplier backs out of a construction deal after a million has already been invested) with what he refers to as a 'promise contract', which cannot really be continually enforced. Apart from slavery, an example would be two people agreeing to marry each other. The man cannot force the woman to marry him if she chooses to break off the engagement. It doesn't matter if the guy has spent money on the engagement ring that he cannot get back.

Rateria

Adawn wrote:I think Huckabee is pretty dapper but Christie doesn't deserve anything

Not a fan of either. Cuckabee is a religious zealot and a political has been. His record as Governor of Arkansas is also quite poor. Cato regularly graded him with Cs and Ds for his fiscal policy, which was filled with several tax increases and higher spending. Christie is a wet towel with no fresh ideas and no respect for the Constitution.

I don't think Christie was offered anything after he got kicked out of his position as transition team leader.

Random Facebook comment:

"The UN is a place for communists, Islamists and 3rd world dictators go to feel as their ideologies and corrupt countries matter. It has long been a vacuum that sucks cash from the US and other western nations to prop up anti-western ideology. Time to let it go."

I got a 3032 Tomcat Inox for christmas... 'merica

Pevvania wrote:Random Facebook comment:

"The UN is a place for communists, Islamists and 3rd world dictators go to feel as their ideologies and corrupt countries matter. It has long been a vacuum that sucks cash from the US and other western nations to prop up anti-western ideology. Time to let it go."

We have this fantastic office space just sitting there in Manhattan and we're using it to house a whole bunch of idiots that get together every year and bash us and our allies. Why do we stand for this?

Pevvania, Kumquat Cove, Condealism

Eventually, automation will create a scenario in which up to half of the population are unemployable, what is the solution?

https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

Is it universal minimum income?

https://youtu.be/fnJTWzf8kH4

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:Eventually, automation will create a scenario in which up to half of the population are unemployable, what is the solution?

Redefine employment. This wouldn't be the first time in history that technological advances would cause a substantial change in the public's preferred professions.

Well, we'd all become employed in the robotics industry

Universal minimum income is an inflationary disaster waiting to occur. Value does not come directly from money, but from the labor value which money represents. This is important to know.

Pevvania, Narland, The Ambassador To The Clfr, Condealism

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Universal minimum income is an inflationary disaster waiting to occur. Value does not come directly from money, but from the labor value which money represents. This is important to know.

Got that right. I think we have more than enough incentive for people to be layabouts.

Condealism

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:Eventually, automation will create a scenario in which up to half of the population are unemployable, what is the solution?

Is it universal minimum income?

Condealism wrote:Redefine employment. This wouldn't be the first time in history that technological advances would cause a substantial change in the public's preferred professions.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Universal minimum income is an inflationary disaster waiting to occur. Value does not come directly from money, but from the labor value which money represents. This is important to know.

Everyone has to manage with the cards they are dealt to be productive (provide an amenable product or service to others or help to do so) to find a place in society. Fortunately, the more affluent and opulent by means of free economics and the ethics of Liberty in that society the better off the poor will ever be; and unemployment more a minor inconvenience than the imminent danger of starvation and disease that it once was.

If we remain free and good enough to pass that technological threshold of a post-scarcity society whence everyone may attain 40 acres and a mule (with their own replicators, 3d-printers, fabricators, and agribots that fit inside a shed) to complete self-sustenance at the familial level, domestic govt will be rendered nearly redundant and irrelevant. The mind will be even that much more a battleground. The narcissist (as apposed to the egoist) will be the dividing line between toleration and tyranny as what will matter most (to the narcissist) is the politicization to exert their will (and whim) over others opinions.

The right to be let alone (so long as they cause no harm to others) will be most crucial. The right to defend oneself from bad ideology and those infested with it along with the force and fraud of its unintended consequence will be paramount. I hope we learn from the mistakes of statism in order to arrive to such a place as a nation within my grand-children's lifetime.

