Holy shit man are you even reading this thread? hugolp said absolutely nothing of using other people's property. He is a known troll. Not even worth answering. Just ignore him. |
|
|
|
Are you saying that if I set up a lemonade stand on my own private property (in USA) with the intent to sell lemonade, I would need to get a vendor license?
The police is shutting down a lot of kid stands that try to sell lemonade to earn a few dollars during summer (like they use to do) because they require to pay a license. We can not allow the kids to take business away from the big operators and so we need regulations to keep the big business safe... This was an act of protest against it. |
|
|
|
To be fair, I don't believe the public would prefer these area to be filled with vendors. If the land was privately owned, it would be a similar case. The arrests were excessive and certainly a waste of resources. The female officer was also unjustified in assaulting the person with the camera. However, selling lemonade on this property is justifiably unlawful but should be treated under more reasonable means. Its an act of protests. Its civil disobedience. Protesting what? The will of property owners which in this case is the public? Now, you can protest the means that decide such rules but I believe it can be determined that its unanimous that people don't want these grounds flooded with solicitors. I see no cause worth protesting. I could be in support of their cause if it included selling lemonade on your own property without a permit but the means used here don't address such ends. That it is ilegal to sell limonade without a license. |
|
|
|
To be fair, I don't believe the public would prefer these area to be filled with vendors. If the land was privately owned, it would be a similar case. The arrests were excessive and certainly a waste of resources. The female officer was also unjustified in assaulting the person with the camera. However, selling lemonade on this property is justifiably unlawful but should be treated under more reasonable means. Its an act of protests. Its civil disobedience. |
|
|
|
Shell would be very unhappy if there was no government to bail them out from their accidents as opposed to having to pay up when they pollute people's property. They would be bankrupt in the latter scenario.
Government enables horrible disasters. In this case, it happens that things are minor and it would be better to avoid confrontation altogether.
Surely the libertarian position is that Shell owns the sea it is drilling under? No-one else owns it and its worthless without Shell drilling there. In a libertarian paradise, its Shell's property and its no-one else's business what they do there. So Shell can pollute all it wants. OMG you are just too stupid. narrow minded, and plain dumb! troll go away! if they are polluting the ocean with oil. the oil are oing to sail away! into other people property. if they keep the oil spills on their property, its fine with me. but when they are polluting my property, im(and many others) going to sue them Stop feeding the trolls. Weve tell them about property rights in environmental issues, they know not all libertarians are anarchists, weve tell them there would be courts in anarchy. They keep ignoring it, because they are trolls. This was an interesting thread with adult conversation and they are derailing it. As long as you keep feeding them they will keep derailing it with stupid answers. |
|
|
|
It isn't supposed to be self-substaining (as I've had to repeat several times). They want to trade with other countries, most goods will still be imported even with a few thousand people. I will put that in bold text if I have to say that again! He is a troll, dont bother. |
|
|
|
|
What a useless example. Johnyj are you trying to be the member that exposes more economic fallacies per day?
Why would C and D not start doing something else? Or fish and get fruit for themselves? Why does GDP matter? If people want to consume less, so be it.
|
|
|
|
hugo: most mutualists do not identify as socialists but as "free market anti-capitalists" and individualist anarchists. Kevin Carson, for example, does not identify as a socialist. to quote mutualist.org Our ultimate vision is of a society in which the economy is organized around free market exchange between producers, and production is carried out mainly by self-employed artisans and farmers, small producers' cooperatives, worker-controlled large enterprises, and consumers' cooperatives. To the extent that wage labor still exists (which is likely, if we do not coercively suppress it), the removal of statist privileges will result in the worker's natural wage, as Benjamin Tucker put it, being his full product. But yes, it's a spectrum of course with an-cap on one side and libertarian communism on the other and various degrees of markets and property rights, mutualism, syndalicalism, egoism etc etc in between I am too lazy to look it up now but I have seen Kevin Carson refering to himself as a socialist and a the rest of the mutualist that I know do also. Benjamin Tucker was a socialist, as was Lysander Spooner, and they are his ideological precedents. At the end that branch comes from Proudhom that is a socialist. They are not marxists, but they are socialists. I personally dont care much if someone calls him/herself socialist. I think the word socialism is a bit useless. I dont see how a stalinists, a progressive, an anarcho-syndicalist and a mutualist can all call themselves socialists and assume they are in some kind of common tent, when they are opposites. What does a stalinists have in common with an anarcho-syndicalist? Yes, they might use similar