---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Weary of irrational biases From: AnonyMint Date: Thu, May 22, 2014 11:53 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This will probably be my last communication on these sort of debates, because I can't convince someone who has an irrational bias and refuses to be objective and based in fact and analysis. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-end-goal/REPLY: I would like to see something like that happen.
However, we must keep in mind that we require the crash and burn. Society
moves through waves of Creative Destruction. We must see the system
collapse and that will then set the stage for a rebirth. The object is to
be there when that happens. This will be the moment of truth. Society will
swing either toward more authoritarian or toward real democracy.
We need the true checks and balance of the people divorced from career
politicians. Eliminating direct taxation will eliminate the corruption and
lobbying of politicians to carve out exclusions. Republics are the WORST
form of government for they ALWAYS become the most corrupt. Even a king is
better for he is either a madman or a saint – he cannot be bribed on the
whims of people or chance.
Eliminating direct taxation, which the founders of the US did originally,
it will eliminate the need to hoard cash offshore. Eliminate direct
taxation and you will lower the cost of labor. Eliminate unions that serve
no functional purpose and only promotes higher wages without improving
skills. To get ahead, people have to keep pace with technology or be
outdated in the workforce watching their labor value depreciate. If people
understand the technology cycle they will grasp the idea that they must
increase their value by expanding their skills. You've observed history and seen that never once has any political system been stable and they always devolve to Totalitarianism at the end game. Yet you still come back for more sloppy seconds, thirds, and Nths. You've observed history and seen that the technologies for global control and the level of global control have radically increased. Yet you deny the global hegemony that will result from your idealistic delusion above. You've observed history and seen that the only escape and freedom has ever come in the form of a frontier where the oppressed can compete against the cancer and thus survival of the human race. Yet now you say we can just burn without a frontier and reform. You've fucking lost your mind. Most people will masturbate like this, because they don't have the skills to work on the information technology frontier so as to provide real solutions. You are too vested in the old school, in idealism about political structure and top-down planning and organization. You will be swept away by decentralization technology. End. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-age-of-disinformation-hiding-truth-in-plain-sight/This is standard operational procedure and it is why I am
very skeptical about conspiracy theories. Trace the origins and you will
find that they are generated as part of a plot to hide in plain view the
truth. Take 911. There are now people who claim that there were no planes
at all and it was all staged.
...
So how do you cover-up what is in plain sight? The oldest trick in the
book is disinformation. You create the controversy centered around the
Twin Towers and exaggerate the claims. The majority will begin to see
through the exaggerations as a conspiracy theory and stop there never
looking further. Indeed, the truth is in detailed analysis of the material facts rather than broad-brushed generalizations such as when you Martin refuse to analyze and accept the detailed factual analysis of the likes of Anthony Sutton on the existence and manipulations funded by the globalists. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Weary of irrational biases From: AnonyMint Date: Thu, May 22, 2014 11:53 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This will probably be my last communication on these sort of debates, because I can't convince someone who has an irrational bias and refuses to be objective and based in fact and analysis. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-end-goal/REPLY: I would like to see something like that happen.
However, we must keep in mind that we require the crash and burn. Society
moves through waves of Creative Destruction. We must see the system
collapse and that will then set the stage for a rebirth. The object is to
be there when that happens. This will be the moment of truth. Society will
swing either toward more authoritarian or toward real democracy.
We need the true checks and balance of the people divorced from career
politicians. Eliminating direct taxation will eliminate the corruption and
lobbying of politicians to carve out exclusions. Republics are the WORST
form of government for they ALWAYS become the most corrupt. Even a king is
better for he is either a madman or a saint – he cannot be bribed on the
whims of people or chance.
Eliminating direct taxation, which the founders of the US did originally,
it will eliminate the need to hoard cash offshore. Eliminate direct
taxation and you will lower the cost of labor. Eliminate unions that serve
no functional purpose and only promotes higher wages without improving
skills. To get ahead, people have to keep pace with technology or be
outdated in the workforce watching their labor value depreciate. If people
understand the technology cycle they will grasp the idea that they must
increase their value by expanding their skills. You've observed history and seen that never once has any political system been stable and they always devolve to Totalitarianism at the end game. Yet you still come back for more sloppy seconds, thirds, and Nths. You've observed history and seen that the technologies for global control and the level of global control have radically increased. Yet you deny the global hegemony that will result from your idealistic delusion above. You've observed history and seen that the only escape and freedom has ever come in the form of a frontier where the oppressed can compete against the cancer and thus survival of the human race. Yet now you say we can just burn without a frontier and reform. You've fucking lost your mind. Most people will masturbate like this, because they don't have the skills to work on the information technology frontier so as to provide real solutions. You are too vested in the old school, in idealism about political structure and top-down planning and organization. You will be swept away by decentralization technology. End. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-age-of-disinformation-hiding-truth-in-plain-sight/This is standard operational procedure and it is why I am
very skeptical about conspiracy theories. Trace the origins and you will
find that they are generated as part of a plot to hide in plain view the
truth. Take 911. There are now people who claim that there were no planes
at all and it was all staged.
