You read whatever I wrote and decided to reply and again with the same nonsense?
There is a character in one of Bulgacov's books, the book's name is "Heart of a Dog", you are pretty much Sharikov, because that's his main thesis: "take away everything and divide it equally".
Do you know who suffers most in bloody revolutions, by the way? You think it's the (often former) elite? Hmmm.
No, I didn't say AMD is in SSD business. I am saying they will have to restructure, do something, concentrate on something and find what their core competency is or should be.
you have this odd, bizarre belief that natural market forces create wealth distribution is somehow fair
- of-course.
that's because I completely reject your version of 'fair' - take from somebody who has and give it to somebody who does not simply because one of them is suffering more. I denounce and reject this type of social entropy, it does not work and it is absolutely unfair, unproductive and dictatorial in nature. How can any amount of violence be fair?
You are defining something as FAIR and you are using VIOLENCE to define it. You want 'fair'? How about you examine your premises first and realise that what you want is violence against the individual, and individual is always above the collective, because there is no reason to have the collective, the entire human population can burn in acidic fiery hell if it defines use of violence as fairness.
and more bizarrely, you believe government, rather than the reality of a rotten institution that does the deeds of those with the money, is somehow an evil tool that steals from the middle class to do the bidding of poor people with low character who don't deserve anything
- ha ha ha, naive.
The government is always a force of evil, that uses the pretence of 'helping the poor', does it by stealing from those who actually work and rewards with it those who are parasitic enough, that they are part of the government trough system. The poor are used as coinage, pawns.
But it's funny, you think there is MORALITY in stealing from some to give to others to equalise their suffering. But how do you measure suffering? If some are fed and clothed because the government system is providing to them while stealing from those who actually work, and have to suffer in fact, through all the nonsense that the system sets in front of them, then even by your definition this cannot work. You can't measure suffering.
You take the edge cases and build your entire system on it. You take the top 0.001% who can STEAL money from people by using government force, then you take the bottom 20% or so who are in worst conditions out of the entire population, and then you say: because there are these people, at the bottom, somebody else must pay for them. But you think you are going to use government to take from the top 0.001%?
No. You are going to steal from the middle, from everybody who actually works and produces and suffers while working and producing. You won't TOUCH those who are on top, you can't, it is absolutely impossible.
You will never help those on the bottom by doing any of it, but you will worsen the situation for the middle, and it's the middle that makes the machine go, and then the machine breaks (one manifestation was the thirties, one was the seventies, one was the nineties and one started around 2008) and then what? You think you can tax your way out of the broken machine?
No, you can push and push all the people, until majority have nothing and some simply escape somewhere else (and that's principally what happened in 1917 to 1923 in Russia as well, and it's been happening for a few decades on a slower scale in US and Europe, because it wasn't an immediate bloody revolution, but it was a slower process of continuous deterioration.)
your understanding of the world and how power and money actually works is completely nonsensical
- oh well, if you established that much, you don't need to reply to me.
Concentration of wealth *diminishes* its utility, even your anarcho-capitalist textbooks should teach you that.
- pure nonsense. Utility of wealth held by owners of companies, how is the utility of wealth diminished if the company is owned by people and the overall wealth of company is growing because the market buys the products the company is producing?
So Apple shares are going up in value, that's some increase in wealth that investors see.
Apple products are bought all over the world - that's the wealth that the Apple customers are see.
Apple products are built by all these people that are hired - that's the wages, and thus improvement in workers' circumstance that these workers see.
Even the tax men see the benefits, as they get more and more taxes out of Apple, its workers and owners and customers (yes, there are various tariffs, import and sales taxes in the world).
The money that one wealthy owner of Apple stock is being recycled in the economy, allowing Apple and other businesses to grow beyond what existed previously, and as long as this money isn't taken out of the investment pool and is not spent by the wealthy owner of that stock, that's the money that grows the economy (and that's why taxing work is almost the worst thing that gov't can do beyond destroying money and starting wars).
There has to be some logical step between "equal distribution of wealth" and "dictatorship".
- there is no miracle, like in your cartoon. Unfortunately there is no miracle - as gov't force is used to steal from some and give to others, this is only used by gov't as a pretence, not to create 'equality of income' but to steal income to grow government power. And equality of income in itself is completely undesirable and counter-productive, because we try to work more and create things that don't exist so that we can become WEALTHIER than the others, otherwise there is no point in running businesses.
But as government steals more work (money) from those who earn it and gives some of it to those who want it (and thus vote for that government), the true consequence emerges - government grows much beyond what it otherwise would have been. That is the problem USA and Europe are facing today - the governments are much beyond what their respective societies can afford and they have destroyed the productivity of the nation by stealing from some who earn, to give to others who want.
As government is growing, so everything it does. Growth of government = growth of power and force that government uses and growth itself allows more force to be used, and this force is used to make government grow more.
