It's called charity work in your own neighbor hood. The government is incapable of judging who is worthy of your dollars that you justly earned because all they see is votes. But you will teach a man to fish instead of giving him a minnow for a vote a million times over.
Taking from the last part in this chapter of Hazlit's book:
It is sometimes said that the Germans or the Japanese had a postwar advantage over the Americans because their old plants, having been destroyed completely by bombs during the war, they could replace them with the most modern plants and equipment and thus produce more efficiently and at lower costs than the Americans with their older and half-obsolete plants and equipment. But if this were really a clear net advantage, Americans could easily offset it by immediately wrecking their old plants, junking all the old equipment. In fact, all manufacturers in all countries could scrap all their old plants and equipment every year and erect new plants and install new equipment.
The simple truth is that there is an optimum rate of replacement, a best time for replacement. It would be an advantage for a manufacturer to have his factory and equipment destroyed by bombs only if the time had arrived when, through deterioration and obsolescence, his plant and equipment had already acquired a null or a negative value and the bombs fell just when he should have called in a wrecking crew or ordered new equipment anyway.
It is true that previous depreciation and obsolescence, if not adequately reflected in his books, may make the destruction of his property less of a disaster, on net balance, than it seems. It is also true that the existence of new plants and equipment speeds up the obsolescence of older plants and equipment. If the owners of the older plant and equipment try to keep using it longer than the period for which it would maximize their profit, then the manufacturers whose plants and equipment were destroyed (if we assume that they had both the will and capital to replace them with new plants and equipment) will reap a comparative advantage or, to speak more accurately, will reduce their comparative loss.
We are brought, in brief, to the conclusion that it is never an advantage to have oneâ(TM)s plants destroyed by shells or bombs unless those plants have already become valueless or acquired a negative value by depreciation and obsolescence.
In all this discussion, moreover, we have so far omitted a central consideration. Plants and equipment cannot be replaced by an individual (or a socialist government) unless he or it has acquired or can acquire the savings, the capital accumulation, to make the replacement. But war destroys accumulated capital.
There may be, it is true, offsetting factors. Technological discoveries and advances during a war may, for example, increase individual or national productivity at this point or that, and there may eventually be a net increase in overall productivity. Postwar demand will never reproduce the precise pattern of prewar demand. But such complications should not divert us from recognizing the basic truth that the wanton destruction of anything of real value is always a net loss, a misfortune, or a disaster, and whatever the offsetting considerations in a particular instance, can never be, on net balance, a boon or a blessing.
So my argument is this, if these cars were soo obsolete that the owners were already going to replace them, why is the stimulus needed? Or if the owners have decided that the cost of a new car compared to the energy saved by the new car was not a sufficient reason to purchase at this time, why should the government redirect resources that provably better spent elsewhere? Or we can assume you think everyone is stupid and disregards logic therefore the government should run their lives...
What would be wrong with the prospecting model that was used during all the gold rush years?
After that fizzles we can move to the homesteading rush.
If you think about it, it's probably the fastest way to colonize space, because I don't see the super powers doing much more than having a global pissing match over what is already here....
I don't see (aside from advertising and bribing doctors and hospitals) why acetomenaphine needs to be on the market at all, as there are a plethora of newer, more effective, and safer analgesics these days.
I'm guessing since it is an older drug, it's easier to produce.
States can and do leverage taxes for building roads, it need not be a Federal Tax.
The other thing I find odd is that most people on the left scoff at the idea of privately owned toll roads and say that the government should just take care of it. Well... How is this different from toll roads?
I consider President Obama a failure because he still thinks he can fix the largest and most complicated economy.
A) That's not his job. B) If he wanted to help fix the economy he should bring troops home to reduce spending. C) The people who are going to fix the economy are people like you and I. D) Legalizing marijuana would also help reduce spending.
I think given the expanded resources of Mars, it would be easier to make self-sustainable compared to the moon. And there is next to no chance of terraforming the moon. I think Mars has a small chance doesn't it?
The question still remains, will this new breed burp less, and yield less beef as well? Necessitating more cattle for the same amount of beef? You don't get something for nothing...
Wrong. I recognize every single person who produces something for me when I trade the value I create for the value they create. I'm against forceful distribution of that value. I recognize the fact that I would have a lower standard of living if it weren't for this trading of value for value. And I recognize the fact that if I stole value from people who produced it, they will eventually stop producing it. This is why I tip the people who make my coffee nearly as much as the menu price. They make good coffee and they deserve a good tip for being able to wake up earlier than I and have the cognitive skills to make good coffee. This is why I pay more for Shadegrown Coffee. I've tried Shadegrown and Folgers, and Shadegrown tastes better. But I will not tolerate anyone dictating to Folgers or the Free Coffee Farmers the price of their effort, besides me and every other free individual dictating with the value they have created. Government creates no value, it only takes from individuals. This is no belly of the beast, this is me buying products I desire/need as I see fit, without anyone else dictating to me. Sure there is organization to what I have just described. It's called Capitalism. If it were Socialism, value would be taken from me, through threat of life and liberty, and redistributed by someone else's values, e.g. not my values. It would likely be decided that Mr. Welling J does not need coffee to function. The farmers would be out of a job, a job that some of them may enjoy more than any other job they have ever known. And I would be out of delicious caffeinated beverage. Which means I would enjoy my job less, as likely would many other people in my profession. You make the right argument that things are interconnected in a very complex way, but then you would want to simplify and codify all these connections with individualism stifling socialism. Why? Am I such a bad person in your eyes as you would want to limit the power I have over my own life? Do you disagree with me because I don't want my life to be arbitrarily controlled by government or some other coercive collective?
