Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Narland wrote:I hope you enjoy Libertatem. I did not see your previous flag, but as an unassuming cowboy, the Aussie flag suits me fine.

Yeah, before I moved here, I was forced into an allegiance I didn’t like, so I left to join you guys, I’m from the UK but I’ve always wanted to go to Australia, so why not have that as my flag

Rateria

Lolanson wrote:Yeah, before I moved here, I was forced into an allegiance I didn’t like, so I left to join you guys, I’m from the UK but I’ve always wanted to go to Australia, so why not have that as my flag

I would like to visit Australia, and New Zealand some day. As the decades roll on its probably more of a pipe dream, now. My travelling years are most likely behind me.

When I want Australia to come to me, i just head to the city and order a Bloomin' Onion from the Outback Steakhouse.

Rateria

Narland wrote:As long as Holmesian/Progressivist Judges subvert the Law by legislating from the bench instead of impartially adjudicating justice, they need to be treated like any other petty legislator -- elected every two years by the People affected within their jurisdictional boundaries.

You think that would decrease the liberalism, that is a dumb move. Democracy moves us away from freedom.

Narland wrote:I would like to visit Australia, and New Zealand some day. As the decades roll on its probably more of a pipe dream, now. My travelling years are most likely behind me.

When I want Australia to come to me, i just head to the city and order a Bloomin' Onion from the Outback Steakhouse.

Nice Mate

Aglonia wrote:You think that would decrease the liberalism, that is a dumb move. Democracy moves us away from freedom.

Unaccountable oligarchs work in obscurity to remove freedom and are difficult to uproot. If the process is democratized,j the People would only have themselves to blame if they lose Liberty. But I stating an extreme to make a point, that it is more important to stop judges from legislating from the bench.

Narland wrote:Unaccountable oligarchs work in obscurity to remove freedom, and are difficult to uproot. If the process is democratized the People would only have themselves to blame if they lose Liberty.

The people will surrender liberty at every turn if we give the power to surrender it. They will sacrifice liberty of the alter to the false Gods of Security and Equality

Aglonia wrote:The people will surrender liberty at every turn if we give the power to surrender it. They will sacrifice liberty of the alter to the false Gods of Security and Equality

I was stating an extreme to make a point, that it is more important to stop judges from legislating from the bench. But i concede, I want neither oligarchy nor democracy.

Narland wrote:I was stating an extreme to make a point, that it is more important to stop judges from legislating from the bench. But i concede, I want neither oligarchy nor democracy.

An oligarchy of the learned would serve us better than democracy of the unlearned

Aglonia wrote:An oligarchy of the learned would serve us better than democracy of the unlearned

If I had my druthers I would rather prefer the latter.

An oligarchy of the learned are the more dangerous because they know the evil they do and have the power to inflict it on others while maintaining their position. Their descendants inherent and magnify their worst traits, and Liberty is deferred.

A democracy of the ignorant, the evil that they do are inflicted upon themselves by their own will. They either wise up quickly or die horrifically; and their descendants have a chance at Liberty once the following tyranny is overthrown.

Thank goodness the Babylon Bee is here to help:

[url]https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bee-guide-physical-contact-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak[/url]

Rateria

Narland wrote:Thank goodness the Babylon Bee is here to help:

[url]https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bee-guide-physical-contact-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak[/url]

Thank god

Rateria

Narland wrote:Thank goodness the Babylon Bee is here to help:

[url]https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bee-guide-physical-contact-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak[/url]

Mate, that is probably one of the funniest things I’ve seen this month.

Rateria

Narland wrote:I would like to visit Australia, and New Zealand some day. As the decades roll on its probably more of a pipe dream, now. My travelling years are most likely behind me.

When I want Australia to come to me, i just head to the city and order a Bloomin' Onion from the Outback Steakhouse.

Pfft, Longhorn Steakhouse is so much better.

Narland wrote:I would like to visit Australia, and New Zealand some day. As the decades roll on its probably more of a pipe dream, now. My travelling years are most likely behind me.

When I want Australia to come to me, i just head to the city and order a Bloomin' Onion from the Outback Steakhouse.

There is nothing even remotely Australian about Outback Steakhouse

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Pfft, Longhorn Steakhouse is so much better.

100%

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Well this has been quite the year so far

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, Miri Islands, Kongeriget Island

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:Liberty is as false a god as her sisters Security and Equality. If the two are false, who's to say that the other is not also? I would contend that it is Equality that causes and upholds Security, from which Liberty originates.