All growth of government force leads to destruction of individual freedoms and the final eventual outcome is always dictatorial, and I can throw names around, like that of Plato, who understood even 2K years back something that is not obvious to you.
Libertarians seem to forget that there are all kinds of predators, only some of whom leverage government corruption. People suck, regardless of the political system they live under.
- it doesn't matter. Of-course some become rich simply because they robbed a bank for example, but that's not what is normally done, mostly people try to become rich through work - trying to run a business. Of-course if they have government force on their side they can simply create a regulation that forces people to "buy" their product - that's a tax, that's theft. An example would be this entire Obamacare with a mandate fiasco.
My thinking is not antiquated, your thinking is antiquated, it's all rotten to the core and it is what is destroying the economies of Europe and US right now, whether you understand it or not.
The only way to fix the problem of overall poverty is to allow markets to work it out, that's what Chinese are mostly doing - allowing capital to come in and create whatever it creates thus improving people's circumstance.
The people can either be left alone and let the market create all the things that they need and set all the prices, and market eventually finds the equilibrium, prices go down so that majority of people can afford everything they need and even most of what they want. Or you can try and enforce some weird notion of 'fairness' (which I completely disagree with you on, I don't believe for a second that robbing anybody to give anybody else anything is fair, so all the Robin Hood stories to me are completely anathema) and you can observe everybody being miserable and only people in government sitting sort of nice, warm and fed on top of that giant shit pyramid.
According to Douglas, the true purpose of production is consumption, and production must serve the genuine, freely expressed interests of consumers. Each citizen is to have a beneficial, not direct, inheritance in the communal capital conferred by complete and dynamic access to the fruits of industry assured by the National Dividend and Compensated Price.
- this is pretty sick stuff, truly remarkably ridiculously insane.
This destroys the very idea of private property and just like the ideas that created the place where I was born (USSR), it requires people to negate their most basic instincts of ownership of things that they create.
As to land owners, etc., if the land owner isn't efficient with his property, he'll be generating a loss, not a profit, and eventually either will sell the land himself to somebody (or to more than one person) who will find ways to generate profit there or there will eventually be a bankruptcy and the outcome will be arranged in a similar manner, just without too much participation from the original owner.
We can't have a society at all where everybody expects to be taken care of by some magic of 'past social credit', somebody has to do the actual work of creating the stuff, whatever it means, and it really means organising land labour and capital in the most efficient manner to give the market something that will be profitable enough to keep the lights on.
Product requirements are changing as new tech comes out and old companies disappear and new ones are created, and there is constant movement in wealth generation, but it's not static as you suggest. Companies are eaten up, broken up, restructured, reassembled all the time, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not happening.
And my last point - there is no reason for some people to work to give something to somebody for free at all.
We do not TRADE with people because it's fun, we trade with them because of comparative advantage. Thus if you make a good product, you find that somebody needs it, you are going to try and build as many of these as you can, and this overproduction allows you to consume things you did not create.
Building things just so that you can give them to somebody simply because they exist - it's vomit inducing.
- obviously? A software business, a real estate one going all the way back to 2000. A software company with a line of products today that is based in Cyprus and operates in Russia and Germany today and in fact looking at Asian market.
AFAIC the further away from USA the easier it is to start and operate s business, but especially dealing with finance and securities regulations.
There is nothing fair about majority vote using government violence as a proxy to steal money from individuals who are more successful than others.
Also there is nothing fair about some individuals gaming the system by buying access to politicians, who then steal and sell power of government violence.
Both of the above are wrong, that's why your argument is nonsense.
Under a system where government is actively prohibited from stealing from anybody to give to anybody else under any and all circumstances, the freedom of everybody who is not being stolen from is maximised, and the market increases the wealth of all people by allowing some to make it big by inventing and bringing to the market products that make ALL people wealthier.
That's why Steve Jobs and his wealth usually was not bemoaned by people - because everybody got WEALTHIER off Steve Jobs, who himself got extraordinary wealthy.
Of-course Marxists like you, are happy to use any amount of collective government violence to ensure that the wealth is "distributed equally", which means unproductively from people who CREATE wealth, to those who WANT it. Thus eventually you descend into totalitarianism and dictatorship, and you call THAT justice.
No. Justice is about freedom. The only justice is FREEDOM. It's freedom to do what you can as you can do it without hurting others (that's the only main condition), and in the process of helping yourself you help others not as an intention, but as a consequence of your actions.
Nobody can become rich and wealthy without either: 1. Theft based on power of government force. 2. Creation of wealth by selling products to people that they are voluntarily willing to buy and pay enough that there is a profit premium in it.
There is nothing just about "universal" healthcare or any other government forced "universal" thing, because it will create poverty and will bring about totalitarian regime and there is nothing just about such a regime, and I should know I was born in a system like that, and you'll find out, you apparently want to go there.
