Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) is the Tonkins Gulf incident of Eurasia, except thsi time something DID happen, but the attribution is fake. Read the headlines, read the incessant drumbeat against Russia. This is being used to whip the US into approviing some military interventionism in the Ukraine.
It's total bullshit. Just like the US, Russia has tons of their weapons in the hands of people they do not directly control every action of. So we really have no hope of finding out who fired that missile and if they did, if they intended to target the plane; the "why" is mysteriously left out of all stories presented to you by the MSM. It's presented as a whodunit, meant to draw you in without triggering your critical thinking.
The Ukranians basically hate each ther for deep cultural, political and ethnic reasons. What needs to happen there is the nation needs to be divided between east and west but fairly, perhaps with one-of-a-kind critical things like ports and other natural resources being shared / accessible to all.
Russia has far far far greater interest in what happens there and is in it for the long haul. America is being driven by hegemonic power lust and behind that are a variety of power players who are looking to make a buck by 1) strting a conflict from which they profit directly 2) gaining control over natural resources.
Just like in Afghanistan then Iraq, the basic dynamic is- the people who live there aren't going anywhere, so how long would YOU like to stay here and keep things the way you like them, America? Because if your answer is anything other than "forever" rest assured things will eventually go in some way you're not going to like.
We'd have a lot more rela power in the world if we went in big on critical things and 8sought to work out equitable compromises elsewhere*.
But we don't do that because the US foreign policy is a tool of multinational corporations, the defence industry, individuals with a distorted and paranoiac world view who are deeply embedded in the national security complex and politicians who never tire of being seen as *tough* and who need an ever changing rolodex of "dangerous enemies" to justify their interventionsim.
For the last category- please let em help yo fill that rolodex with REAL worries.
Our infrastrcuture- water, electrcity, sewer systems are critically even insanely vulnerable to terrorism and a plausibly big attack on them would kill tens of thousands even millions. Feel free to start fixing that anytime.
The advancing state of civilian technology is leading us directly into a world where just anyone or a few people can kill people by the tens of thousands or millions. We're talking civilian access and ability to alter the DNA of organisms and even viruses. We're talking about synthetic biology. We're talking about the force multiplier for evil a poorly done IoT will subject us to.
We haver a lot more in common (to lose) with established nation-states like Russia than we have differences. We should be working WITH them, not trying to decide what goes down in their backyard. Would we let them decide what happens in Mexico? In Nicaragua or Chile or Argentina.. oh wait.. we already know the ansers tothose questions.
What -exactly- is the US afraid Russia is going to do to us? If the answer is "prevent a small gorup of billionaires like the members of the Blackstone Group fropm conrtolling more of the world's resources" then, yeah, that's not actually a national security concern.
Does anyone have a theory on what strategic purpose Russia and Putin may be said to have had in shooting down this flight which coud not have been achievedina "better" (quieter say) way?
So the socialist nations in the EU are far better off than the US but do you concede? No, like the Black Knight in Monty Python, you fight on!
Your original assertion, that the poor in the US are better off than the people in Europe. Now that's a total joke. Some guy making 7.50 an hour 15k a year (much less just a year ago b4 they raised the minimum wage) OR LESS is better off than the vast vast vast majority of people in Europe. Such a joke,. You have no idea what poverty is and what it means to be poor in a nation without any meaningful social services like the US.
Yet you fight on, in true libertarian fashion !
Please, don't take out a contract on my life, don't Ulbricht me man; I know how much sense that sort of thing makes to libertarians because, you know it's a kind of freedom, but really, just because you've been humiliated online is no reason to go FULL libertarian, FULL Pinochet, Full Milton Friedman, FULL Ross Ulbrecht and start plotting someone's murder.
I mean, really!
You're wrong. So sayeth the stats, so sayeth people who have actually lived in both places, so sayeth anyone and anything not specifically and toxically dedicated to distorting reality.
>>Saying that I should be able to sell you raisins at a price we freely agree on and without getting taxed
Let me complete the sentence for you,.. is the same as saying there's not government since there's no taxes and since there's no government there's no law. Like it or not, taxes are the basis for civilization, including taxes on raisins.
If socialist rule is so bad , why are the richest nations also the most socialist?
nations whose income is more than US norway \sweden denmark 'finland
all highly socialist nations. So actually, their money, which they just outright have more of, goes further than American wages out of which comes health and education and other services which are paid for in those nations.
Absolutely lived out of my car in Mountain View because 1) I was never not at work for more than 9 hours at a time 2) could shower at the gym and 3) didn't feel like forking over 2500 a month for a 1 bdm.