Condealism

The Ambassador To The Clfr wrote:Got that right. I think we have more than enough incentive for people to be layabouts.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/375600/&ved=0ahUKEwjbuMeJ55bRAhVqJsAKHeqqBpUQFgglMAE&usg=AFQjCNHbJL19p-OhJprIuvS0f3aY17FTcA

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:Eventually, automation will create a scenario in which up to half of the population are unemployable, what is the solution?

https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

Is it universal minimum income?

https://youtu.be/fnJTWzf8kH4

The over-mechanisation theory is a tiresome economic fallacy that has been debunked countless times over the past two centuries. Simply put, any short-term losses in employment are negated by long-term income gains and increases in employment. Mechanisation lowers costs thereby increasing supply thereby lowering prices, which leads to lower costs of living. The money now left over from the price cut is used to stimulate other growing industries which absorb the workers displaced by automation. End result: increased employment, investment and disposable income, and higher aggregate demand. Classic seen vs. unseen.

Condealism

Had a very interesting read into the Franco-Mexico Wars the other day that demonstrates the importance of free trade. After Mexico's independence from Spain in the 1820s, the chaos and infighting that ensued between rival warlords and gangs meant the country was a very unreliable trade partner. France, one of its biggest partners, was repeatedly having its businesses subjected to looting and destruction. The Mexican government, which I may add was taxing imports heavily, was doing a poor job of protecting private property. The French government asked for reparations, Mexico refused, so France invaded in 1838 to pressure them to pay up. The French withdrew once Mexico agreed to pay 3 million francs and commit themselves to trade with France. Hint: they did neither, and after suspending interest payments to foreign countries, France - aided by Britain and Spain - invaded once more in the 1860s to force Mexico to honour its trade commitments. This ensuing war led to tens of thousands of deaths, as control of the country swayed to a French puppet government and then back to republican forces. Diplomatic relations between France and Mexico were not restored until 1880.

Essentially, the Mexican government was too incompetent to protect the private property of foreign investors, eliciting two protracted conflicts that caused a lot of harm and not much good.

This is an interesting case study that proves Adam Smith's axiom 'if goods don't cross borders, soldiers will', and is relevant today with the incoming protectionist wave that will be unleashed after Trump's inauguration.

Republic Of Minerva, Rateria, Condealism

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:Eventually, automation will create a scenario in which up to half of the population are unemployable, what is the solution?

https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

Is it universal minimum income?

https://youtu.be/fnJTWzf8kH4

[nation=short]Pevvania[/nation]

I have better thing to do with my time than type a page of text, so please, watch.

https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:[nation=short]Things about robits[/nation]

Anprims are going to declare you first to be eaten.

Rateria

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:I have better thing to do with my time than type a page of text, so please, watch.

https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

There are so many errors I do not know where to begin. I tried to answer it with my previous post without having to write a book. The only not overly-rationalized premise from the limitation of its philosophical base assumptions is ironically its conclusion: It is coming and what shall this man do?. But these are questions every generation must master or succumb to tyranny. This is where the ethics of Liberty by means of (objectively real) free economics is crucial.

Bad thinking on these issues (Liberty and the nature of reality) via statist thinking in all its guises has caused irreparable harm to each generation in which it is foisted, and the next generation survivors are that much poorer when freed from the shackles of the death (and mass murders), slavery (from abject slavery to supposedly minimally invasive involuntary servitude), and theft of time and justly acquired property. The dialectic of tyranny is the same--present something scary, offer the solution as deferring your right to life, liberty and property to the power of the tyrant (be it a person or system) and most craftily done in such a way to make it sound like the idea was yours to begin with.

Humans are not horses; and horses are not humans--horses are involuntary tools and resources by means (of economic transfer of productivity) while humans are its ends. A post-scarcity society must be thought through very carefully since there is so much bad thinking about the nature of reality out there--especially the nature of economic and political reality. The reality is most of humanity no longer lives close enough to nature (they are urban or suburban) to understand its brutal consequences that bad governance (tyranny) has caused since the 20th century wherein 100s of millions of people ended up dead, and the subsidization of poverty that until broken by Liberty of economy provided by free market ideals and distinctly Christian ethics of the golden rule applied to everyone equally and liberally (in the classical sense).