USA is very dangerous to start ANY business, not just a web business. With all of the taxes, regulations, inflation caused by counterfeiting operation at the Fed and the government banks. The confiscation of private property that was clearly displayed in GM and Chrysler case and just a couple of months ago with MF Global - where cooperation between financial institution (JP Morgan) and government agencies allowed for customer funds to be stolen, in fact gold bars with serial numbers assigned to specific holders of account at MF Global (which is basically an insurance company for farmers - future trading is used to insure against uncertainty of future crop prices) went "MISSING" and nobody is being held accountable for it and apparently everybody is aware that JP Morgan and the feds have agreed on something, which is pretty damning - the bankruptcy court was instructed to run the bankruptcy as if MF Global was an 'investment' company, which makes their counter-parties to be first in line to receive collateral, while actually MF Global wasn't an investment company, it was an insurance company, and under those conditions it would have been the CLIENTS who would be first in line to get their money out.
But this is just an example why it is dangerous to deal in USA now, other things are of-course all of the regulations, all of the executive branch departments acting as if they are the Congress and as if they can pass laws, the fact that US courts are on the side of the government in all of this.
Again, it's not just about web businesses. Don't forget, as Steve Jobs told Obama - those jobs, they are not coming back.
I am certain I have nothing to do with your ulcer, you need to take it easy, maybe it's your attitude that doesn't really help your condition? Get well.
So how come they can stick you in jail for damaging it? Title 18 sec 333.
- because the population has long ago stopped holding the government accountable with respect to the Constitution, ever since they stopped bothering with amendments as an example, to take away your rights. They just do it and nobody challenges and stops them.
As to only gold and silver being money, you need to understand something:
AMENDMENT IX
RIGHTS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
AMENDMENT X
POWERS RETAINED BY THE STATES AND THE PEOPLE
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
and this
Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: The Congress shall have Powerâ¦To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.
To COIN means to make coins out of gold and silver. You bring your metal to the mint and they can coin it for you (maybe they take a fee for it, but that's the purpose of the mint, to coin money out of bullion). "Regulating value" means defining what a dollar is in terms of WEIGHT of gold/silver and purity of gold/silver.
Coinage Act of 1792 - this was the coinage act that defined weights and measures for what a dollar was in gold and silver.
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
Federal reserve activities are not authorised by the Constitution, what the Fed does is illegal.
And those words they can't say really help the students how?
-:) it doesn't. It helps the authorities with an early start of conditioning people into believing that what government authority (and any kind of authority) tells them is the truth.
It's not about 'fuck' and all the other Carlin's favourites, it's about "Iraq was tied to Al Qaeda", "Hussein tied to 9/11", "Iran has nuclear weapons", "Iran is a threat to USA". It's about "Income taxes on the rich improve the economy". It's about "Income equality is government's mandate". It's about "Paper currency is money". It's about "Bailouts are necessary to save the economy".
It's very important to raise generations of people incapable of distilling the real message out of the myriad pieces of nonsense that are bombarding an average person from all the MSM outlets.
There is a very important reason to do this - running a totalitarian war machine is made much easier with a complacent population, it's much easier when the population believes everything it is told.
Right now every MSM channel in US is pushing Iran war, it's not even a question that the political mind is made up, the MSM system is in all gears to push that nonsense (and of-course US has a 'standing army', so there is nothing really that Congress or POTUS need to do to run that war, there is no need to search for more money, it's all already 'budgeted in'.)
But how do you start, how do you create this insane mind control over the population? Well, you start young. You start with small type of censorship and then you go from there. Thus my previous comment (that was moded 'funny' but also a 'troll' as well) stands.
Please don't forget that you need a strong and active government to keep the market free.
- don't take it the wrong way, but this is what's called an 'oxymoron'. You can't have free market being forced by threat of violence. It's sort of like "noisy silence", "sweet sorrow", "artificial grass" and all these other contradictions.
It is again, propaganda that is pushed onto the people by government that makes you believe in such.... silly thing.
The only help that people get from government is the fact that it exists as a system that is understood to be completely inherently evil, and as such is actively prevented from meddling with people's affairs, and prevents individuals from becoming government.
Individuals becoming government - that's where the danger is. Bush and Obama becoming kings that kill people on a whim - that's the danger.
Market without force of government intervention is free in itself. Some companies will do better and some will do worse, but there is never one company that will hold on to its dominance forever, and even holding to dominance for a very long time is problematic, as companies age, they become difficult to maneuver and they don't react to the market changes quickly enough.
But government helps to destroy companies, that is true, destroy them with various 'anti-competitive' laws at the time when those companies are very much profitable because they provide a product that may dominate the market for THAT TIME PERIOD. So what? The people pay to that company voluntarily. Gov't can break it, but it's never done to help the market of people, it's done to help special interests who want a piece of that pie.
It's always about special interests aiming at grabbing some part of that money, success, it's never about individual customers, because individual customers are already voting with their wallets.
There is no problem with companies that are huge - economies of scale. They provide the lowest prices for the products and eventually that's what brings in the customers, that's all.