I should also point out that you, yourself, are guilty of that with which you charge others: Your promotion of oligarchy betrays your own worship of the "false" Security".

Equality is not a virtue. A society that is truly equal is not free and a free society can never be truly evil. Rather I would contend that the security needed is only the security to secure our liberties we very much need to secure this freedom and liberty. Not to protect the people, but to protect freedom.

Kongeriget Island

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:This is a very odd bunch of words that make no sense coming from a self described libertarian.

That sounded pretty libertarian to me tbh

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:People who talk about protecting ideas like "freedom" or "tradition" or "religion" as opposed to protecting people generally end up being nothing more than Robespierres and Francos. The point of the state is to protect the person. You can talk about freedom all you want, but if ir doesn't include the person first and foremost, it's pretty hollow.

All they mentioned was freedom though. There was nothing about tradition or religion.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:People who talk about protecting ideas like "freedom" or "tradition" or "religion" as opposed to protecting people generally end up being nothing more than Robespierres and Francos. The point of the state is to protect the person. You can talk about freedom all you want, but if ir doesn't include the person first and foremost, it's pretty hollow.

Negative freedom/natural rights is the only logical and consistent rights doctrine, everything else is arbitrary. Instrumental/positive/"human" rights/freedom are entirely illusory and depend on the generosity of the polity you live in at any given time.

Narland, Miri Islands, Kongeriget Island

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Pfft, Longhorn Steakhouse is so much better.

***Anecdote Alert***

The las time we went to an Outback the hostess/waitress was apologizing softly that they were understaffed and that the temporary cook for that day wasn't very good. Then she whispered, " Perhaps you might want to come back tomorrow?" But we were already there and wanted a Bloomin' Onion anyway. When it came to us it was more like a scorched dead sea anemone. :)

The poor waitress had these big pleading puppy-dog eyes. I am sure it was a defense mechanism of some sort. We thanked her for her honesty, and left without eating.

***End Anecdote Alert***

Unfortunately there is no way to express a dry British-ish tongue in cheek statement over text. Kind of like saying when I want to bring the the New England Seaside to me, I poor a jug of maple syrup over some Skipper's Fish and Chips. =) More unfortunately, if it has to be explained, it loses what little humor it has. In voice, my wry understatements to Americans are usually overlooked or winced but rarely given consideration; but in the UK my dry idiosyncrasies to emphasize a point were generally noticed and on occasion unintentionally considered humorous. ***Narland won't quit his day job for a Stand-Up Comedy tour***

Pevvania wrote:There is nothing even remotely Australian about Outback Steakhouse

Yes. Absolutely true. The franchise is open about it only being an Australian Themed restaurant, and doesn't serve authentic Aussie Cuisine.

***Anecdote Alert***

The first time a fellow sailor and I, were in the northwest of England we asked a native where the best fish & chips could be found. He gave us a complicated set of instructions that included was a 4 mile hike into a busy town center. We were getting pretty hungry. When we finally got close and turned the final corner... it was a Skipper's Fish and Chips. lol

We were laughing so hard, the locals probably thought we were drunk. We found a small family run operation closer to the shore. We knew we had come to the right place when the fish and chips came on paper and they charged extra for the condiments.

***End Anecdote Alert***

Pevvania, Rateria

Pevvania wrote:100%

Give me a properly cut home grown steer on an outdoor bbq any day. :)

Aglonia wrote:Equality is not a virtue. A society that is truly equal is not free and a free society can never be truly evil. Rather I would contend that the security needed is only the security to secure our liberties we very much need to secure this freedom and liberty. Not to protect the people, but to protect freedom.

Equality is the supreme virtue for determining the righteousness of the justice met on rich and poor, bond and free, male and female, us and them, citizen and noncitizen alike. Any ideology that cannot objectively reconcile Liberty and Equality as a two sides of the same political coin is a failed ideology. The People will find themselves either equally enslaved or all too freely abused.

Freedom at the expense of equality destroys justice. Equality at the expense of liberty destroys freedom. The first casualty of the former is generally peace and the first casualty of the latter is usually truth.

Security is the antithesis of Liberty. The ends of the State must be one or the other. Otherwise it defeats itself. Liberty is the safest thing a people can practice for their own security. Anything that deprives Liberty for security thus increases the danger of the State becoming the threat they ostensibly claim they are "protecting" the People from.