Do not get me started on the unemployability of the horse. ...too late...

Horse as a human employee. Horses are intelligent working animals that deserve our best welfare, not the indignity of pretending it has human rights. This of course saves police departments (that have horses) from all the damned legislation that as all but criminalized the use of the horse as a work animal in public and so-called public lands, as well as for sport or leisure. Trigger? He isn't a horse--see the legislature says he's a person employed as a police officer and no different from a human police--thus exempt from laws affecting the owners of unprivileged horses. He even earned a medal for kicking a mugger in the face, and was not at fault when he trampled that toddler. Double standards are always dangerous as it gives the appearance of lawless behavior under color of authority.

The government without understanding the economic consequences in the natural course of mechanical automation crippled the economic effecaciouness of the horse for various reasons throughout the 20th century. The government has made it unfeasible--even if I use my horse as a trained work animal it by tax law is a leisure animal subject to luxury tax and not deductable as an expense. It has been banned for use as a conveyance of transportation on public lands and public roads in most jurisdictions. I would ride my horse to market if I would not be thrown in jail for it--like hell if I am going to get a permit (I should not need permission from anyone to ride my own horse), or wear a freaking helmet.

It is analogous and near-contemporaneous to rails, trolleys, and trams that were unnaturally killed by government graft, subsidy of GM, over-regulation ad naseum to foster the automotive industry. The temporary transit crises mistakenly identified as the need for government controlled, taxpayer subsidized "public" transportation systems has been an indirect but detrimental effect on urban transportation such that public urban transport actually appeared to progressives to be viable, when the free market response (which is always the correct response when moral and lucid) would not have abandoned the already mature trolley systems so soon especially those found in many urban areas--even in small towns (at the time) like Boise, Idaho and Portland, Oregon. It took the automobile until the 50s and 60s to replace the inconvenience caused to the urban commuters and the over-correction in the 80s and 90s (automotive glut) that helped to decimate the US auto industry (not the the sole cause but a contributing factor). ...arg... sorry, this is meant to be a short response... my bad...

"Labor unions always loose, economics always wins." Yes, of course. Another case of really bad thinking by statists. The reality of the nature of economics is so obscured by politics that socialism (and other forms of statism) cannot be seen for mass murdering formula that are its farcry ends that never met its intended goals.

The biggest problem with this is it potential for scaremongering. This is only scary if you have bought into some form of existential relativism that cannot scrutinize in an objectively real sense what this means for the individual human mind--and what it frees him/her to do and accomplish and how to defend against force and fraud in a post-scarcity society. That video misses the mark. Sorry for the rambling--I have to get back to some errands.

The Ambassador To The Clfr, Condealism

Narland wrote:There are so many errors I do not know where to begin. I tried to answer it with my previous post without having to write a book. The only not overly-rationalized premise from the limitation of its philosophical base assumptions is ironically its conclusion: It is coming and what shall this man do?. But these are questions every generation must master or succumb to tyranny. This is where the ethics of Liberty by means of (objectively real) free economics is crucial.

Bad thinking on these issues (Liberty and the nature of reality) via statist thinking in all its guises has caused irreparable harm to each generation in which it is foisted, and the next generation survivors are that much poorer when freed from the shackles of the death (and mass murders), slavery (from abject slavery to supposedly minimally invasive involuntary servitude), and theft of time and justly acquired property. The dialectic of tyranny is the same--present something scary, offer the solution as deferring your right to life, liberty and property to the power of the tyrant (be it a person or system) and most craftily done in such a way to make it sound like the idea was yours to begin with.

Humans are not horses; and horses are not humans--horses are involuntary tools and resources by means (of economic transfer of productivity) while humans are its ends. A post-scarcity society must be thought through very carefully since there is so much bad thinking about the nature of reality out there--especially the nature of economic and political reality. The reality is most of humanity no longer lives close enough to nature (they are urban or suburban) to understand its brutal consequences that bad governance (tyranny) has caused since the 20th century wherein 100s of millions of people ended up dead, and the subsidization of poverty that until broken by Liberty of economy provided by free market ideals and distinctly Christian ethics of the golden rule applied to everyone equally and liberally (in the classical sense).