That's GOOD. That enforces the free market to innovate and to invent ways to drop the prices (or maybe to increase quality or maybe both).
It is competition, and gov't regulations are by design against competition, they create monopolies, they destroy competitive markets and they pretend this is done to help consumers and that's the propaganda that's being pushed upon everybody.
Same as all the war propaganda, same as all the money propaganda.
I suppose you didn't participate in that 'end copyrights and patents' discussion, where I specifically said that I don't believe in gov't policing of private property either. It's none of government's business to police private property.
Government is there to occupy the space that is always reserved for somebody who will govern, and as such, it is inherently evil, and as such, it must exist only with the law above it (Constitution) ensuring that the only thing that government exists for and does is to protect individuals from government itself. That's why government that breaks the chains of the law, the chains imposed by it by the real contract between government and people - Constitution, is so important.
Now, local matters are local, at least there is competition among localities. But just saying that Constitution does not grant authority to the federal government to take away powers from State governments, does NOT imply that State governments automatically get those powers. It just means it is up to the people in the State to decide how those power are allocated, and the best way is to deny the State government most powers as well.
Having government ensuring border security and judging in cases of contract law is one thing.
Having government running police force to threaten individuals with violence in order to beat them into submission, while pretending that this is for their own good, is another thing altogether. Individuals are capable of handling their affairs with other individuals without government interference.
your so completely full of shit, you should go to school and learn something about economics, instead of spouting off that laissez faire nonsense. It's kind of your fault that you listen to such rhetoric, which often appeals to idealistic notions, but lacks the rigor of a proper education.
- excellent "argument"....
anyways, im up late because im in pain, from having had an ulcer today, otherwise i would go into more depth. But please stop pretending your an expert on this , until you've decided to spend a few years learning and practicing it.
- more excellent argument.
What can I say, you are full of excellent argument.
--
By the way, I took this course on being more 'social' with people, they taught me this one thing: when I want to say that somebody is an "uneducated piece of retarded shill, who knows not of what he speaks", I instead must say: "excellent argument".
Second: I just readRand'swork, started a couple of weeks ago and posted the reviews (thus those links).
I've been posting here, on/., for about 11 maybe 12 years. I don't think I need to dig out 12 years worth of various comments, all one needs to do is look at my journal to understand that I never needed Rand's books to think what I think.
I am not a 'victim of Ayn Rand', I am a product of the world. The world, that is ran by stupid people.
You see, it is stupidity that runs the world. When Ponzi ran his scam, it was stupidity, gullibility, the wrong type of greed as well, that let people buy into his scam and then those very stupid people that lost their money (but it's a tiny fraction of all people) pushed for more 'regulations' and 'laws', and thus more distortion of the economy by threat of violence from government, which always helps government to grow some more and steal some more.
Stupidity rules the world and as long as it happens, there will be real con artists, and they will not be in free market, where con artists are eventually found out, their scams eventually fall apart and people stop wasting their money.
Government ponzi scams are found out, but it doesn't mean that the scam stops, because there is threat of government violence that keeps the scam going. The government mandates that the scam must go on, and that's how it works, be it in SS or money itself.
Government regulations and laws do the opposite of what free market does. Free market improves everybody's conditions, government deteriorates everybody's conditions.
Free market makes everybody wealthier by providing products, services that people WANT to pay for enough that it creates profit. Free market provides investment opportunities, wages and even taxes.
Government does not provide products and services that people WANT to pay for, it take upon itself to IMPOSE various ideas on what products and services should be forced onto people with the threat of violence. Government is theoretically 'non-profit', but there are plenty of individuals and corporations that make huge profits by using government violence. Government TAKES taxes, government DESTROYS investment opportunities.
Free market pulls the average living standard up but in doing so it allows some people to get WAY above average - thus income inequality will always be there with free market but so will increase of wealth.
Government pulls the average living standard down, it pretends that in doing so it will create 'income equality', while in reality the only equality that is created is equality of poverty and the real change is that the people who still get huge disproportionate income are not those who produce products and services that market wants to buy, but instead those, who are the most connected to the government and can STEAL THE MOST with government threat of violence.
In the other news, 30 new government positions have been allocated as part of a "job program" to 30 soon to be graduates out of University of Twente. Seems like all of them will be IRS related jobs.
Slashdot Mirror
You read whatever I wrote and decided to reply and again with the same nonsense?
There is a character in one of Bulgacov's books, the book's name is "Heart of a Dog", you are pretty much Sharikov, because that's his main thesis: "take away everything and divide it equally".
Do you know who suffers most in bloody revolutions, by the way? You think it's the (often former) elite? Hmmm.
No, I didn't say AMD is in SSD business. I am saying they will have to restructure, do something, concentrate on something and find what their core competency is or should be.
you have this odd, bizarre belief that natural market forces create wealth distribution is somehow fair
- of-course.
that's because I completely reject your version of 'fair' - take from somebody who has and give it to somebody who does not simply because one of them is suffering more. I denounce and reject this type of social entropy, it does not work and it is absolutely unfair, unproductive and dictatorial in nature. How can any amount of violence be fair?