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Why do people take Keynesian economics seriously? The fed dumped 1.5 trillion into the stock market and it stopped the crash for a mere 30 minutes. Keynes BTFO again. Give Hayek a chance

Miencraft, Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots, Skaveria, Kongeriget Island

Miri Islands wrote:Why do people take Keynesian economics seriously? The fed dumped 1.5 trillion into the stock market and it stopped the crash for a mere 30 minutes. Keynes BTFO again. Give Hayek a chance

When confronted that his economic theory could provide massive growth in the short-term, but was unsustainable and would cause immeasurable long-term damage, Keynes replied by saying: "We'll all be long dead by then anyways." He's been dead for eighty years now...

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, Miri Islands

People often scoff when folks say that higher education brainwashes people. My teacher in my "Human Geography" class, quoted Marx twice, as she often does, and said that Capitalism and Colonialism was literally the same thing.

Miencraft, Narland, Rateria, Kongeriget Island

Miri Islands wrote:Why do people take Keynesian economics seriously? The fed dumped 1.5 trillion into the stock market and it stopped the crash for a mere 30 minutes. Keynes BTFO again. Give Hayek a chance

Yeah, Trump is wrong on this one. Reason wrote about how the payroll tax cut is actually a pretty bad idea, because a) it might encourage sick people to go into work and b) it could possibly DOUBLE our already $1 trillion deficit to $2 trillion.

Obviously the best thing "economically" would be to just let the recession happen if it's going to happen, but this is an election year so the administration probably doesn't have the luxury of thinking that far into the long term.

Narland, Rateria, Miri Islands

Skaveria wrote:When confronted that his economic theory could provide massive growth in the short-term, but was unsustainable and would cause immeasurable long-term damage, Keynes replied by saying: "We'll all be long dead by then anyways." He's been dead for eighty years now...

That quote is championed by Keynes followers for some bizarre reason. Why is literal short-sightedness and short-term thinking smart economics?

Miencraft, Rateria, Miri Islands, Kongeriget Island

Trump's handling of the coronavirus could make or break his presidency. As we know through history, leaders are made or destroyed by how they respond to crises.

Rateria, Miri Islands

Pevvania wrote:

Obviously the best thing "economically" would be to just let the recession happen if it's going to happen, but this is an election year so the administration probably doesn't have the luxury of thinking that far into the long term.

It's crap like this that make me see democracy as a mistake

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria

Miri Islands wrote:It's crap like this that make me see democracy as a mistake

Yeah, that's the huge disadvantage of the system. As the ex-CIA guy that goes on Joe Rogan a lot says, Americans think in 4-year terms, the Chinese think in 30-year terms. Despite the obvious immoralities and flaws in their system, China has been able to develop rapidly due to the ruthless efficiency of their governing system. An infrastructure project can get approved by the stroke of a pen and built immediately; in the US a one-year timeline would be hilariously optimistic.

Narland, Rateria, Miri Islands, Kongeriget Island, Aglonia

What's up with all the economic illiterates condemning or trying to stop "price gouging" right now? Lol companies aren't raising the price of hand sanitizer to exploit people, they're doing it because there's been an enormous increase in demand. If there is no price signal there will be no corresponding increase in production. The angels at eBay have banned the sale of all hand sanitizers and face masks to avoid the appearance of price gouging. Thank goodness!

Miencraft, Narland, Kongeriget Island

Here's an idea: let's set the price artificially low for these goods, watch them fly off shelves at the hands of hoarders and let everyone else fend for themselves.

Narland, Kongeriget Island

Pevvania wrote:What's up with all the economic illiterates condemning or trying to stop "price gouging" right now? Lol companies aren't raising the price of hand sanitizer to exploit people, they're doing it because there's been an enormous increase in demand. If there is no price signal there will be no corresponding increase in production. The angels at eBay have banned the sale of all hand sanitizers and face masks to avoid the appearance of price gouging. Thank goodness!

Reeeee! Stop price gouging!!!

Why is all the toilet paper gone!!!

Pevvania, Narland

Pevvania wrote:Trump's handling of the coronavirus could make or break his presidency. As we know through history, leaders are made or destroyed by how they respond to crises.

It does not matter what Trump does or does not do regarding the Virus. Even if he miraculously whipped up a vaccine in a secret White House basement laboratory, they would complain that he should have done it sooner. The dominant News Media will do anything to destroy this president including siding with China over the People of the US.

I think the news media is trying to make this a crisis.

Pevvania wrote:That quote is championed by Keynes followers for some bizarre reason. Why is literal short-sightedness and short-term thinking smart economics?

Delayed gratification is not an option. It is more like, "My precious.... Those tricksy Hayekses try to steal my precious."