Do not get me started on the unemployability of the horse. ...too late...

Horse as a human employee. Horses are intelligent working animals that deserve our best welfare, not the indignity of pretending it has human rights. This of course saves police departments (that have horses) from all the damned legislation that as all but criminalized the use of the horse as a work animal in public and so-called public lands, as well as for sport or leisure. Trigger? He isn't a horse--see the legislature says he's a person employed as a police officer and no different from a human police--thus exempt from laws affecting the owners of unprivileged horses. He even earned a medal for kicking a mugger in the face, and was not at fault when he trampled that toddler. Double standards are always dangerous as it gives the appearance of lawless behavior under color of authority.

The government without understanding the economic consequences in the natural course of mechanical automation crippled the economic effecaciouness of the horse for various reasons throughout the 20th century. The government has made it unfeasible--even if I use my horse as a trained work animal it by tax law is a leisure animal subject to luxury tax and not deductable as an expense. It has been banned for use as a conveyance of transportation on public lands and public roads in most jurisdictions. I would ride my horse to market if I would not be thrown in jail for it--like hell if I am going to get a permit (I should not need permission from anyone to ride my own horse), or wear a freaking helmet.

It is analogous and near-contemporaneous to rails, trolleys, and trams that were unnaturally killed by government graft, subsidy of GM, over-regulation ad naseum to foster the automotive industry. The temporary transit crises mistakenly identified as the need for government controlled, taxpayer subsidized "public" transportation systems has been an indirect but detrimental effect on urban transportation such that public urban transport actually appeared to progressives to be viable, when the free market response (which is always the correct response when moral and lucid) would not have abandoned the already mature trolley systems so soon especially those found in many urban areas--even in small towns (at the time) like Boise, Idaho and Portland, Oregon. It took the automobile until the 50s and 60s to replace the inconvenience caused to the urban commuters and the over-correction in the 80s and 90s (automotive glut) that helped to decimate the US auto industry (not the the sole cause but a contributing factor). ...arg... sorry, this is meant to be a short response... my bad...

"Labor unions always loose, economics always wins." Yes, of course. Another case of really bad thinking by statists. The reality of the nature of economics is so obscured by politics that socialism (and other forms of statism) cannot be seen for mass murdering formula that are its farcry ends that never met its intended goals.

The biggest problem with this is it potential for scaremongering. This is only scary if you have bought into some form of existential relativism that cannot scrutinize in an objectively real sense what this means for the individual human mind--and what it frees him/her to do and accomplish and how to defend against force and fraud in a post-scarcity society. That video misses the mark. Sorry for the rambling--I have to get back to some errands.

This might be because it is almost 2 AM for me, but throughout your page of text, I don't see you addressing my question.

Up to half of the population will be rendered unemployable, there isn't any new area that can sponge up the massive amount of unemployed people.

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:This might be because it is almost 2 AM for me, but throughout your page of text, I don't see you addressing my question.

Up to half of the population will be rendered unemployable, there isn't any new area that can sponge up the massive amount of unemployed people.

All I see as of now [nation=short]Narland[/nation] is you going off on an anti state tangent, but that might change once I get some rest.

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:but throughout your page of text, I don't see you addressing my question.

Tl;dr version: Your question is the economist's equivalent of asking "Why is the sky purple?"

Miencraft, The Ambassador To The Clfr

Anyway, I hit the Suppress button by accident. Who the hell thought it was a good idea to give me the ability to do that?

"Uhhh, YOU did, Condy."

...Oh.

Condealism wrote:Tl;dr version: Your question is the economist's equivalent of asking "Why is the sky purple?"

No it is not.

