Well, if the rules are clear beforehand, and A knows that he won't get money for medicines even if that means dieing, then he has to die for not mowning the lawn (it is HIS decision). There can be some exceptions as if he is disabled and therefore can't do it or is incapable of understanding the rules due to some mental issues. Acting otherwise would be completely unfair.
P.S.: I think I have some "leftist" inclinations for making some exceptions in relation to protect the weak (not the lazy though).
What if the parents are very lazy and don’t mow the lawn, but the consequence is their children die? |
|
|
|
|
I see the Republicans are trying to start a trade war with Europe. I guess the right doesn’t believe in free trade anymore. Free trade has always been more of a socialist thing.
|
|
|
|
amendments are changes to the constitution
Aren't they ad ons to the constitution? I realize that they can change the meaning of the constitution, but can the actual wording of the constitution be altered? Yes and yes. An amendment can delete part of the Constitution in an additive way. For example, a Constitutional amendment could be added that repeals the federal Senate and all clauses of the Constitution in relation to the Senate. From that day forward, the Senate would be deleted. Technically you are adding another layer, but new layers can change old layers. The most extreme example would be a Constitutional amendment that repeals the Constitution itself, at which point the whole thing disappears in a puff of smoke. |
|
|
|
Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?
Isn't that more fairness than moral. There is two "types" of fairness with fancy names that I don't remember right now. Examples: Mother asks children A and B to mow the lawn. A can't be bothered, he plays video games instead, B mows the lawn. At tea time only child B gets a piece of the pudding, A gets mad and says "that's not fair" mother replies that B mowed the lawn so it's only fair that he gets pudding and A do not. Mother asks children A and B to mow the lawn. A can't be bothered, he plays video games instead, B mows the lawn. At tea time both children get's an equal piece of the pudding, B gets mad and says "that's not fair, I mowed the lawn", mother replies that it's unfair not to give both her children the same amount of pudding. Both are valid examples of fairness, the right tend to lean towards the first example and the left towards the second. As a hard left socialist, Child B is not getting any cake. |
|
|
|
My non-existent experience if using RPGs against helicopters is from watching Black Hawk Down where they were used to shoot the tail off Where is realroach? Did he died  now we have his alter ego, left statist Mclary We are going take all the Jews and send them to university. And make them write essays on Hobbes. And child support. |
|
|
|
Do you guys feel you are missing out by not being allowed RPGs? Isn’t that a violation of your second amendment rights? How are you going to protect yourself against black helicopters?
I have seen RPG:s for sale in Georgia in the 90s. I guess it was naive of me to think that civilians don’t need RPGs and that they would be illegal. I may need to up the ante slightly and check whether short range ballistic missiles are permissible for US civilians under the second amendment. Edit: this looks promising. Justice Scalia saying the second amendment applies to hand carried weapons so Stinger anti-aircraft missiles may be protected. It’s great to know that I can express my second amendment rights by bringing down civilian airliners. I guess we can defend ourselves against the black helicopters after all. https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/07/gun-rights |
|
|
|
Long / shorts ratio steady at 2.05, on the slightly bullish side of the ledger.  |
|
|
|
Let Ripple cripple for a while. Banky coin does not want to die  20000pages is coming ,hope when the 20000 pages coming with the price of $20000, that will be awesome.
Have faith, never underestimate the power of the Wall Observer Thread coinbase ripple listing. Is it true? If the price will fly high No. |
|
|
|
|
Yes Wired Magazine. That notorious hotbed of pinko commies.
|
|
|
|
20000pages is coming ,hope when the 20000 pages coming with the price of $20000, that will be awesome.
I’m shitposting my way into immortality. Edit: for those following along at home, I have just been informed by the OTC desks that they don’t want the third world shitfiat. Doesn’t look like I can help, going to have to remain someone else’s problem. |
|
|
|
Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?