Problems arising include *it's illegal* and enforced, having to find somewhere else to park each night, having to pee ( pooping was on schedule, at work) staying organized in a smaller car. Hiding what you're doing from everyone.
So been there done that and I'm not the only one.
Later was at an interview in Palo Alto. Went to lunch with team. Manager remarks on a certain truck / car thing he's seen parked around town and comments that someone is living out of that, and wasn't that something? Oh the irony.
Actually Adam Smith would have puked up at the libertarian agenda. The only reason libertarian coke snorters can claim him is because he's not around to tell them to go fuck themselves. Ditto Jesus and the Christians.
No I think Ross Ulbricht pretty well embodies libertarian ideology and of course practice. Yep no laws, no regulation just people exchanging money for goods. You know, goods like oh I don't know, very very dangerous drugs and illegal firearms and of course - contracts for assassination !!!! Yeah Ross was into that, wasn't he. Typical libertarian - all about freedom and freedom from coercion until someone pisses him off then that person needs to die- literally, while the libertarian bemoans the lack of integrity people have.
Yep a libertarian paradise for sure, where every libertarian is left alone and is free to do as he pleases without "the goddamn goob'mint" getting in his way.
Libertarians are murdering, drug dealing fucking scum.
Fuck yeah, let's do away with regulation and laws because that's worked out so well for us the first couple thousand years of human civilization. If the "free natural market unregulated by laws" were going to spontaneously spring forward with its abundant blessings, then it would have when there were no laws under Ghengis Khan or in Somolia anywhere else on earth in which there were, literally, no laws.
At it's very best, you have unhackable encryption for e-data. Now I will show you that that data can be hacked.
At some point, some human has to take some action to access the unencrypted form of that data. If that human can do it, then it can be done by another human, some other unauthorized way. That's called hacking.
There is no way around this. The problem with e-records is *you don't have to be physically present to steal them- they can be copied and they can be transported and the original source is none the wiser.
once you have something that fits that description, all your security is out the window.
Read the story above this one or just read the daily headlines of the MSM. Nothing is safe in electronic form- it's less safe relative to its paper counterpart. More convenient, but less safe.
Until you have computation being done on data that is never decrypted, which is possible, you'll have these problems.
Yeah now you're making the arguments the Luddite's make. That machinery will replace workers and leave them disadvantaged (unemployed or underpaid).
Fact is, when robots replace people, people shift to programming robots, maintaining robots, designing robots etc.
One the one hand we have the libertarian-cocaine theory of fucking everyone over, driving them into poverty wages and sneering "that's the free market" and on the other hand we have a system which is deliberately designed through public education, displaced worker education packages and other means to create a virtuous circle of greater productivity / cheaper goods / greater economic participation and better distribution of wealth.
The choice is ours. Thankfully sociopathic libertarian scum compromise only a few percentage points of the population and they control exactly no nation or government.
Once we understand more about genes and how they give rise to distinct patterns of human social orientation: pro-social vs anti-social , egalitarian world view vs predatory world view, we'll be able to identify the anti-social genes and correct them either before or after birth.
You're the last of your kind; we're going to ride you into extinction.
Well either you're a knowing and deliberate liar or you have the shortest memory for your own claims on record. Here's your original claim:
"As to European middle class having less money than the America's poor, it's such a joke of a statement that it makes me believe you're capable of saying just anything your brain presents to you, evidence free."
European middle class has less money than America's poor.
Not only is this false, it's not even true that the European middle class has less money the American middle class. Actually, they have as much or more.
In true libertarian fashion, you're such a crackhead for your pet theory you're continue to argue for it even if you have to engage in the classic rhetorical lies- moving goalposts , ignoring valid counter arguments of your opponent, presenting evidence -free unsourced broad statements as facts.
Libertarianism is somewhere between a drug and a religion to its adherents. It's a disease to those who are susceptible to it, as you are. Really it's turned you into a POS that people just ignore, as I will now do. WHen yo argue, you lie. You change goalposts You make broad statements without supporting facts. You grossly misrepresent your opponent's speech (I never said civilization began 2000 years ago, I said slavery is the natural order of man and it's only enforced laws and regulations based on democratic ideals and nothing else that stops us from going back there).
You're truly the worst sort of online troll. Please continue to have.... the life you're having
I doubt this person ever lived in "europe" for the same reason I doubt anyone lives in "north america." Europe is a continent you douchebag, if you were "from europe" you would have stated the nation you were "from" in europe.