...
So how do you cover-up what is in plain sight? The oldest trick in the
book is disinformation. You create the controversy centered around the
Twin Towers and exaggerate the claims. The majority will begin to see
through the exaggerations as a conspiracy theory and stop there never
looking further. Indeed, the truth is in detailed analysis of the material facts rather than broad-brushed generalizations such as when you Martin refuse to analyze and accept the detailed factual analysis of the likes of Anthony Sutton on the existence and manipulations funded by the globalists. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Weary of irrational biases From: AnonyMint Date: Thu, May 22, 2014 11:53 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This will probably be my last communication on these sort of debates, because I can't convince someone who has an irrational bias and refuses to be objective and based in fact and analysis. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-end-goal/REPLY: I would like to see something like that happen.
However, we must keep in mind that we require the crash and burn. Society
moves through waves of Creative Destruction. We must see the system
collapse and that will then set the stage for a rebirth. The object is to
be there when that happens. This will be the moment of truth. Society will
swing either toward more authoritarian or toward real democracy.
We need the true checks and balance of the people divorced from career
politicians. Eliminating direct taxation will eliminate the corruption and
lobbying of politicians to carve out exclusions. Republics are the WORST
form of government for they ALWAYS become the most corrupt. Even a king is
better for he is either a madman or a saint – he cannot be bribed on the
whims of people or chance.
Eliminating direct taxation, which the founders of the US did originally,
it will eliminate the need to hoard cash offshore. Eliminate direct
taxation and you will lower the cost of labor. Eliminate unions that serve
no functional purpose and only promotes higher wages without improving
skills. To get ahead, people have to keep pace with technology or be
outdated in the workforce watching their labor value depreciate. If people
understand the technology cycle they will grasp the idea that they must
increase their value by expanding their skills. You've observed history and seen that never once has any political system been stable and they always devolve to Totalitarianism at the end game. Yet you still come back for more sloppy seconds, thirds, and Nths. You've observed history and seen that the technologies for global control and the level of global control have radically increased. Yet you deny the global hegemony that will result from your idealistic delusion above. You've observed history and seen that the only escape and freedom has ever come in the form of a frontier where the oppressed can compete against the cancer and thus survival of the human race. Yet now you say we can just burn without a frontier and reform. You've fucking lost your mind. Most people will masturbate like this, because they don't have the skills to work on the information technology frontier so as to provide real solutions. You are too vested in the old school, in idealism about political structure and top-down planning and organization. You will be swept away by decentralization technology. End. http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/the-age-of-disinformation-hiding-truth-in-plain-sight/This is standard operational procedure and it is why I am
very skeptical about conspiracy theories. Trace the origins and you will
find that they are generated as part of a plot to hide in plain view the
truth. Take 911. There are now people who claim that there were no planes
at all and it was all staged.
...
So how do you cover-up what is in plain sight? The oldest trick in the
book is disinformation. You create the controversy centered around the
Twin Towers and exaggerate the claims. The majority will begin to see
through the exaggerations as a conspiracy theory and stop there never
looking further. Indeed, the truth is in detailed analysis of the material facts rather than broad-brushed generalizations such as when you Martin refuse to analyze and accept the detailed factual analysis of the likes of Anthony Sutton on the existence and manipulations funded by the globalists. |
|
|
|
anonyminttalk.org
Lately I've posted in roughly 6 threads out of 1000s of threads on this site. Do you have any rational point to make? |
|
|
|
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/22/historic-trade-deal-russia-china-will-this-dethrone-the-usd/Backing their currencies with gold is irrelevant because their economies are turning down. All the capital inflow in the world can't make China's exports more profitable. China and Russia's problem is their top-down managed economies can't grow in real terms. China did mostly debt based pumped false growth. And Russia did oligarchy control over natural resources. Oh yes it won't take 100s of years for these global bubble to collapse. The bottom of the collapse will be 2032 according the Armstrong's computer model (which has never been wrong).
|
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: There will never be effective planning in government (not even in China) From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 9:07 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/21188/VA Scandal – More Evidence that Government is INCAPABLE
of Planning
...