Miri Islands wrote:It's crap like this that make me see democracy as a mistake

Democracy is a mistake. Aristotle lumped it together with the other mistakes of Tyranny, and Oligarchy. Polity (responsible self-government via Civic Virtue) is the antithesis of Democracy and is beneficently expressed in in a republican (little r) framework to the ends of limited (external) government and the recognition of individual rights. Democracy happens when there is no civic virtue (or civic virtue is greatly curtailed to impotence). Democracy is inherently flawed, sowing the seeds for its own destruction.

Rateria, Miri Islands

Pevvania wrote:Yeah, that's the huge disadvantage of the system. As the ex-CIA guy that goes on Joe Rogan a lot says, Americans think in 4-year terms, the Chinese think in 30-year terms. Despite the obvious immoralities and flaws in their system, China has been able to develop rapidly due to the ruthless efficiency of their governing system. An infrastructure project can get approved by the stroke of a pen and built immediately; in the US a one-year timeline would be hilariously optimistic.

And to think that to our founders any temporality was short sighted. They would be shocked that some of us cannot think past the next commercial break on the video screen. They spoke of eternal truths, eternal principles, and eternal goals with a government built to withstand the test of time. To use snowflakese, were Madison and Jefferson alive today "it would hurt their feelings."

Rateria

Pevvania wrote:What's up with all the economic illiterates condemning or trying to stop "price gouging" right now? Lol companies aren't raising the price of hand sanitizer to exploit people, they're doing it because there's been an enormous increase in demand. If there is no price signal there will be no corresponding increase in production. The angels at eBay have banned the sale of all hand sanitizers and face masks to avoid the appearance of price gouging. Thank goodness!

Pevvania wrote:Here's an idea: let's set the price artificially low for these goods, watch them fly off shelves at the hands of hoarders and let everyone else fend for themselves.

I think it is about control. Play both ends against the middle and step in with a "Mommy-knows-best" Statism as the solution. Of course nobody is smart enough or quick enough to calculate all of the volitional transactions and the value placed by each of the individuals of those transactions when they occur. It is either rank hubris of someone who needs committed, or rank incompetence of someone subject to the Dunning-Kruger affect who should play with sharp pointy objects like pencils and calculators. Either way neither should make public policy.

Pevvania

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Narland wrote:Equality is the supreme virtue for determining the righteousness of the justice met on rich and poor, bond and free, male and female, us and them, citizen and noncitizen alike. Any ideology that cannot objectively reconcile Liberty and Equality as a two sides of the same political coin is a failed ideology. The People will find themselves either equally enslaved or all too freely abused.

Freedom at the expense of equality destroys justice. Equality at the expense of liberty destroys freedom. The first casualty of the former is generally peace and the first casualty of the latter is usually truth.

Security is the antithesis of Liberty. The ends of the State must be one or the other. Otherwise it defeats itself. Liberty is the safest thing a people can practice for their own security. Anything that deprives Liberty for security thus increases the danger of the State becoming the threat they ostensibly claim they are "protecting" the People from.

Update: A better way to express this is: People must fully both be equally free and freely equal, in order to enjoy the fruits of both peace and justice at the same time and in the same place. To separate one is to destroy the other at the expense of domestic tranquility (societal stability), viz., peace, and justice.

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Skaveria wrote:When confronted that his economic theory could provide massive growth in the short-term, but was unsustainable and would cause immeasurable long-term damage, Keynes replied by saying: "We'll all be long dead by then anyways." He's been dead for eighty years now...

I thought that the context of this quote was someone saying to Keynes that markets can correct themselves over the long run. I suppose Keynes wanted to correct markers sooner.

Just thinking back on how I couldn't wait to expend a whole roll of TP just to give my gerbil a fun new toy.

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria

Rateria wrote:I thought that the context of this quote was someone saying to Keynes that markets can correct themselves over the long run. I suppose Keynes wanted to correct markers sooner.

The problem is that when you "fix" a market, to avoid a recession, you inevitably make the next recession much worse. You may buy your way out of trouble for a time, but eventually the chickens come home to roost.

Narland, Rateria

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:Isn't this a good thing?
It depends of whether or not the chickens are contagious.

Skaveria wrote:The problem is that when you "fix" a market, to avoid a recession, you inevitably make the next recession much worse. You may buy your way out of trouble for a time, but eventually the chickens come home to roost.
I dislike Keynes greatly. Artificially interfering in the market at the expense of other people's principal and interest is fraud and eventually hurts everybody. Artificially interfering in the market by force of law to the benefit of some over others is patently unjust, also sending wrong signals to everybody's harm. In market flow it turns the finances into a hustle akin to N Card Monte with the Fed Banksters holding all the cards. It is the banking form of command economy wage and price controls (and we know how well that turned out under LBJ, Nixon and Carter). Under Keynes the government becomes the Lord Fiduciary to whom we must all pay scuttage to pursue our happiness.