You are defining something as FAIR and you are using VIOLENCE to define it. You want 'fair'? How about you examine your premises first and realise that what you want is violence against the individual, and individual is always above the collective, because there is no reason to have the collective, the entire human population can burn in acidic fiery hell if it defines use of violence as fairness.
and more bizarrely, you believe government, rather than the reality of a rotten institution that does the deeds of those with the money, is somehow an evil tool that steals from the middle class to do the bidding of poor people with low character who don't deserve anything
- ha ha ha, naive.
The government is always a force of evil, that uses the pretence of 'helping the poor', does it by stealing from those who actually work and rewards with it those who are parasitic enough, that they are part of the government trough system. The poor are used as coinage, pawns.
But it's funny, you think there is MORALITY in stealing from some to give to others to equalise their suffering. But how do you measure suffering? If some are fed and clothed because the government system is providing to them while stealing from those who actually work, and have to suffer in fact, through all the nonsense that the system sets in front of them, then even by your definition this cannot work. You can't measure suffering.
You take the edge cases and build your entire system on it. You take the top 0.001% who can STEAL money from people by using government force, then you take the bottom 20% or so who are in worst conditions out of the entire population, and then you say: because there are these people, at the bottom, somebody else must pay for them. But you think you are going to use government to take from the top 0.001%?
No. You are going to steal from the middle, from everybody who actually works and produces and suffers while working and producing. You won't TOUCH those who are on top, you can't, it is absolutely impossible.
You will never help those on the bottom by doing any of it, but you will worsen the situation for the middle, and it's the middle that makes the machine go, and then the machine breaks (one manifestation was the thirties, one was the seventies, one was the nineties and one started around 2008) and then what? You think you can tax your way out of the broken machine?
No, you can push and push all the people, until majority have nothing and some simply escape somewhere else (and that's principally what happened in 1917 to 1923 in Russia as well, and it's been happening for a few decades on a slower scale in US and Europe, because it wasn't an immediate bloody revolution, but it was a slower process of continuous deterioration.)
your understanding of the world and how power and money actually works is completely nonsensical
- oh well, if you established that much, you don't need to reply to me.
Let's start with nonsense:
Concentration of wealth *diminishes* its utility, even your anarcho-capitalist textbooks should teach you that.
- pure nonsense. Utility of wealth held by owners of companies, how is the utility of wealth diminished if the company is owned by people and the overall wealth of company is growing because the market buys the products the company is producing?
So Apple shares are going up in value, that's some increase in wealth that investors see.
Apple products are bought all over the world - that's the wealth that the Apple customers are see.
Apple products are built by all these people that are hired - that's the wages, and thus improvement in workers' circumstance that these workers see.
Even the tax men see the benefits, as they get more and more taxes out of Apple, its workers and owners and customers (yes, there are various tariffs, import and sales taxes in the world).
The money that one wealthy owner of Apple stock is being recycled in the economy, allowing Apple and other businesses to grow beyond what existed previously, and as long as this money isn't taken out of the investment pool and is not spent by the wealthy owner of that stock, that's the money that grows the economy (and that's why taxing work is almost the worst thing that gov't can do beyond destroying money and starting wars).
There has to be some logical step between "equal distribution of wealth" and "dictatorship".
- there is no miracle, like in your cartoon. Unfortunately there is no miracle - as gov't force is used to steal from some and give to others, this is only used by gov't as a pretence, not to create 'equality of income' but to steal income to grow government power. And equality of income in itself is completely undesirable and counter-productive, because we try to work more and create things that don't exist so that we can become WEALTHIER than the others, otherwise there is no point in running businesses.
But as government steals more work (money) from those who earn it and gives some of it to those who want it (and thus vote for that government), the true consequence emerges - government grows much beyond what it otherwise would have been. That is the problem USA and Europe are facing today - the governments are much beyond what their respective societies can afford and they have destroyed the productivity of the nation by stealing from some who earn, to give to others who want.
As government is growing, so everything it does. Growth of government = growth of power and force that government uses and growth itself allows more force to be used, and this force is used to make government grow more.
All growth of government force leads to destruction of individual freedoms and the final eventual outcome is always dictatorial, and I can throw names around, like that of Plato, who understood even 2K years back something that is not obvious to you.
Libertarians seem to forget that there are all kinds of predators, only some of whom leverage government corruption. People suck, regardless of the political system they live under.
- it doesn't matter. Of-course some become rich simply because they robbed a bank for example, but that's not what is normally done, mostly people try to become rich through work - trying to run a business. Of-course if they have government force on their side they can simply create a regulation that forces people to "buy" their product - that's a tax, that's theft. An example would be this entire Obamacare with a mandate fiasco.