Give the people FULL coverage in the private sector and that just may
spark a reality check that these wars are going to COST a lot more money
that people thought so perhaps they will not be so eager to wage war on
the world. Martin, it is clear from your posts about China that you admire their 5 and 10 year top-down central planning. You've even written that when you were in China you saw them observing the prices of everything (even 64 variants of tea) and you admired that they didn't intervene but just collected data to understand the markets. You think that government can be made to act rationally if for example term limits are implemented in the West. What you fail to understand is that China's planning is an abject failure. China is rising only because their people were so undervalued relative to the rest of the world, not because as you attribute to some brilliance of Communist planning. It was just time (as you often say about your cycles model). The coming Knowledge Revolution is going to shred these top-down planning paradigms (the globalist agenda is a paradigm of passive capital being defeated and the rise of the individualized capital in the Knowledge Age). The people will rise to direct power via the power of decentralized technologies on the network. You are entirely missing the real trend at hand. Your mind is still stuck in your political and high-end money manager connections. All of you are going to become increasingly irrelevant. I again refer you to the following threads to bring yourself up to speed on the fledgling trend at hand: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg6078778#msg6078778https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.0Educate yourself by reading carefully the above threads. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: There will never be effective planning in government (not even in China) From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 9:07 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/21188/VA Scandal – More Evidence that Government is INCAPABLE
of Planning
...
Give the people FULL coverage in the private sector and that just may
spark a reality check that these wars are going to COST a lot more money
that people thought so perhaps they will not be so eager to wage war on
the world. Martin, it is clear from your posts about China that you admire their 5 and 10 year top-down central planning. You've even written that when you were in China you saw them observing the prices of everything (even 64 variants of tea) and you admired that they didn't intervene but just collected data to understand the markets. You think that government can be made to act rationally if for example term limits are implemented in the West. What you fail to understand is that China's planning is an abject failure. China is rising only because their people were so undervalued relative to the rest of the world, not because as you attribute to some brilliance of Communist planning. It was just time (as you often say about your cycles model). The coming Knowledge Revolution is going to shred these top-down planning paradigms (the globalist agenda is a paradigm of passive capital being defeated and the rise of the individualized capital in the Knowledge Age). The people will rise to direct power via the power of decentralized technologies on the network. You are entirely missing the real trend at hand. Your mind is still stuck in your political and high-end money manager connections. All of you are going to become increasingly irrelevant. I again refer you to the following threads to bring yourself up to speed on the fledgling trend at hand: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg6078778#msg6078778https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.0Educate yourself by reading carefully the above threads. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: There will never be effective planning in government (not even in China) From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 9:07 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/21188/VA Scandal – More Evidence that Government is INCAPABLE
of Planning
...
Give the people FULL coverage in the private sector and that just may
spark a reality check that these wars are going to COST a lot more money
that people thought so perhaps they will not be so eager to wage war on
the world. Martin, it is clear from your posts about China that you admire their 5 and 10 year top-down central planning. You've even written that when you were in China you saw them observing the prices of everything (even 64 variants of tea) and you admired that they didn't intervene but just collected data to understand the markets. You think that government can be made to act rationally if for example term limits are implemented in the West. What you fail to understand is that China's planning is an abject failure. China is rising only because their people were so undervalued relative to the rest of the world, not because as you attribute to some brilliance of Communist planning. It was just time (as you often say about your cycles model). The coming Knowledge Revolution is going to shred these top-down planning paradigms (the globalist agenda is a paradigm of passive capital being defeated and the rise of the individualized capital in the Knowledge Age). The people will rise to direct power via the power of decentralized technologies on the network. You are entirely missing the real trend at hand. Your mind is still stuck in your political and high-end money manager connections. All of you are going to become increasingly irrelevant. I again refer you to the following threads to bring yourself up to speed on the fledgling trend at hand: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.msg6078778#msg6078778https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.0Educate yourself by reading carefully the above threads. |
|
|
|
If Rome Collapse - then it didn't occur to the people who lived through it ~ historians regard the 'collapse' of Rome as having lasted 300+ years at a time when the life expectancy was in the 30s to 40s and after the collapse did occur general nutrition and living standards actually improved.
Rome itself didn't disappear - people continued to live within Rome itself and the 'Roman Empire' technically got bigger, if we regard the Roman Catholic Church as being the proper continuation of the Empire.
True collapses rarely occur in history - they're more like fades into obscurity and often whimpers at that.
Try telling that to the 1.4 million people the fled Rome because the Totalitarianism was so onerous. See following post I had made in the Mad Max thread:
Actually what happened is the capital shifted to the Byzantine or Eastern Roman empire: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/unions-out-of-control-the-real-poison-pill/ Maybe the one exception was the Soviet Union where the collapse was almost instantaneous to the American perspective, although the Soviet people themselves were well evident it was a dying institution at best.