Was the first man who put a fence around the land he worked and said: "This is mine." a theif?

Without the Government who would shoot you in the middle of your sleep in order to take your guns?

Miencraft, Narland, Rateria

The United States Of Patriots wrote:Without the Government who would shoot you in the middle of your sleep in order to take your guns?

My homie Tyrone

Skaveria wrote:Was the first man who put a fence around the land he worked and said: "This is mine." a theif?

Nope, he was an inventor.

Narland

Skaveria wrote:Was the first man who put a fence around the land he worked and said: "This is mine." a theif?

Not according to Locke, Nozicke and Rothbard. If you mix your labor with the soil, it's yours.

Narland, Auxorii, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots, Miri Islands

Pevvania wrote:If you mix your labor with the soil, it's yours.

I like this.

What if I mix my sh!t in the soil?

Pevvania wrote:Not according to Locke, Nozicke and Rothbard. If you mix your labor with the soil, it's yours.

Would you then advocate for the workers owning their means of production?

Rateria

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Skaveria wrote:Was the first man who put a fence around the land he worked and said: "This is mine." a theif?

Only if the fence blocked a previous right of way or was the patent claim to someone else. If he was the first, then he has lawful primacy to work the land in most systems of jurisprudence including fencing it. Should he abandon his labors and the land lay fallow "dead hand" clauses kick in (that vary widely and dramatically) which allowed the land to revert to it previous state. In Anglo-American law this could be as short as a Sheriff's eviction order in Montana, and as long as 400 years such as with unclaimed property in Maryland (iirc Maryland changed this in the 1980s).

If he truly was the first (Robinson Crusoe, a couple stranded in an uninhabited land beyond a dimensional rift), They by definition are the possessor of the hold. As long as they keep it, they then becomes its sovereign and his decedents heir to the land fences and all. Some legal fiction will develop akin to title and deed and be passed on.

People always precede the governance (and thus have primacy over the governments they create). In either case the person who cries thief has no claim.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:What if I mix my sh!t in the soil?

It makes you a farmer.

Rateria

Auxorii wrote:Would you then advocate for the workers owning their means of production?

***Narland in his best radio announcer voice****

"And here comes Marx deep out of left field trying to catch the line drive..." :)

Pevvania, The United States Of Patriots, Miri Islands

Pevvania wrote:Not according to Locke, Nozicke and Rothbard. If you mix your labor with the soil, it's yours.

At what point do property rights kick in? Certainly you'd agree that if I owned an abandoned lot, and used it for nothing, the lot would never revert back to being unowned?

Say the land in question was being used by hunter-gatherers, and an agricultural society moved in and farmed it? Would this line of reasoning not be similar to the colonial idea of the taking of territory from more savage peoples is justified because they aren't adequately harnessing the resources, so we have the right to teach them how to alter nature via force?

I agree with you, don't get me wrong, but I'm playing devil's advocate. In a state of nature, limiting access to a particular area seems like an initiation of force. After all, what's implied is that force will be used to remove you from that area.

It seems to me that labor is an arbitrary justification for it. What inherently about me working land would justify restricting someone else from doing so?

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Post self-deleted by Narland.

Skaveria wrote:At what point do property rights kick in? Certainly you'd agree that if I owned an abandoned lot, and used it for nothing, the lot would never revert back to being unowned?

Say the land in question was being used by hunter-gatherers, and an agricultural society moved in and farmed it? Would this line of reasoning not be similar to the colonial idea of the taking of territory from more savage peoples is justified because they aren't adequately harnessing the resources, so we have the right to teach them how to alter nature via force?

I agree with you, don't get me wrong, but I'm playing devil's advocate. In a state of nature, limiting access to a particular area seems like an initiation of force. After all, what's implied is that force will be used to remove you from that area.

It seems to me that labor is an arbitrary justification for it. What inherently about me working land would justify restricting someone else from doing so?

Well my knowledge on the subject mostly comes from The Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard, and much of the property rights theory he describes is an updated version of locke's original ideas. I believe the concept is that nobody inherently 'owns' land in the state of nature if it's unclaimed by any individual (individual being a sentient, self-owning, rational actor), so basically it's a case of finders, keepers. Yes, this theory would mean that colonial dispossesions of native land are indeed aggressions. But it's also worth noting that the natives did not use all of the land they claimed ownership over. In terms of the finer points of land ownership in relation to 'proper use', I can't answer that question.