"In the beginning of human life, when there was yet no law and government, the custom was "everybody according to his moral (yi)." Accordingly each man had his own moral, two men had two different morals and ten men had ten different morals -- the more people the more different notions. And everybody approved of his own moral and disapproved the views of others, and so arose mutual disapproval among men. As a result, father and son and elder and younger brothers became enemies and were estranged from each other, since they were unable to reach any agreement. Everybody worked for the disadvantage of the others with water, fire, and poison. Surplus energy was not spent for mutual aid; surplus goods were allowed to rot without sharing; excellent teachings (Dao) were kept secret and not revealed." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_natureThat's Thomas Hobbes. He was paranoid AF in his social philosophy due to living during the times of Cromwell, the republic and civil war. As a result he had a low opinion of "human nature" which tended to make life "nasty, brutish and short" in the absence of some higher restraining power (Leviathan/the state). I have to wonder about the mental health of people quoting Hobbes - what sort of hellhole did you grow up in to completely overlook the human drive for cooperation? Well the Moji did grow up during the Warring States period (c. 400 BC) which was a pretty hellish time so perhaps not surprising he was quoting Hobbes. |
|
|
|
|
Like a hypothetical frothing snake.
That’s an extremely tight band on the daily.
|
|
|
|
Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?
"In the beginning of human life, when there was yet no law and government, the custom was "everybody according to his moral (yi)." Accordingly each man had his own moral, two men had two different morals and ten men had ten different morals -- the more people the more different notions. And everybody approved of his own moral and disapproved the views of others, and so arose mutual disapproval among men. As a result, father and son and elder and younger brothers became enemies and were estranged from each other, since they were unable to reach any agreement. Everybody worked for the disadvantage of the others with water, fire, and poison. Surplus energy was not spent for mutual aid; surplus goods were allowed to rot without sharing; excellent teachings (Dao) were kept secret and not revealed." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature |
|
|
|
I really do wish you all would take your culture war to off-topic. You're not being edgy. We are only fighting because the price is doing frothing. Edit: I actually meant to type “nothing” but I prefer this version so leaving it. |
|
|
|
|
I’m not doing the deal. At most I will link him up with an OTC desk but I seriously doubt they want the shitfiat either.
|
|
|
|
Is your contact also a Nigerian prince?
No he’s more of a princess than anything else. Just got a phone call from a contact in the mining industry. He has built a water pipeline in a third world country and has been paid several million USD equivalent in local currency. Now he wants to get his money out but is having problems due to forex controls.
He called me to see if I could find someway to sell him Bitcoin in exchange for the local currency. I might need to contact one of the OTC desks to see if they take third world shit fiat.
Why would someone build anything without making sure, in first place, he can get the money out? Or is it that something changed in that country afterwards? I am sure he will find someone to sell him the BTC.... for an astronomical premium most probably. Would love to hear more about how it all develops. They have gotten the money out in the past but they had to charter an airplane to do it. He seems to think Bitcoin would be safer and more convenient. I have asked some questions and will see what happens. I suspect the answer will be no one wants the shitty local currency. |
|
|
|
|
Just got a phone call from a contact in the mining industry. He has built a water pipeline in a third world country and has been paid several million USD equivalent in local currency. Now he wants to get his money out but is having problems due to forex controls.
He called me to see if I could find someway to sell him Bitcoin in exchange for the local currency. I might need to contact one of the OTC desks to see if they take third world shit fiat.
|
|
|
|
A well regulated milita does not require full auto weapons.
Who the fuck is arguing for full auto weapons in the civilian population ?! No sane person I know. That's who. Agreed. No civilian gun owner I know wants or cares about full auto. In fact it is a liability. Another thing, if that mentally unstable kid had gone into the Parkland school with a handgun instead of an AR-15, the outcome would have been exactly the same. The rifle did him no favors. He would have been shooting from the exact same near point-blank distances, and with a hand gun would have killed just as many former classmates if not more. But of course, the AR-15 rifle now gets all the blame and calls for ban. I guess if he had gone in with a samurai sword instead they would be wanting to ban those? Or how about a knife? Or what if he had just mowed down his former classmates with a truck out in the school parking lot? I guess we should ban trucks now? Whatever we do, let's DON'T address teenage mental health as the real culprit. No no. Death toll at the Florida school shooting was 17. There is no equivalent to school shootings in any other civilised country that bans guns, including countries where trucks are legal. This is an entirely and uniquely American problem. I only know of one school lockdown in my home city. It happened when a large snake crawled out of the HVAC system. Edit: Torque I would say 59 dead and 500+ wounded is pretty effective. That’s almost 9/11 level shit and it only took one angry old guy to do it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