>> To the contrary, monarchies and aristocracies generally lost their power because of free markets, as commoners became wealthier through commerce and then demanded more political power.
Gawd you have no idea about history whatsoever. A serf who attempted to work a neighbor's land because the neighbor offered him a better deal was killed outright. There is opening for "market forcces" to take over. If "market forces" were able to take over, then why didn't they do it for the first two thousand years. If it's such an inevitable powerful force, why does its appearance and rise coincide with democratic government and not before?
The fact is a few rich people - nobles and barons, kings, the upper echelon of the military effectively owned fucking everything even into the 1700s and 1800s. Then democracy started in France by violent overthrow of the King. That's when things started to get better for people and that's when fair laws regulating the economy began to create something other than an "economic" world composed of intrigue, murder, theft, piracy, and the other forms of raw power.
The people who write the books that tell you that the market created democracy and a fair economy and the rule of law are all coke addicts. I can prove this. I can prove it using the same type of evidence you've presented here to support their theories.
Shit, I can prove anything using your methods. All I have to do is think it and wish it and *poof !* it becomes reality.
Saaaay.... maybe there is something to this libertarian smack after all.
>>I'm sorry if you don't understand how cherry picking a few small, rich enclaves in Europe has nothing to do with my statement. Apparently, you also have trouble understanding concepts like gross/net.
You just say shit that has no basis in reality but makes you feel good. This is typical of libertarians. Strong on strong ideas, short on facts.
I think its genetic. Libertarians are essentially predators and hate with every fiber of their being anything that tells them they can't act on their predatory instincts. That would be Government and Laws.
Since you've posted fact free and in fact opposite of reality statement after statement I really don't hold out much hope for you; you'll spend the rest of your life snarling and frothing at civilization's progress, which is more or less inevitable.
Since that was the second post to which you stooped to name calling and character assassination,please, let me return the favor.
The libertarians I've known are basically Asperger's syndrome, coke-addicted, amphetamine freaks who spend all their time (re-re-)reading Ayn Rand (who was all that and more ! ) and talking about the Austrian school of economics as though those economists hadn't stated that *no set of real world facts or statistics could ever count as evidence against their theories because such real world evidence would invariably be tainted by the impure environment of an at least somewhat regulated economy.*
So much for science.
But please, I feel like I'm keeping you from bursting an aneurysm in response to some other part of the real world which has enraged you to the point of an apoplectic fit.
>>. Whether you believe that regulation and laws are necessary or not, they are clearly not part of the definition of market economies.
Wrong again. The very idea IDEA of a modern economy is a fabrication of the human mind. Before there were anything like modern "economies" there was warfare, booty and enslavement of the losers and in fact nearly everyone outside the ruling class. You need to read history. That is how the world was run for aeons.
Laws and regulations are what create modern civilization with anything you'd call an economy. Outside of that, it's pillage and plundering ala Ghengis Khan.
>>Therefore, you actually agree: the goal of market economies is to make money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service
Wrong. You reduce labor by reducing the number of people you need to do a job through automation, product re-design or other increases in efficiency. Kneecapping wage earners is a road to nowhere but a nation of people who have no money for goods. You need to actually take an economics course,.
he government has specific age-bias laws in place which prohibit hiring/firing on the basis of age. It is against the law. And yet, SV gets away with it on a massive scale. They will do mass layoffs where virtually everyone laid off is over 30. I have seen this myself.
Just so anyone who supposes that the 1% actually have to abide by laws the 99% pass can revise their views They're completely and flagrantly lawless whenever they feel like it, and they're not afraid of the government.
Really, the whole closing of the open internet is about control and power. Just as FB is not about "connecting people to their friends!", it's about control and power then leveraging that power into more power, more money more control.
The exact same thing is going on with Cloudflare which is about inducing site owners to select options which preclude anonymity.
>>Exporting jobs and importing goods is the way we improve wealth across the world; the global economy isn't a zero sum game.
You misinterpret the global economy as a zero some game, and then, out of your own greed and fears, use flowery phrases like "exporting prosperity" to disguise your own greed, selfishness, and irrational fears.
Wrong You misinterpret the economy as a zero sum game. I think maybe you are aware of this unconsciously and therefore laid the accusation against me.Specifically, you turn it into a zero sum game in this exchange:
>> It's not a clever "new business model" for a "new economy" if it can basically be described as making money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service
>>>Yes: that's what a market economy does and what it is supposed to do.