Of course, we do not live in a state of nature, and countless exchanges, seizures and destructions of property have occurred since the beginning of human history, some just but many not. Libertarian theory elucidated by Rothbard says that any land claimed or owned unjustly (i.e. as a result of theft, fraud or violence) should be returned to its owners, and if they're not living, returned to their closest living relative. This theory, I suppose, would justify reparations of a certain nature. Nozick deals with this in Anarchy, State, and Utopia with 'entitlement theory', which is essentially the same: all property must be owned, acquired and transferred voluntarily and non-coercively, otherwise it must be redistributed to its rightful owners.

So as to your specific question about unused land, I don't know to be honest. That's a great question though, and I doubt Rothbard would have a satisfying answer, mostly due to how rigidly ideological he was. Worth looking into though.

Rateria, Skaveria

Auxorii wrote:Would you then advocate for the workers owning their means of production?

Yes, I would. The workers should be free to work and contract themselves however they wish, and keep the full fruits of their work.

If we concede that income inequality in the US is a problem (which I don't, but let's do so for the sake of argument), an amazing way to make working people the owners of capital would be to privatize state assets and sell shares to the people. Thatcher did that in England in the 80s, and as a result the share ownership rate went up from 3% to 25%. Working people voted en masse for Thatcher because she made them owners.

Skaveria

Pevvania wrote:Yes, I would. The workers should be free to work and contract themselves however they wish, and keep the full fruits of their work.

If we concede that income inequality in the US is a problem (which I don't, but let's do so for the sake of argument), an amazing way to make working people the owners of capital would be to privatize state assets and sell shares to the people. Thatcher did that in England in the 80s, and as a result the share ownership rate went up from 3% to 25%. Working people voted en masse for Thatcher because she made them owners.

Elaborate more on this; could you give a few examples of state assets that should be privatized and how that helps the workers (especially the now massive removal of safety benefits those public employees had) and the process of the state then ‘selling shares to people’?

The overreaction to coronavirus is worse than the virus itself

Miencraft, Miri Islands

Suzi Island wrote:The overreaction to coronavirus is worse than the virus itself

Yeah, I love how every body makes these elaborate posts, and I’m just like, wow, I wish I was smart enough to write something like that

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:You don't have to be smart to write a lot of stuff. Fascists write long posts all the time.

The bar is low.

Ah i see

Auxorii wrote:Elaborate more on this; could you give a few examples of state assets that should be privatized and how that helps the workers (especially the now massive removal of safety benefits those public employees had) and the process of the state then ‘selling shares to people’?

So in the UK when Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979 the state controlled water, coal, petroleum, steel, rail and several other industries. All of these (except rail which was privatised under John Major) were given initial public offerings and widely advertised to the British public by the government, so everyone knew when they were going up for sale and when and how to buy shares, and millions did so.

Also key to privatisation was 'right to buy'. In the UK, government housing is called council housing, which is usually paid for by local authorities. Across the country, tenants in these houses were given the option to buy them from the government at a reduced price (since most of them were low income anyway), which increased home ownership rates significantly.

Narland, Kongeriget Island

Lolanson wrote:Yeah, I love how every body makes these elaborate posts, and I’m just like, wow, I wish I was smart enough to write something like that

Just start typing to get your thoughts out there. You can use a place like Libertatem as a sounding board. You will get plenty of feedback.

Then you can use it to gather your thoughts, and build on them. You will get attacked by some but there will be others that will help you sharpen your thoughts. That is what I do.

Miri Islands

***anecdote alert***

I had a series of TBIs that knocked my thinking back to grade school, my emotions back to maybe a 14 year old petulant child, and lapses of memory where entire chunks of my life and life experiences just disappeared down a deep dark hole (and haven't returned).

Fortunately, my physical debilitation was 80% fixable, but my brain was toast. Good friends, faithful churchmen, the right kind of books, and pre-Obamacare pro-bono medical researchers helped put me back together. Sadly, my family put me in a box and were my worst frenemies. I am by no means as smart as I used to be, but what was important was using what smarts remained to the best effect.

Typing things out for others to see, and getting feedback (from the rooms, from friends, and world class theologian/philosopher who took me under his wing for a short time) -- people who had their thinking caps on straight was a big help.