vocabulary and rethoric, but thats all. Btw, I dont see how anarcho-syndicalism/anarcho-communism makes any sense. When I discovered mutualism (which is what lead me to become an anarchist) I also investigated anarcho-syndicalism/anarcho-communism. What I read is that they oppose the market and money itself, but they want to substitute it with something that looks very similar to a market and money. So basically they want to form local communes that would exchange (not trade!! that would be a market, they exchange, but I see no difference) their products in some exchangers (not a market!!, again I dont see the difference) based in the time it has taken to produce the goods. So basically imposing a "time to produce" monetary standard, but again, its not money according to them. I dont see how a market based in some "time" monetary standard is not a market and is not money, but also there are several problems with this situation, basically that producers would be compelled to lie about the time it took to produce the products to adquire certain goods. According to my very superficial readings anarcho-syndicalists argue it wont happen because, since "capitalism" is gone, people will act very different. To me this is wishfull thinking. While it is true that the dynamics of capitalism creates certain harmful ractions, believing that without capitalism humans will react according to how each anarcho-syndicalists thinks society has to be is 100% wishfull thinking. When you question this, they reffer to Marx writtings as scientific proof (!!!!!). It seems to me like a religion, where once something has happened (you die and got to heaven, capitalism ends) everybody will start acting by your personal and subjective moral standards. Honestly, I dont see how it makes any sense. |
|
|
|
1) The global economy is tanking and will crash really hard, into the biggest crash in the past 250 years, which means this will be bigger than 1929. Silver specifically will crash real hard because i) it is used as industrial metal much more than gold, and once industrials turn down even harder, demand for silver will collapse. ii) silver prices have also been largely driven up by speculators , and many of them will run to the exit once the economy gets worse. It has been true until now that when there has been a downturn investors have cashed out into dollars. But at some point it might not be the case and investors could start cashing out into precious metals. Im always checking the price of gold and silver when the stock markets crash. If they keep going in opposite directions it means the dollar is fucked. I dont think it will happen now, but its very possible at some point during this crisis. |
|
|
|
companies' sells going down -> cut staffs -> more people becomes jobless or threatened by jobless possibility and spend less -> total demand going down -> companies' sells going down -> cut staffs -> ...... This is an economic fallacy. This "model" supposes that there is only one type of good being produced. This does not happen in the real economy. Its only inflationist propaganda. |
|
|
|
I don't know about you but I'm kinda glad when I buy food from a shop I don't need insider knowledge of the company and the stores policies to know it's safe to eat because of government health and safety regulations. Are you? You are very trusting of the burocrats. |
|
|
|
Yeah I'm a bit disappointed I cashed out a big chunk of my silver bullion a month or two back...
Don't worry, it will turn down hard soonWhy do you think this will happen? Only because of charting or do you have analize fundamentals as well (not judging just curious)? |
|
|
|
If I own a house, it's my house. We are discussing the validity and reach of property rights. You can not justify owning something by saying that you own it. We are discussing exactly that concept, what it means to own something. If I want it to sit there unused then that's my choice. Again, it all boils down to your idea of property rights. Maybe I just like the idea of having a house that I could always live in, in an emergency. The point is, I might want to use it someday and that's all that matters. Let's say that I already own a house that I live in and I buy another house for $50,000. I have it there for 15 years doing nothing with it. Then, you come along and move in to it claiming it's unowned. The next day, the house I was living in burns to the ground and I'm homeless. Do you think that's fair? If you are able to have a house of $50.000 there unused I am sure you are capable of storing some wealth in other ways that allow you to recover from your loss. Also, Im not being very strick. If you visit your house from time to time, it can still be considered yours. I dont think its fair or socially stable in a voluntary society to have a bunch of capital unused for years and years. People will not accept that arrangement and will lead to violantions of property rights. Only under a represive society those type of situations are accepted. Wait, now the justification for the State is e.coli? Not warlords or marauding bandits but food posioning? Sheesh, debate sure has gone downhill since I last checked the politics forums. Yes, its like that with those people. I think that when they see a thread with adult conversations they come to distract. EDIT: Btw, lemonginger last time I check mutualist were socialists. I dont consider myself a mutualist or a socialist, although I have taken or share a lot of ideas with them, because I dont feel that strongly about wage labour as they do. I guess Im near them, but somewhere in between. |
|
|
|
In the real world, that means you are happy to see people die of food poisoning.