My thinking is not antiquated, your thinking is antiquated, it's all rotten to the core and it is what is destroying the economies of Europe and US right now, whether you understand it or not.
The only way to fix the problem of overall poverty is to allow markets to work it out, that's what Chinese are mostly doing - allowing capital to come in and create whatever it creates thus improving people's circumstance.
The people can either be left alone and let the market create all the things that they need and set all the prices, and market eventually finds the equilibrium, prices go down so that majority of people can afford everything they need and even most of what they want. Or you can try and enforce some weird notion of 'fairness' (which I completely disagree with you on, I don't believe for a second that robbing anybody to give anybody else anything is fair, so all the Robin Hood stories to me are completely anathema) and you can observe everybody being miserable and only people in government sitting sort of nice, warm and fed on top of that giant shit pyramid.
According to Douglas, the true purpose of production is consumption, and production must serve the genuine, freely expressed interests of consumers. Each citizen is to have a beneficial, not direct, inheritance in the communal capital conferred by complete and dynamic access to the fruits of industry assured by the National Dividend and Compensated Price.
- this is pretty sick stuff, truly remarkably ridiculously insane.
This destroys the very idea of private property and just like the ideas that created the place where I was born (USSR), it requires people to negate their most basic instincts of ownership of things that they create.
As to land owners, etc., if the land owner isn't efficient with his property, he'll be generating a loss, not a profit, and eventually either will sell the land himself to somebody (or to more than one person) who will find ways to generate profit there or there will eventually be a bankruptcy and the outcome will be arranged in a similar manner, just without too much participation from the original owner.
We can't have a society at all where everybody expects to be taken care of by some magic of 'past social credit', somebody has to do the actual work of creating the stuff, whatever it means, and it really means organising land labour and capital in the most efficient manner to give the market something that will be profitable enough to keep the lights on.
Product requirements are changing as new tech comes out and old companies disappear and new ones are created, and there is constant movement in wealth generation, but it's not static as you suggest. Companies are eaten up, broken up, restructured, reassembled all the time, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not happening.
And my last point - there is no reason for some people to work to give something to somebody for free at all.
We do not TRADE with people because it's fun, we trade with them because of comparative advantage. Thus if you make a good product, you find that somebody needs it, you are going to try and build as many of these as you can, and this overproduction allows you to consume things you did not create.
Building things just so that you can give them to somebody simply because they exist - it's vomit inducing.
You obviously have never started a business
- obviously? A software business, a real estate one going all the way back to 2000. A software company with a line of products today that is based in Cyprus and operates in Russia and Germany today and in fact looking at Asian market.
AFAIC the further away from USA the easier it is to start and operate s business, but especially dealing with finance and securities regulations.
Explain your comment, I can't understand what you are replying to.
AMD needs a restructuring. They really need to find their core competency and concentrate there, what was that entire ATI deal?
Maybe core competency for AMD would include building bigger cheaper SSDs?
There is nothing fair about majority vote using government violence as a proxy to steal money from individuals who are more successful than others.
Also there is nothing fair about some individuals gaming the system by buying access to politicians, who then steal and sell power of government violence.
Both of the above are wrong, that's why your argument is nonsense.
Under a system where government is actively prohibited from stealing from anybody to give to anybody else under any and all circumstances, the freedom of everybody who is not being stolen from is maximised, and the market increases the wealth of all people by allowing some to make it big by inventing and bringing to the market products that make ALL people wealthier.
That's why Steve Jobs and his wealth usually was not bemoaned by people - because everybody got WEALTHIER off Steve Jobs, who himself got extraordinary wealthy.
Of-course Marxists like you, are happy to use any amount of collective government violence to ensure that the wealth is "distributed equally", which means unproductively from people who CREATE wealth, to those who WANT it. Thus eventually you descend into totalitarianism and dictatorship, and you call THAT justice.
No. Justice is about freedom. The only justice is FREEDOM. It's freedom to do what you can as you can do it without hurting others (that's the only main condition), and in the process of helping yourself you help others not as an intention, but as a consequence of your actions.
Nobody can become rich and wealthy without either:
1. Theft based on power of government force.
2. Creation of wealth by selling products to people that they are voluntarily willing to buy and pay enough that there is a profit premium in it.
There is nothing just about "universal" healthcare or any other government forced "universal" thing, because it will create poverty and will bring about totalitarian regime and there is nothing just about such a regime, and I should know I was born in a system like that, and you'll find out, you apparently want to go there.
USA is very dangerous to start ANY business, not just a web business. With all of the taxes, regulations, inflation caused by counterfeiting operation at the Fed and the government banks. The confiscation of private property that was clearly displayed in GM and Chrysler case and just a couple of months ago with MF Global - where cooperation between financial institution (JP Morgan) and government agencies allowed for customer funds to be stolen, in fact gold bars with serial numbers assigned to specific holders of account at MF Global (which is basically an insurance company for farmers - future trading is used to insure against uncertainty of future crop prices) went "MISSING" and nobody is being held accountable for it and apparently everybody is aware that JP Morgan and the feds have agreed on something, which is pretty damning - the bankruptcy court was instructed to run the bankruptcy as if MF Global was an 'investment' company, which makes their counter-parties to be first in line to receive collateral, while actually MF Global wasn't an investment company, it was an insurance company, and under those conditions it would have been the CLIENTS who would be first in line to get their money out.