If that's what it's supposed to do, then you're saying it's a zero sum game. What I was saying is you create wealth by creating new products and services that people want: Here's what I said:
>>A real "new economy" with "new business models" is one where the wealth is increased across the board to everyone, one where we export prosperity itself instead of exporting someone's job or import someone to degrade the labor position of the incumbents.
And here's what you said when I said that lowering prices by driving down wages is how you create wealth
>>>Yes: that's what a market economy does and what it is supposed to do.
Just so we're clear on the difference in perspectives.
As to immigration, it shows how little you read the headlines when yo say people won't come here to escape their shithole war torn nations.
As to European middle class having less money than the America's poor, it's such a joke of a statement that it makes me believe you're capable of saying just anything your brain presents to you, evidence free.
Here is the median wages for Europe. The "dying socialist nations" are at the very top of the heap, as they always are. Unless you want to make the claim that America's poor earn more than 52k a year, you've got a problem with your argument.
On top of their earnings, they also enjoy free healthcare, dental, education, college and a vast array of social services that make America look like it never really quit it's slavery addiction.
That's a working economy- where freedom from poverty creates a virtuous circle of people spending money because they have it to spend and businesses creating goods and employing people to meet that demand.
I'm disappointed that when I argue with libertarians they're big on just provably false and in fact just made up statements and big on accusatory language.
Libertarianism basically has nothing to show for itself but the bank accounts of a few South American dictators and mass murderers like Pinochet which libertarian economist Milton Friedman supported and whose regime he contributed to. That and psychotic sociopaths / amphetamine freaks like Ayn Rand.
Libertarianism is basically a masturbation fantasy of sociopaths who dream of being left alone by government to inflict their will on everyone weaker than they are.
That and oh yeah, denying the fact of human caused climate change, apparently because upping the death toll of their policies out of the hundreds of thousands and into the hundreds of millions of a couple billion is less of a concern than to them than a few gas an oil barons be permitted to continue in the lifestyles they've become accustomed to.
Hey man, what's a little mass murder when it comes to making money with fossil fuels?
>>Look around the world and 20th century history. Socialists, fascists, and dictators all tried to impose regulations, redistribute wealth, and limit trade in order to "help" people, and their citizens usually end up destitute except for a small wealthy elite in government
Look into the past prior to the 20th century. Back backin time into the 16th and 15th and 10th and 8th and 2nd and into BCE and just keep going. There is one and only one "market' the market of the strong enslaving the weak. That's the "natural order" that humans create for themselves. A tiny elite owning, literally, everything. Raewald's wealth dwarfed Gates' wealth by orders of magnitude and he was just a the start of the English Bretwaldas. So also in Asia, and everywhere else.
It was that way up until the 19th and 20th century. King John's Magnacarta applied only to the nobles who forced it on him, not the vast majority of people who were defacto slaves or just slaves.
Only laws and regulation aimed at preventing the concentration of wealth prevent the concentration of wealth. You can say that the Nordic socialist nations are dying or whatever you want to say, but that's all it is, you speaking empty phrases that have no connection to reality.
>> It's not a clever "new business model" for a "new economy" if it can basically be described as making money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service
>>>Yes: that's what a market economy does and what it is supposed to do.
Wrong A market economy is not meant to drive down wages and concentrate wealth. A market economy is supposed to incentivize, through regulation and laws, competition so that better goods and services are created for the same or less money. Big difference.
If you make everyone a slave, then you've driven down the cost of labor and therefore goods. That's not a market economy functioning to support the public good. It's a slave economy We fought a war over this. It's over folks, you lost. You're not going to sneak it in through the back door by calling it some for of "free market".
A public good is a product or service , "stuff" for sale to the public . THE public good is the policies and practices *including but not limited to the buying and selling of stuff* the government puts in place to benefit people. Please tell me you can see the difference.
Really interested to know why this comment got 5 stars since it 1) lacks any kind of support for it's assertions 2) its assertions fly in the face of what data there is (see my earlier post) and 3) basically amounts to saying nothing more than "fuck cabs! Cabs suck! Go Uber!" in just about those words.
Do I detect some form of biasing going on in the rating system here at.../. !!! My god. What has the world come to??!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Let's see, Russia is near undersea cables which the US, as everyone knowns, has tapped in order to spy on the rest of the world .
Why whatever could they want ?
It must be they're going to cut them and not just cut them. but cut them where it's hard to fix them.
Ohhh ....those Ruskies!
I think I see the plan
1) hang out near cables..
2) cut the cables !
3)?????
4) profit !
Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17) is the Tonkins Gulf incident of Eurasia, except thsi time something DID happen, but the attribution is fake. Read the headlines, read the incessant drumbeat against Russia. This is being used to whip the US into approviing some military interventionism in the Ukraine.
