private dollars are no more valuable than public dollars, the only difference is how efficiently they are spent.
Wrong. Private dollars are indeed worth more - because there's more of them. Which proves in itself that free markets are good, and state monopoly's are bad.
So when a band of Hell's Angels have beaten you up and are busy gang raping your 12 yr old daughter
I was referring to theft, both physical and virtual, not crimes against the person. But nice strawman, anyways. In your rediculous example, the rule of law is the problem. Rule of law[yers] (i.e. gun control) is what prevented me from having a gun to shoot them with. Rule of law[yers] (i.e. inflation & other taxes) makes me unable to afford a bodyguard because they've taken my money away to give to the workshy and feckless.
The rule of law is for people who want to live with other people.
The rule of law is taking away my liberty, but giving weak people like you the liberty to tell me what to do.
a HUGE factor lacking in Siberia: Rule of Law. Russia does not observe copyright or patent law.
Good for them! This will allow market forces to make their economy more efficient. I guess it's not obvious to most people here, so I'll explain how it works(1).
If a company is using more resources (labor, gold) than it produces it's not adding value to the economy. This is expressed as profit's or in this case, a loss. Faced with theft/piracy firms will adapt their business processes, i.e. keeping staff's children as hostage or hiring former Spetznas trouper's to kill anybody who pinches their wares. On the other hand, if the company pirating (as you'd say - I'd call it 'liberating') their stuff is able to afford better goons, or to bribe off the first companies' heavies, then it is by definition more efficient - if not it wouldn't have the money to do so.
In summary, rule of law is for wussies and communists.
(1) taken from one of my speeches on the subject that I give regularly around the world
It will not depreciate, because diamends have nearly as much intrinsic value (95.3%) as gold, which always goes up. It's a good investment, I might buy a second one for my other trailer.
If the market price for dead babies is greater than the cost of live babies plus the labor involved in killing them, then killing babies is a perfectly rational decision and no true supporter libertarian would infringe an individual's right to pursue happiness by the method of infanticide.
Actually, gas was MORE EXPENSIVE at $0.80 per gallon in the 1970s than it is at $3.25 per gallon today. There's this thing called "inflation", which along with its close cousin "deflation" cause the value of money to rise and fall.
$0.80 and $3.25 are meaningless numbers manipulated by the whims of government and the schemes of moneylenders. What are they in terms of gold?
Ah, so do you believe that a company should be allowed to print whatever it wants on, say, the label of a bottle of "medicine" that actually does nothing, or even worsens some conditions?
Yes. In a free market, such a company will eventually go out of business because they're customers all die, allowing it's resources to be utlised by a more efficient firm.
While some people propose laws about product safety and efficacy of medicines (which may enable the company to be sued) these are really a distortion of the free market. The consumer should have the right to consume poison if he wants.
If he really wants to know what he's taking, then he can qualify in biochemistry and start his own lab (I have helped people to do this in several countries). If he doesn't do this then rational economic theory implies he was happy to drink a mixture of cyanide, strychnine and food coloring.
Slashdot Mirror
Cammas have, another use, to indicate, a pause. You are, William Shatner, AICMFP.
My point exactly...
Don't accept fiat currency. Only accept payment in gold.
No true libertarian could tolerate such an interventionist policy! Let the market (for ideas) decide what gets modded up or down.
... and it's all been downhill since then.
If a company is using more resources (labor, gold) than it produces it's not adding value to the economy. This is expressed as profit's or in this case, a loss. Faced with theft/piracy firms will adapt their business processes, i.e. keeping staff's children as hostage or hiring former Spetznas trouper's to kill anybody who pinches their wares. On the other hand, if the company pirating (as you'd say - I'd call it 'liberating') their stuff is able to afford better goons, or to bribe off the first companies' heavies, then it is by definition more efficient - if not it wouldn't have the money to do so.
In summary, rule of law is for wussies and communists.
(1) taken from one of my speeches on the subject that I give regularly around the world
Except those wouldn't necessarily correspond with the true colors you'd see under visible light.
It will not depreciate, because diamends have nearly as much intrinsic value (95.3%) as gold, which always goes up. It's a good investment, I might buy a second one for my other trailer.
No. Gold isn't cash. Unless you've found a way to print it.
Avoid the tax by buying with gold. It's exempt from tax due to the fact that it's a good with intrinsic value.
So does anyone with any economic smarts. Unlike paper currency it holds it's value - it's not as if you can dig it out of the ground.
Patents are an impediment (or as we world renowned and yet unheard-of experts say, friction) to an efficient free economy.
I'd like to replace banknotes and all forms of lancia currency with lovely shiny gold.
Gold, it has intrinsic value. That's what I tell everyone on my vastly popular speaking tours.
While some people propose laws about product safety and efficacy of medicines (which may enable the company to be sued) these are really a distortion of the free market. The consumer should have the right to consume poison if he wants.
If he really wants to know what he's taking, then he can qualify in biochemistry and start his own lab (I have helped people to do this in several countries). If he doesn't do this then rational economic theory implies he was happy to drink a mixture of cyanide, strychnine and food coloring.