Can't see the benefit myself. Even with lower taxes, being poisoned is never fun. Are you trying to keep the debate honest?  I guess that what happened last month here in the EU with the people poisoned by food did not happened since we have the government taking care of safety. Or should I say that since you support those agencies you are guilty of what happened? You can try to play all the rethoric tricks you want. You have said nothing. |
|
|
|
o_O Really? It's been plastered all over the news, Sovereign debt, poor economic data, and the absolute fact that even countries with low sovereign debt are too invested in the dollar such that should the worst be achieved things would really go to shit, and fast! Add to that the proximity to the 2008 financial crisis, the wipeout of gains since, and house of cards that debt has put us on, and the potential energy of a future decline is frightening. Even if we do achieve some form of recovery out of this corner, debt has been so over extended since the 80's that it would easily take 10 - 20 years just to get us on a steady footing again. And I'm not even an Austrian gold bug!  There is also the likely scenario that we add some more duct tape and limp on for another few years on the back of tech advancements and emerging markets....who knows what would come of this outcome. Yes, that is the broad picutre. What you expose has been there for months and things were more or less stable. Im just saying that there is something in particular going on right now that is driving everybody nuts and in panic but I dont know what it is. Also, the debt is a big problem but its not only the debt. The distortion of the capital structure is stopping the recovery as well. The most dramatic part is probably the people. You have a lot of people that specialized in the construction sector, in my country people stopped studying because they were getting payed a lot in the construction sector. What are these people going to do now that all that demand for construction labour is never going to come back (at least in some decades)? Are they going to go back to study again that they are over 30 and with family and obligations? Are they condemned to low-level paying jobs? Are there so many low-level paying jobs? The situation is dire. And the sad thing is that there is no magic solutions and the objectives of the solutions being applied are to mantain the status quo at any price, no matter the consquences for the people. Hence QE2, and our governments continued attempt at 'rectifiying it's household budget' via a CCCS (Consumer Credit Counselling Service) type of arrangement, which again... is just anothe money-making body - a vicious cycle.
I think currently, the nation, is coming to the conclusion that, well, It's time to bit the bullet, and face the cold hard truth --- As a nation, we're overspent, GROSSLY, and holy cow, we can't sweep this under the rug any longer, because, the World has pulled the rug out from under us. If history is any reference, when the system is so gone, governments and society in general never take the difficult (but correct) decissions and just keep going until everything collapses. |
|
|
|
¡Hola compadres! ¡Oigan!  ¿Qué hay de nueces en cuanto a Bitcoin en Cuba? He visto un nodo por allá una vez hace tiempo, pero ya no lo veo. Quizás, era el nodo del Comandante...  ¿Hay algunos bitcoineros cubanos? Si no, ¿es posible utilizar Bitcoin en Cuba, o existen algunos problemas de la infraestructura telefónica todavía, o alguna otra cosa? Bitcoin no usa demasiado ancho de banda para los estandares a los que estamos acostumbrados aquí, así que supongo que tampoco habrá problema en Cuba en ese sentido, pero desconozco hay mucha diferencia. Realmente Bitcoin puede ser una gran manera de enviar dinero a Cuba. Yo diría que hay negocio, aunque faltaría ver la respuesta de las autoridades claro. |
|
|
|
Estimados todos,
¿Alguien estaría interesado en usar un sistema de micropagos de movil que permita obtener bitcoins a cambio de mensajes premium o especiales?
Inicialmente en España.
El mayor problema que le veo es que el coste para el usuario es muy elevado, ¿alguien conoce algún sistema mejor?
Creo que hay alguien que ha creado un sistema así en UK. |
|
|
|
So getting rid of all those pesky food safety regulations and like? And reducing taxes so people can self-organize saftey consumer associations, yes. But honestly, there are other more pressing matters than those. |
|
|
|
No seriously the companies listed above (under Ron - Lock Mart etc.) make the most money not in war but in peace. I worked in that industry so have seen the effects first hand. Basically what happens is that in war time the gov slows or stops contracts to make new things or modernize things, instead their budgets get spent maintaining, and replacing equipment, troops, munitions, etc. So yes those companies would be much better off out of the war. Now you would be unlikely to hear them make any official statements otherwise... after all the boss of their customers is the president :-D Curiously enough there was a proposed law in France to tax gold and the the NO won. Wonder why the politicians voted no on that one...  Corruption always find ways around the law. Also, by giving government money by numbers of votes you are punishing small parties and benefiting big parties. They get more votes so they get more money, because they have more money they get more votes, because they get more votes they get more money, ... Its a vicious circle that stops any kind of political diversity. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