But this is just an example why it is dangerous to deal in USA now, other things are of-course all of the regulations, all of the executive branch departments acting as if they are the Congress and as if they can pass laws, the fact that US courts are on the side of the government in all of this.
Again, it's not just about web businesses. Don't forget, as Steve Jobs told Obama - those jobs, they are not coming back.
I am certain I have nothing to do with your ulcer, you need to take it easy, maybe it's your attitude that doesn't really help your condition? Get well.
The problem is government cooperation, this automatically raises a flag - this company will not have a problem cooperating with the government.
So, what do these companies have to hide? What are they getting from government that they agreed to do this?
fuck yeah, the motherfucking shitty 'education' system has gone tits up enough already! Everybody and their cocksucking cunts should be pissed!
So how come they can stick you in jail for damaging it? Title 18 sec 333.
- because the population has long ago stopped holding the government accountable with respect to the Constitution, ever since they stopped bothering with amendments as an example, to take away your rights. They just do it and nobody challenges and stops them.
As to only gold and silver being money, you need to understand something:
AMENDMENT IX
RIGHTS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
AMENDMENT X
POWERS RETAINED BY THE STATES AND THE PEOPLE
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
and this
Article I, Section 8, Clause 5: The Congress shall have Powerâ¦To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.
To COIN means to make coins out of gold and silver. You bring your metal to the mint and they can coin it for you (maybe they take a fee for it, but that's the purpose of the mint, to coin money out of bullion). "Regulating value" means defining what a dollar is in terms of WEIGHT of gold/silver and purity of gold/silver.
Coinage Act of 1792 - this was the coinage act that defined weights and measures for what a dollar was in gold and silver.
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
Federal reserve activities are not authorised by the Constitution, what the Fed does is illegal.
And those words they can't say really help the students how?
- :) it doesn't. It helps the authorities with an early start of conditioning people into believing that what government authority (and any kind of authority) tells them is the truth.
It's not about 'fuck' and all the other Carlin's favourites, it's about "Iraq was tied to Al Qaeda", "Hussein tied to 9/11", "Iran has nuclear weapons", "Iran is a threat to USA". It's about "Income taxes on the rich improve the economy". It's about "Income equality is government's mandate". It's about "Paper currency is money". It's about "Bailouts are necessary to save the economy".
That's what it really is all about.
It's very important to raise generations of people incapable of distilling the real message out of the myriad pieces of nonsense that are bombarding an average person from all the MSM outlets.
There is a very important reason to do this - running a totalitarian war machine is made much easier with a complacent population, it's much easier when the population believes everything it is told.
For example: Iraq was not a threat to USA at any time, nor were they linked to 9/11, but majority of people (70% in that poll) were brainwashed by the politicians and the MSM enough to believe it.
Right now every MSM channel in US is pushing Iran war, it's not even a question that the political mind is made up, the MSM system is in all gears to push that nonsense (and of-course US has a 'standing army', so there is nothing really that Congress or POTUS need to do to run that war, there is no need to search for more money, it's all already 'budgeted in'.)
But how do you start, how do you create this insane mind control over the population? Well, you start young. You start with small type of censorship and then you go from there. Thus my previous comment (that was moded 'funny' but also a 'troll' as well) stands.
Please don't forget that you need a strong and active government to keep the market free.
- don't take it the wrong way, but this is what's called an 'oxymoron'. You can't have free market being forced by threat of violence. It's sort of like "noisy silence", "sweet sorrow", "artificial grass" and all these other contradictions.
It is again, propaganda that is pushed onto the people by government that makes you believe in such .... silly thing.
There is no such thing as a 'natural monopoly', and definitely government laws cannot make market FREE.
The purpose of government is to exist and to be chained by the Constitution, all so that others are denied the power that being government allows. That's what is broken - people broke the system and now the government is not what people need it to be (something that exists to deny some usage of it in order to prevent abuse of power, that government holds).
The only help that people get from government is the fact that it exists as a system that is understood to be completely inherently evil, and as such is actively prevented from meddling with people's affairs, and prevents individuals from becoming government.
Individuals becoming government - that's where the danger is. Bush and Obama becoming kings that kill people on a whim - that's the danger.
Market without force of government intervention is free in itself. Some companies will do better and some will do worse, but there is never one company that will hold on to its dominance forever, and even holding to dominance for a very long time is problematic, as companies age, they become difficult to maneuver and they don't react to the market changes quickly enough.