That's what i am working towards, and that's why i'm a member of a revolutionary socialist organisation. What are you working towards?
I'm working towards my own future, where no one forces me to join their revolutionary socialist organisation or uses said organisation for coercion.
I just want to know two things. How old are you? What state do you live in? If it's the same state as mine, I'm out of here as soon as you are of voting age.
Slashdot Mirror
It's called charity work in your own neighbor hood. The government is incapable of judging who is worthy of your dollars that you justly earned because all they see is votes. But you will teach a man to fish instead of giving him a minnow for a vote a million times over.
Ah, so you do think every one is stupid and disregards logic... So that leads us to... more government?
Taking from the last part in this chapter of Hazlit's book:
So my argument is this, if these cars were soo obsolete that the owners were already going to replace them, why is the stimulus needed? Or if the owners have decided that the cost of a new car compared to the energy saved by the new car was not a sufficient reason to purchase at this time, why should the government redirect resources that provably better spent elsewhere? Or we can assume you think everyone is stupid and disregards logic therefore the government should run their lives...
What would be wrong with the prospecting model that was used during all the gold rush years?
After that fizzles we can move to the homesteading rush.
If you think about it, it's probably the fastest way to colonize space, because I don't see the super powers doing much more than having a global pissing match over what is already here....
Makes me wonder how bad it is when you do try.
I don't see (aside from advertising and bribing doctors and hospitals) why acetomenaphine needs to be on the market at all, as there are a plethora of newer, more effective, and safer analgesics these days.
I'm guessing since it is an older drug, it's easier to produce.
If you want to kill yourself, I'd suggest a nice clean OD on smack.
I want comfirmation by some one with experience before I'd believe you.
I suggest two books you may enjoy:
Arrowsmith by Sinclair Lewis Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
That's an interesting premise. But I have a question: If we were to succeed like ants, why did we as humans leave monarchies behind?
Access to the hardware is the death to any "secure" system.
Since when has the law limited the US government?
False dichotomy.
States can and do leverage taxes for building roads, it need not be a Federal Tax.
The other thing I find odd is that most people on the left scoff at the idea of privately owned toll roads and say that the government should just take care of it. Well... How is this different from toll roads?
What kind of crazy are you thinking!?
You have to use real math after it becomes law! Not before!
The nerve of some people.
I wonder how many cars will end up in Boston harbor?
I consider President Obama a failure because he still thinks he can fix the largest and most complicated economy.
A) That's not his job.
B) If he wanted to help fix the economy he should bring troops home to reduce spending.
C) The people who are going to fix the economy are people like you and I.
D) Legalizing marijuana would also help reduce spending.
But what about the human aspect? I kid, I kid...
I think given the expanded resources of Mars, it would be easier to make self-sustainable compared to the moon.
And there is next to no chance of terraforming the moon. I think Mars has a small chance doesn't it?
You ever read Battle Angle Alita?
Agreed. They even left it hanging after the movie.
If ever there was a time that show's message was needed, it's now.
Que 70's chika-bow-wow
The question still remains, will this new breed burp less, and yield less beef as well? Necessitating more cattle for the same amount of beef? You don't get something for nothing...
Wrong. I recognize every single person who produces something for me when I trade the value I create for the value they create. I'm against forceful distribution of that value. I recognize the fact that I would have a lower standard of living if it weren't for this trading of value for value. And I recognize the fact that if I stole value from people who produced it, they will eventually stop producing it. This is why I tip the people who make my coffee nearly as much as the menu price. They make good coffee and they deserve a good tip for being able to wake up earlier than I and have the cognitive skills to make good coffee. This is why I pay more for Shadegrown Coffee. I've tried Shadegrown and Folgers, and Shadegrown tastes better. But I will not tolerate anyone dictating to Folgers or the Free Coffee Farmers the price of their effort, besides me and every other free individual dictating with the value they have created. Government creates no value, it only takes from individuals. This is no belly of the beast, this is me buying products I desire/need as I see fit, without anyone else dictating to me. Sure there is organization to what I have just described. It's called Capitalism. If it were Socialism, value would be taken from me, through threat of life and liberty, and redistributed by someone else's values, e.g. not my values. It would likely be decided that Mr. Welling J does not need coffee to function. The farmers would be out of a job, a job that some of them may enjoy more than any other job they have ever known. And I would be out of delicious caffeinated beverage. Which means I would enjoy my job less, as likely would many other people in my profession. You make the right argument that things are interconnected in a very complex way, but then you would want to simplify and codify all these connections with individualism stifling socialism. Why? Am I such a bad person in your eyes as you would want to limit the power I have over my own life? Do you disagree with me because I don't want my life to be arbitrarily controlled by government or some other coercive collective?
+5 it would be funny if it weren't so true....
Pax and other conventions might not be a bad move either.
That's what i am working towards, and that's why i'm a member of a revolutionary socialist organisation. What are you working towards?
I'm working towards my own future, where no one forces me to join their revolutionary socialist organisation or uses said organisation for coercion.
I just want to know two things. How old are you? What state do you live in? If it's the same state as mine, I'm out of here as soon as you are of voting age.