***End Anecdote Alert***

also:

It isn't how smart you are (IQ) but how well you use what smarts you have (Wisdom). It is better to be wise (regardless of intelligence or lack thereof) than to be too smart and so morally stupid (lack of wisdom) that one cannot see the unforeseen/unintended consequences that harm everyone else. Power structures are filled with people that are too smart by 1/2, and but are not wise enough to understand. A wise society that lacks intelligence is more just, free and happy than a society of fools who overthink and over complicate things to their own ruin.

I type a profusely but always wish I was more succinct. :(

Rateria, Kongeriget Island

One of my favourite quotes from Jefferson is where he apologized (I think it was in a letter to Adams) that the letter was so long -- because he didn't have the time to write a shorter letter. :) I can relate. I type out a bunch of stuff and then redact it to make it more concise.

Rateria

Narland wrote:It isn't how smart you are (IQ) (

The only people I've ever seen care about IQ are weird racists. I dont think IQ means much

"EQ" is all the rage these days anyway.

Narland, Kongeriget Island

Jadentopian Order wrote:The only people I've ever seen care about IQ are weird racists. I dont think IQ means much

Most of administrative academia is obsessed with it, especially bioethics.

Sucess is less about base inteligence and more about emotional/social intellegiance.

Jadentopian Order

IQ is a real thing. It measures you're processing power and ability to learn new information quickly. That's your fluid intelligence. You're crystallized intelligence is the actual sum total if everything you know. So if your fluid intelligence is higher, you're crystallized intelligence will increase faster your whole life, thus making you "smarter" than others.

Emotional/social intelligence doesn't exist. That'd be trait agreeableness. One of the big five personality traits. Agreeable people can empathize very well, don't like conflict, and are good at soothing people emotionally.

Narland, Kongeriget Island, Wyattish

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:I don't consider knowledge to have anything to do with intelligence. One can be a genius and not know anything yet, and that doesn't mean that someone more knowledgeable is actually smart.

Ah, that'd be the difference between fluid and crystallized IQ that I mentioned.

Fluid IQ is basically you're processing capacity. You're ability to absorb new information, categorize it to make the information useful, and the speed in which you can do that.

Once the information is processed, that's when it gets added to your crystallized IQ.

Imagine someone with a really high fluid IQ. It means they process information insanely fast. It means they can master new concepts and such quickly. In doing so, they can move onto the next thing, while someone with a lower fluid IQ takes longer, and can therefore learn less things in the same amount of time.

This can obviously be negated though. If one person with a high IQ decides to not learn anything, while another with a low IQ does. The lower IQ person will have more knowledge, but if they're both enrolled in the same courses, and have a similar thirst for knowledge, the high IQ individual will master concepts and move onto the next much quicker. If that trend continues, the higher IQ person with inevitably end up havimg perpetually more knowledge than the other person.

Narland, Venomringo, Jadentopian Order, Kongeriget Island

Skaveria wrote:Ah, that'd be the difference between fluid and crystallized IQ that I mentioned.

Fluid IQ is basically you're processing capacity. You're ability to absorb new information, categorize it to make the information useful, and the speed in which you can do that.

Once the information is processed, that's when it gets added to your crystallized IQ.

Imagine someone with a really high fluid IQ. It means they process information insanely fast. It means they can master new concepts and such quickly. In doing so, they can move onto the next thing, while someone with a lower fluid IQ takes longer, and can therefore learn less things in the same amount of time.

This can obviously be negated though. If one person with a high IQ decides to not learn anything, while another with a low IQ does. The lower IQ person will have more knowledge, but if they're both enrolled in the same courses, and have a similar thirst for knowledge, the high IQ individual will master concepts and move onto the next much quicker. If that trend continues, the higher IQ person with inevitably end up havimg perpetually more knowledge than the other person.

Yeah Wil is just trying to sound smart by disagreeing with you....

Narland, Auxorii

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:I don't consider knowledge to have anything to do with intelligence. One can be a genius and not know anything yet, and that doesn't mean that someone more knowledgeable is actually smart.

In automotive terms:

IQ is more like how large the gas tank is. Intelligence is how full the gas tank, and wisdom is how clean the fuel.

The carburetion type and setting can be likened to one's planning;

engine capacity to one's grit, determination, and perseverance; and

the tires are how well you have a grip on things;

the direction you go in life is determined by what road you go down, and

how well you negotiate that road is primarily the nut behind the wheel.

Rateria

If you are from a free country country promoting rugged individualism (Red State), you are probably built more like an Humvee, 4X jeep Wagoneer or Travell-all, which is great for going where you want (usually the homestead), but not so good on the state controlled and highway. Blue State probably built like a Volt or Prius, great for the government regulated roads and signs but horrible if you want to strike out in your own direction.