The Ambassador To The Clfr

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:I have better thing to do with my time than type a page of text, so please, watch.

https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

He points to a YouTube 15:00 video narrated by a machine and thinks he is making a point.

People are always going to find themselves losing work to automation, overseas, outsourcing and anywhere else it is cheaper to have the work done another way. Minimum wage laws and unions are pushing this trend along a lot faster.

The most basic rule of employer-employee economics is very simple: The employee only has a job as long as that employee is worth more than he is being paid. The instant that equation inverts, that employee is out of a job.

Miencraft, Rateria, Condealism, I Am Totally Not A Puppet

Narland wrote:Do not get me started on the unemployability of the horse. ...too late...

Quite possibly the best sentence posted on the internet this year.

Condealism, I Am Totally Not A Puppet

In case you haven't noticed CLFR, what I am trying to tell you is that the rate at which people lose their jobs is going to skyrocket, and there will be nowhere for them to go to get employed.

If you haven't watched the video, this isn't so let about how minimum wage workers will soon find themselves being replaced, I am talking about much more than that, doctors, lawyers etc, all will be replaced by machines vastly more capable, cheaper machines.

This isn't something I am calling to be prevented, far from it, I am just wondering what is to happen when the percentage of the unemployed is twice that of the great depression.

If I am correct, [nation=short]Narland[/nation] suggested a post scarcity society where everyone has there own replicators etc, but I wonder how anyone could afford such things if they have no form of income?

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:In case you haven't noticed CLFR, what I am trying to tell you is that the rate at which people lose their jobs is going to skyrocket, and there will be nowhere for them to go to get employed.

If you haven't watched the video, this isn't so let about how minimum wage workers will soon find themselves being replaced, I am talking about much more than that, doctors, lawyers etc, all will be replaced by machines vastly more capable, cheaper machines.

This isn't something I am calling to be prevented, far from it, I am just wondering what is to happen when the percentage of the unemployed is twice that of the great depression.

Why don't the doctors, lawyers etc. learn the skill to build these robots? There always has to be an end point in which humans are needed.

And if there are so many people without jobs that means 1) their skills are not needed anymore so they better learn a new skill and 2) it actually won't be hard to be employed because labor supply would sky rocket, lowering the price of labor immensely.

(I'm working under the frame-work of no intervention, ie. not focusing on min wage and such. The focus didnt seem to be on that, but correct me if wrong)

The Aradites wrote:Why don't the doctors, lawyers etc. learn the skill to build these robots? There always has to be an end point in which humans are needed.

And if there are so many people without jobs that means 1) their skills are not needed anymore so they better learn a new skill and 2) it actually won't be hard to be employed because labor supply would sky rocket, lowering the price of labor immensely.

(I'm working under the frame-work of no intervention, ie. not focusing on min wage and such. The focus didnt seem to be on that, but correct me if wrong)

There are only so many people that can be employed in robotics, it wouldn't even make a dent in the amount of unemployed.

The frame is the current world, anyway, I don't think anyone could live off any lower than the cost of the robots.

Robots:

Mistakes: Almost Never

Cost: Electricity/Batteries (Pennies)

Humans: All the time

Cost: Minimum wage

Don't let life get you down - if you got your first steady, full-time job before the age of 40, then congratulations, you've achieved more in life than Bernie Sanders.

Miencraft, Condealism

Cyborgs And Sentient Machines wrote:I don't think anyone could live off any lower than the cost of the robots.

This is based on the assumption that automation won't increase supply, and therefore decrease cost of, anything.

Plus, there really is no reason that robots would take over control of anything any time soon. Mechanical errors can be much more devastating than human error, and there are plenty of fields (eg medicine) where total automation is flat-out not possible. You know why you still get checkups from a bag of meat and bones instead of a robot? Because a human is more likely to detect problems with another human than a robot is.

Well-trained human labor is also incredibly useful even in fields we can automate, so there's no reason to worry about hypothetical scenarios that will never happen.

Just get rid of the minimum wage, and make sure you've got well-trained people doing what you need. Easy.

Pevvania, Narland

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.