But government helps to destroy companies, that is true, destroy them with various 'anti-competitive' laws at the time when those companies are very much profitable because they provide a product that may dominate the market for THAT TIME PERIOD. So what? The people pay to that company voluntarily. Gov't can break it, but it's never done to help the market of people, it's done to help special interests who want a piece of that pie.
It's always about special interests aiming at grabbing some part of that money, success, it's never about individual customers, because individual customers are already voting with their wallets.
There is no problem with companies that are huge - economies of scale. They provide the lowest prices for the products and eventually that's what brings in the customers, that's all.
That's GOOD. That enforces the free market to innovate and to invent ways to drop the prices (or maybe to increase quality or maybe both).
It is competition, and gov't regulations are by design against competition, they create monopolies, they destroy competitive markets and they pretend this is done to help consumers and that's the propaganda that's being pushed upon everybody.
Same as all the war propaganda, same as all the money propaganda.
I suppose you didn't participate in that 'end copyrights and patents' discussion, where I specifically said that I don't believe in gov't policing of private property either. It's none of government's business to police private property.
The entire premise that gov't must be there to protect one individual from actions of another individual is wrong.
Government is there to occupy the space that is always reserved for somebody who will govern, and as such, it is inherently evil, and as such, it must exist only with the law above it (Constitution) ensuring that the only thing that government exists for and does is to protect individuals from government itself. That's why government that breaks the chains of the law, the chains imposed by it by the real contract between government and people - Constitution, is so important.
Now, local matters are local, at least there is competition among localities. But just saying that Constitution does not grant authority to the federal government to take away powers from State governments, does NOT imply that State governments automatically get those powers. It just means it is up to the people in the State to decide how those power are allocated, and the best way is to deny the State government most powers as well.
Having government ensuring border security and judging in cases of contract law is one thing.
Having government running police force to threaten individuals with violence in order to beat them into submission, while pretending that this is for their own good, is another thing altogether. Individuals are capable of handling their affairs with other individuals without government interference.
your so completely full of shit, you should go to school and learn something about economics, instead of spouting off that laissez faire nonsense. It's kind of your fault that you listen to such rhetoric, which often appeals to idealistic notions, but lacks the rigor of a proper education.
- excellent "argument". ...
anyways, im up late because im in pain, from having had an ulcer today, otherwise i would go into more depth. But please stop pretending your an expert on this , until you've decided to spend a few years learning and practicing it.
- more excellent argument.
What can I say, you are full of excellent argument.
--
By the way, I took this course on being more 'social' with people, they taught me this one thing: when I want to say that somebody is an "uneducated piece of retarded shill, who knows not of what he speaks", I instead must say: "excellent argument".
Censorship must start early in life, that's the first rule of government running propag... education system.
First: what an "argument"!
Second: I just read Rand's work, started a couple of weeks ago and posted the reviews (thus those links).
I've been posting here, on /., for about 11 maybe 12 years. I don't think I need to dig out 12 years worth of various comments, all one needs to do is look at my journal to understand that I never needed Rand's books to think what I think.
I am not a 'victim of Ayn Rand', I am a product of the world. The world, that is ran by stupid people.
You see, it is stupidity that runs the world. When Ponzi ran his scam, it was stupidity, gullibility, the wrong type of greed as well, that let people buy into his scam and then those very stupid people that lost their money (but it's a tiny fraction of all people) pushed for more 'regulations' and 'laws', and thus more distortion of the economy by threat of violence from government, which always helps government to grow some more and steal some more.
Stupidity rules the world and as long as it happens, there will be real con artists, and they will not be in free market, where con artists are eventually found out, their scams eventually fall apart and people stop wasting their money.
Government ponzi scams are found out, but it doesn't mean that the scam stops, because there is threat of government violence that keeps the scam going. The government mandates that the scam must go on, and that's how it works, be it in SS or money itself.
Government regulations and laws do the opposite of what free market does. Free market improves everybody's conditions, government deteriorates everybody's conditions.
Free market makes everybody wealthier by providing products, services that people WANT to pay for enough that it creates profit. Free market provides investment opportunities, wages and even taxes.
Government does not provide products and services that people WANT to pay for, it take upon itself to IMPOSE various ideas on what products and services should be forced onto people with the threat of violence. Government is theoretically 'non-profit', but there are plenty of individuals and corporations that make huge profits by using government violence. Government TAKES taxes, government DESTROYS investment opportunities.
Free market pulls the average living standard up but in doing so it allows some people to get WAY above average - thus income inequality will always be there with free market but so will increase of wealth.
Government pulls the average living standard down, it pretends that in doing so it will create 'income equality', while in reality the only equality that is created is equality of poverty and the real change is that the people who still get huge disproportionate income are not those who produce products and services that market wants to buy, but instead those, who are the most connected to the government and can STEAL THE MOST with government threat of violence.
In the other news, 30 new government positions have been allocated as part of a "job program" to 30 soon to be graduates out of University of Twente. Seems like all of them will be IRS related jobs.