It's total bullshit. Just like the US, Russia has tons of their weapons in the hands of people they do not directly control every action of. So we really have no hope of finding out who fired that missile and if they did, if they intended to target the plane; the "why" is mysteriously left out of all stories presented to you by the MSM. It's presented as a whodunit, meant to draw you in without triggering your critical thinking.
The Ukranians basically hate each ther for deep cultural, political and ethnic reasons. What needs to happen there is the nation needs to be divided between east and west but fairly, perhaps with one-of-a-kind critical things like ports and other natural resources being shared / accessible to all.
Russia has far far far greater interest in what happens there and is in it for the long haul. America is being driven by hegemonic power lust and behind that are a variety of power players who are looking to make a buck by 1) strting a conflict from which they profit directly 2) gaining control over natural resources.
Just like in Afghanistan then Iraq, the basic dynamic is- the people who live there aren't going anywhere, so how long would YOU like to stay here and keep things the way you like them, America? Because if your answer is anything other than "forever" rest assured things will eventually go in some way you're not going to like.
We'd have a lot more rela power in the world if we went in big on critical things and 8sought to work out equitable compromises elsewhere*.
But we don't do that because the US foreign policy is a tool of multinational corporations, the defence industry, individuals with a distorted and paranoiac world view who are deeply embedded in the national security complex and politicians who never tire of being seen as *tough* and who need an ever changing rolodex of "dangerous enemies" to justify their interventionsim.
For the last category- please let em help yo fill that rolodex with REAL worries.
Our infrastrcuture- water, electrcity, sewer systems are critically even insanely vulnerable to terrorism and a plausibly big attack on them would kill tens of thousands even millions. Feel free to start fixing that anytime.
The advancing state of civilian technology is leading us directly into a world where just anyone or a few people can kill people by the tens of thousands or millions. We're talking civilian access and ability to alter the DNA of organisms and even viruses. We're talking about synthetic biology. We're talking about the force multiplier for evil a poorly done IoT will subject us to.
We haver a lot more in common (to lose) with established nation-states like Russia than we have differences. We should be working WITH them, not trying to decide what goes down in their backyard. Would we let them decide what happens in Mexico? In Nicaragua or Chile or Argentina.. oh wait.. we already know the ansers tothose questions.
What -exactly- is the US afraid Russia is going to do to us? If the answer is "prevent a small gorup of billionaires like the members of the Blackstone Group fropm conrtolling more of the world's resources" then, yeah, that's not actually a national security concern.
Does anyone have a theory on what strategic purpose Russia and Putin may be said to have had in shooting down this flight which coud not have been achievedina "better" (quieter say) way?
This doesn't pass the smell test.
So dont' do business with Sony Epc or any of the other companies Sony owns.
There, problem solved.
So the socialist nations in the EU are far better off than the US but do you concede? No, like the Black Knight in Monty Python, you fight on!
Your original assertion, that the poor in the US are better off than the people in Europe. Now that's a total joke. Some guy making 7.50 an hour 15k a year (much less just a year ago b4 they raised the minimum wage) OR LESS is better off than the vast vast vast majority of people in Europe. Such a joke,. You have no idea what poverty is and what it means to be poor in a nation without any meaningful social services like the US.
Yet you fight on, in true libertarian fashion !
Please, don't take out a contract on my life, don't Ulbricht me man; I know how much sense that sort of thing makes to libertarians because, you know it's a kind of freedom, but really, just because you've been humiliated online is no reason to go FULL libertarian, FULL Pinochet, Full Milton Friedman, FULL Ross Ulbrecht and start plotting someone's murder.
I mean, really!
You're wrong. So sayeth the stats, so sayeth people who have actually lived in both places, so sayeth anyone and anything not specifically and toxically dedicated to distorting reality.
>>Saying that I should be able to sell you raisins at a price we freely agree on and without getting taxed
Let me complete the sentence for you, .. is the same as saying there's not government since there's no taxes and since there's no government there's no law. Like it or not, taxes are the basis for civilization, including taxes on raisins.
If socialist rule is so bad , why are the richest nations also the most socialist?
nations whose income is more than US
norway
\sweden
denmark
'finland
all highly socialist nations. So actually, their money, which they just outright have more of, goes further than American wages out of which comes health and education and other services which are paid for in those nations.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166...
Once you start figuring THAT in the US is really pretty far down the list, far below Canada and France and Germany, all highly socialist nations also.