But if you are in a Communist country your are probably built more like a Trabant or Yugo (unless you are party then more like a Zil 4100).

I boasted once to my uncle that I had been driving a car for 4 years and never had a wreck.

He said, that ain't nothing. He'd been driving a wreck for 40 years and never had a car.

***tom-kick-crash***

I think Trump is getting infected with Potamica Swampitis.

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Narland wrote:I boasted once to my uncle that I had been driving a car for 4 years and never had a wreck.

He said, that ain't nothing. He'd been driving a wreck for 40 years and never had a car.

***tom-kick-crash***

Noice

Remember that in times of emergency is when the government expands the most. Emergencies have always been the excuse to turn freed men into slaves.

Miencraft, Narland, Rateria, Miri Islands

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Highway Eighty-Eight wrote:Free men*

I was never a slave.

Everyone is freed (free men in a free society) from their own ignorance and immaturity (indolence) by the time they reach adulthood (if they are to be free), and in their maturity continually free themselves from their tumultuous passions in reconciling mercy and truth with righteousness/justice and peace. If it was something simple, the early modern Humanists would have the other Latin word for freedom (I forget it at the moment) instead of Liberty/Libertatem (which assumes that man has to rise to the status -- it just doesn't happen).

US Citizens: Please, please, please, call your Congressmen and Senators, and the White House and insist that they do not spend us into serfdom.

No nation has ever spent itself into prosperity. We just need the state to get out of our economic way. We can recover best when the government stops sending mixed signals into the economy.

We don't even print our own currency. Congress borrows money at interest from the Federal Reserve Bank, (a private Banking Concern) who then sells our borrowed assets to foreign nations as instruments of debt and "lets" us circulate the certificates of indebtedness as US$s. (In other words cash in US doesn't act as hard assets (gold, silver, real estate, etc; but it affects the economy like increasingly passing around never balancing (accounting-wise) IOUs.

It will guarantee inflation, with the wealthy getting the increased surplus first and the poor and the working poor forever playing catch-up.

Stimulus packages are usually Keynesspeak for debasing the currency. This is a recipe to return back to the 1970s -- 27% inflation, 21% percent prime lending rates, corrupt union bosses empowered to demand minimum wage increases that do not cover for the progressive loss of the laborer who then in turn demand that Congress stimulate (debase) the economy to death to appear as if they really care about the laborers they are drowning in debt (innefficacious productivity).

We do not need cash, we need banking reform, and a full audit of the Federal Reserve Bank; we need honest money, and sound currency, not stimulus packages (more destructive government intervention).

If you enjoyed the economic destruction and societal malaise of the 1960s and 70s (LBJ, Nixon/Ford, & Carter), and the Me-Generation of the freaking "experts" in academia, in the media, and bureaucracy soothingly telling us how to destroy ourselves, liked a drug dealer who is done with you and just wants you to OD on your own indulgence -- then do nothing.

Please contact them. Be civil.

https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

Miencraft, The United States Of Patriots, Miri Islands

also, contact Reason.org, Cato, Mises, Heritage and other DC thinkdanks; Fox, CNBC, CNN (as if they newsmongers would even listen) and have them howl from the rooftops that Stimulus (debasing) and cash for lack of productivity (rewarding not working) are BAD ideas. It will have the same affect on the economy as allowing people to print $1000 cash on their home printers. This is very bad, -- Venesuela and Zimbabwe bad.

If the government does want to interfere in the obligation of contract it should do so by issuing a temporary banking moratorium on foreclosure of struggling business and workers due to SARS-CoV-1/Covid-19.

Debasement and Free Cash are the "you can't fix stupid" type bad.

Miri Islands

Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.

Just throwing this out there, I don't have strong views on this either way and can be convinced: but aren't the coronavirus stimulus packages necessary for this crisis? Of course, ordinarily I oppose Keynesian economic "solutions" and believe governments botched the response after 2008. But what we're facing isn't the result of government intervention (at least not ours), price bubbles or bad market behavior, it's due to a global pandemic that threatens the livlihoods of billions of people. Surely it makes sense to give relief to the people who will be out of work or struggling to pay off their loans?

If not, what's the right solution?

(All that being said though, of course I realise how dangerous it is to a) blow up our debt at a time when it's already so high and b) increase spending without making cuts elsewhere. But my specific question is whether this can be considered a different crisis, as its origins are biological rather than economic?)

Jadentopian Order, Kongeriget Island

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