Absolutely lived out of my car in Mountain View because 1) I was never not at work for more than 9 hours at a time 2) could shower at the gym and 3) didn't feel like forking over 2500 a month for a 1 bdm.
Problems arising include *it's illegal* and enforced, having to find somewhere else to park each night, having to pee ( pooping was on schedule, at work) staying organized in a smaller car. Hiding what you're doing from everyone.
So been there done that and I'm not the only one.
Later was at an interview in Palo Alto. Went to lunch with team. Manager remarks on a certain truck / car thing he's seen parked around town and comments that someone is living out of that, and wasn't that something? Oh the irony.
Actually Adam Smith would have puked up at the libertarian agenda. The only reason libertarian coke snorters can claim him is because he's not around to tell them to go fuck themselves. Ditto Jesus and the Christians.
No I think Ross Ulbricht pretty well embodies libertarian ideology and of course practice. Yep no laws, no regulation just people exchanging money for goods. You know, goods like oh I don't know, very very dangerous drugs and illegal firearms and of course - contracts for assassination !!!! Yeah Ross was into that, wasn't he. Typical libertarian - all about freedom and freedom from coercion until someone pisses him off then that person needs to die- literally, while the libertarian bemoans the lack of integrity people have.
Yep a libertarian paradise for sure, where every libertarian is left alone and is free to do as he pleases without "the goddamn goob'mint" getting in his way.
Libertarians are murdering, drug dealing fucking scum.
Fuck yeah, let's do away with regulation and laws because that's worked out so well for us the first couple thousand years of human civilization. If the "free natural market unregulated by laws" were going to spontaneously spring forward with its abundant blessings, then it would have when there were no laws under Ghengis Khan or in Somolia anywhere else on earth in which there were, literally, no laws.
Fucking idiot.
At it's very best, you have unhackable encryption for e-data. Now I will show you that that data can be hacked.
At some point, some human has to take some action to access the unencrypted form of that data. If that human can do it, then it can be done by another human, some other unauthorized way. That's called hacking.
There is no way around this. The problem with e-records is *you don't have to be physically present to steal them- they can be copied and they can be transported and the original source is none the wiser.
once you have something that fits that description, all your security is out the window.
Read the story above this one or just read the daily headlines of the MSM. Nothing is safe in electronic form- it's less safe relative to its paper counterpart. More convenient, but less safe.
Until you have computation being done on data that is never decrypted, which is possible, you'll have these problems.
Yeah now you're making the arguments the Luddite's make. That machinery will replace workers and leave them disadvantaged (unemployed or underpaid).
Fact is, when robots replace people, people shift to programming robots, maintaining robots, designing robots etc.
One the one hand we have the libertarian-cocaine theory of fucking everyone over, driving them into poverty wages and sneering "that's the free market" and on the other hand we have a system which is deliberately designed through public education, displaced worker education packages and other means to create a virtuous circle of greater productivity / cheaper goods / greater economic participation and better distribution of wealth.
The choice is ours. Thankfully sociopathic libertarian scum compromise only a few percentage points of the population and they control exactly no nation or government.
Once we understand more about genes and how they give rise to distinct patterns of human social orientation: pro-social vs anti-social , egalitarian world view vs predatory world view, we'll be able to identify the anti-social genes and correct them either before or after birth.
You're the last of your kind; we're going to ride you into extinction.
Well either you're a knowing and deliberate liar or you have the shortest memory for your own claims on record. Here's your original claim:
"As to European middle class having less money than the America's poor, it's such a joke of a statement that it makes me believe you're capable of saying just anything your brain presents to you, evidence free."
European middle class has less money than America's poor.
Not only is this false, it's not even true that the European middle class has less money the American middle class. Actually, they have as much or more.
In true libertarian fashion, you're such a crackhead for your pet theory you're continue to argue for it even if you have to engage in the classic rhetorical lies- moving goalposts , ignoring valid counter arguments of your opponent, presenting evidence -free unsourced broad statements as facts.
Libertarianism is somewhere between a drug and a religion to its adherents. It's a disease to those who are susceptible to it, as you are. Really it's turned you into a POS that people just ignore, as I will now do. WHen yo argue, you lie. You change goalposts You make broad statements without supporting facts. You grossly misrepresent your opponent's speech (I never said civilization began 2000 years ago, I said slavery is the natural order of man and it's only enforced laws and regulations based on democratic ideals and nothing else that stops us from going back there).
You're truly the worst sort of online troll. Please continue to have.... the life you're having
I doubt this person ever lived in "europe" for the same reason I doubt anyone lives in "north america." Europe is a continent you douchebag, if you were "from europe" you would have stated the nation you were "from" in europe.
>> To the contrary, monarchies and aristocracies generally lost their power because of free markets, as commoners became wealthier through commerce and then demanded more political power.
Gawd you have no idea about history whatsoever. A serf who attempted to work a neighbor's land because the neighbor offered him a better deal was killed outright. There is opening for "market forcces" to take over. If "market forces" were able to take over, then why didn't they do it for the first two thousand years. If it's such an inevitable powerful force, why does its appearance and rise coincide with democratic government and not before?
The fact is a few rich people - nobles and barons, kings, the upper echelon of the military effectively owned fucking everything even into the 1700s and 1800s. Then democracy started in France by violent overthrow of the King. That's when things started to get better for people and that's when fair laws regulating the economy began to create something other than an "economic" world composed of intrigue, murder, theft, piracy, and the other forms of raw power.
The people who write the books that tell you that the market created democracy and a fair economy and the rule of law are all coke addicts. I can prove this. I can prove it using the same type of evidence you've presented here to support their theories.
Shit, I can prove anything using your methods. All I have to do is think it and wish it and *poof !* it becomes reality.
Saaaay.... maybe there is something to this libertarian smack after all.
>>I'm sorry if you don't understand how cherry picking a few small, rich enclaves in Europe has nothing to do with my statement. Apparently, you also have trouble understanding concepts like gross/net.
This should pretty much settle this. The list of European nations by median wage:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yeah, that hurts, I know.
So much for accusations of cherry picking.
You just say shit that has no basis in reality but makes you feel good. This is typical of libertarians. Strong on strong ideas, short on facts.
I think its genetic. Libertarians are essentially predators and hate with every fiber of their being anything that tells them they can't act on their predatory instincts. That would be Government and Laws.
Since you've posted fact free and in fact opposite of reality statement after statement I really don't hold out much hope for you; you'll spend the rest of your life snarling and frothing at civilization's progress, which is more or less inevitable.
Since that was the second post to which you stooped to name calling and character assassination,please, let me return the favor.
The libertarians I've known are basically Asperger's syndrome, coke-addicted, amphetamine freaks who spend all their time (re-re-)reading Ayn Rand (who was all that and more ! ) and talking about the Austrian school of economics as though those economists hadn't stated that *no set of real world facts or statistics could ever count as evidence against their theories because such real world evidence would invariably be tainted by the impure environment of an at least somewhat regulated economy.*
So much for science.
But please, I feel like I'm keeping you from bursting an aneurysm in response to some other part of the real world which has enraged you to the point of an apoplectic fit.
I wouldn't want to do that.
As you were.
>>. Whether you believe that regulation and laws are necessary or not, they are clearly not part of the definition of market economies.
Wrong again. The very idea IDEA of a modern economy is a fabrication of the human mind. Before there were anything like modern "economies" there was warfare, booty and enslavement of the losers and in fact nearly everyone outside the ruling class. You need to read history. That is how the world was run for aeons.
Laws and regulations are what create modern civilization with anything you'd call an economy. Outside of that, it's pillage and plundering ala Ghengis Khan.
>>Therefore, you actually agree: the goal of market economies is to make money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service
Wrong. You reduce labor by reducing the number of people you need to do a job through automation, product re-design or other increases in efficiency. Kneecapping wage earners is a road to nowhere but a nation of people who have no money for goods. You need to actually take an economics course,.
' One big problem is not knowing if your friends are friends with you or your money."
And yet they continue to marry only the most beautiful women they can without it bothering them too much.
Huh.
he government has specific age-bias laws in place which prohibit hiring/firing on the basis of age. It is against the law. And yet, SV gets away with it on a massive scale. They will do mass layoffs where virtually everyone laid off is over 30. I have seen this myself.
Just so anyone who supposes that the 1% actually have to abide by laws the 99% pass can revise their views They're completely and flagrantly lawless whenever they feel like it, and they're not afraid of the government.
Really, the whole closing of the open internet is about control and power. Just as FB is not about "connecting people to their friends!", it's about control and power then leveraging that power into more power, more money more control.
The exact same thing is going on with Cloudflare which is about inducing site owners to select options which preclude anonymity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
>>Exporting jobs and importing goods is the way we improve wealth across the world; the global economy isn't a zero sum game.
You misinterpret the global economy as a zero some game, and then, out of your own greed and fears, use flowery phrases like "exporting prosperity" to disguise your own greed, selfishness, and irrational fears.
Wrong You misinterpret the economy as a zero sum game. I think maybe you are aware of this unconsciously and therefore laid the accusation against me.Specifically, you turn it into a zero sum game in this exchange:
>> It's not a clever "new business model" for a "new economy" if it can basically be described as making money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service
>>>Yes: that's what a market economy does and what it is supposed to do.
If that's what it's supposed to do, then you're saying it's a zero sum game. What I was saying is you create wealth by creating new products and services that people want: Here's what I said:
>>A real "new economy" with "new business models" is one where the wealth is increased across the board to everyone, one where we export prosperity itself instead of exporting someone's job or import someone to degrade the labor position of the incumbents.
And here's what you said when I said that lowering prices by driving down wages is how you create wealth
>>>Yes: that's what a market economy does and what it is supposed to do.
Just so we're clear on the difference in perspectives.
As to immigration, it shows how little you read the headlines when yo say people won't come here to escape their shithole war torn nations.
As to European middle class having less money than the America's poor, it's such a joke of a statement that it makes me believe you're capable of saying just anything your brain presents to you, evidence free.
Here is the median wages for Europe. The "dying socialist nations" are at the very top of the heap, as they always are. Unless you want to make the claim that America's poor earn more than 52k a year, you've got a problem with your argument.
On top of their earnings, they also enjoy free healthcare, dental, education, college and a vast array of social services that make America look like it never really quit it's slavery addiction.
That's a working economy- where freedom from poverty creates a virtuous circle of people spending money because they have it to spend and businesses creating goods and employing people to meet that demand.
I'm disappointed that when I argue with libertarians they're big on just provably false and in fact just made up statements and big on accusatory language.
Libertarianism basically has nothing to show for itself but the bank accounts of a few South American dictators and mass murderers like Pinochet which libertarian economist Milton Friedman supported and whose regime he contributed to. That and psychotic sociopaths / amphetamine freaks like Ayn Rand.
Libertarianism is basically a masturbation fantasy of sociopaths who dream of being left alone by government to inflict their will on everyone weaker than they are.
That and oh yeah, denying the fact of human caused climate change, apparently because upping the death toll of their policies out of the hundreds of thousands and into the hundreds of millions of a couple billion is less of a concern than to them than a few gas an oil barons be permitted to continue in the lifestyles they've become accustomed to.
Hey man, what's a little mass murder when it comes to making money with fossil fuels?
>>Look around the world and 20th century history. Socialists, fascists, and dictators all tried to impose regulations, redistribute wealth, and limit trade in order to "help" people, and their citizens usually end up destitute except for a small wealthy elite in government
Look into the past prior to the 20th century. Back backin time into the 16th and 15th and 10th and 8th and 2nd and into BCE and just keep going. There is one and only one "market' the market of the strong enslaving the weak. That's the "natural order" that humans create for themselves. A tiny elite owning, literally, everything. Raewald's wealth dwarfed Gates' wealth by orders of magnitude and he was just a the start of the English Bretwaldas. So also in Asia, and everywhere else.
It was that way up until the 19th and 20th century. King John's Magnacarta applied only to the nobles who forced it on him, not the vast majority of people who were defacto slaves or just slaves.
Only laws and regulation aimed at preventing the concentration of wealth prevent the concentration of wealth. You can say that the Nordic socialist nations are dying or whatever you want to say, but that's all it is, you speaking empty phrases that have no connection to reality.
>> It's not a clever "new business model" for a "new economy" if it can basically be described as making money by paying people less to do deliver the exact same service
>>>Yes: that's what a market economy does and what it is supposed to do.
Wrong A market economy is not meant to drive down wages and concentrate wealth. A market economy is supposed to incentivize, through regulation and laws, competition so that better goods and services are created for the same or less money. Big difference.
If you make everyone a slave, then you've driven down the cost of labor and therefore goods. That's not a market economy functioning to support the public good. It's a slave economy We fought a war over this. It's over folks, you lost. You're not going to sneak it in through the back door by calling it some for of "free market".
A public good is a product or service , "stuff" for sale to the public . THE public good is the policies and practices *including but not limited to the buying and selling of stuff* the government puts in place to benefit people. Please tell me you can see the difference.
Really interested to know why this comment got 5 stars since it
1) lacks any kind of support for it's assertions
2) its assertions fly in the face of what data there is (see my earlier post) and
3) basically amounts to saying nothing more than "fuck cabs! Cabs suck! Go Uber!" in just about those words.
Do I detect some form of biasing going on in the rating system here at... /. !!! My god. What has the world come to??!!!