Educate yourself about the collapse of the Soviet Union: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/03/18/the-us-did-not-cause-the-fall-of-the-soviet-union-that-is-a-false-belief-on-both-sides/ |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Eliminating career politicians doesn't eliminate the power vacuum of democracy From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 8:24 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/return-of-corruption-sorry-lobbying/it seems remarkable that companies would do anything but
lobby. A particularly vivid example was in 2004, when an aggressive
corporate campaign prompted Congress to grant a one-off tax holiday for
American companies to repatriate foreign earnings. The outright return on
lobbying costs, according to one of the various studies that served as
inspiration for the Strategas index, was $220 for each $1 spent. (see also
CNBC).
An you wonder WHY I say we FIRST need to get rid of career politicians –
one term only. Do that, and most else will start to fall into
place. Martin, setting term limits won't resolve the perils of socialism and collectivism. You are naively expecting that if the people who are elected have no incentive to remain in office then they will try to do what is best for the citizens rather than appeasing lobbyists. Again you fail to understand the deeper implications of the reference I have sent you numerous times as follows. http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984Some Iron Laws of Political Economics
Mancur Olson, in his book The Logic Of Collective Action,
highlighted the central problem of politics in a democracy. The benefits
of political market-rigging can be concentrated to benefit particular
special interest groups, while the costs (in higher taxes, slower economic
growth, and many other second-order effects) are diffused through the
entire population.
The result is a scramble in which individual interest groups perpetually
seek to corner more and more rent from the system, while the incremental
costs of this behavior rise slowly enough that it is difficult to sustain
broad political opposition to the overall system of political privilege
and rent-seeking. Let me spell it out for you. The "special interest groups" are the citizens. The citizens form groups that demand the government give them benefits. For example, you documented this recently "Germany is promising a Woman’s Mother’s Pension for those mothers whose children were born before 1992. They will be entitled to early retirement at 63": http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/18/german-politicians-promise-unfunded-pensions-just-to-win/Politicians get elected when they promise everyone everything. Term limits won't change the fact that citizens view government as a collective trough from which each citizen should vote to get their fair share. Problem is that to appease this it requires politicians to promise more and more share, i.e. government becomes a larger and larger share of the GDP crowding out the private sector and ultimately reaching Totalitarianism as we are entering now with the NSA and the hunt for all wealth to fund the for example $200 trillion of actuarial obligations promised by the U.S. government. Martin you are just masturbating with the term limits idea. In fact, you play right into the plans of the globalists, because reform of the nation-states is part of the globalist agenda taking us towards "international cooperation and oversight for transparency" which is a code phrase for global hegemony and enslavement of the global citizen in the power vacuum of global collectivism. The only solution to rising to periodic end game of collectivism (when it reaches Totalitarianism) has always been for the intellectuals and forthright to seek out frontiers. In fact, your masturbation delusion about term limits as a nirvana is in direct defiance of the your own model which tells you there must always be a cycle. The cycle has always been and will always be an oscillation between rising socialism and rising frontiers. So now the frontier of geography and cash are gone. So what is the next frontier? It is of course technological.Sooner or later you will realize I am correct. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Eliminating career politicians doesn't eliminate the power vacuum of democracy From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 8:24 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/return-of-corruption-sorry-lobbying/it seems remarkable that companies would do anything but
lobby. A particularly vivid example was in 2004, when an aggressive
corporate campaign prompted Congress to grant a one-off tax holiday for
American companies to repatriate foreign earnings. The outright return on
lobbying costs, according to one of the various studies that served as
inspiration for the Strategas index, was $220 for each $1 spent. (see also
CNBC).
An you wonder WHY I say we FIRST need to get rid of career politicians –
one term only. Do that, and most else will start to fall into
place. Martin, setting term limits won't resolve the perils of socialism and collectivism. You are naively expecting that if the people who are elected have no incentive to remain in office then they will try to do what is best for the citizens rather than appeasing lobbyists. Again you fail to understand the deeper implications of the reference I have sent you numerous times as follows. http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984Some Iron Laws of Political Economics
Mancur Olson, in his book The Logic Of Collective Action,
highlighted the central problem of politics in a democracy. The benefits
of political market-rigging can be concentrated to benefit particular
special interest groups, while the costs (in higher taxes, slower economic
growth, and many other second-order effects) are diffused through the
entire population.
The result is a scramble in which individual interest groups perpetually
seek to corner more and more rent from the system, while the incremental
costs of this behavior rise slowly enough that it is difficult to sustain
broad political opposition to the overall system of political privilege
and rent-seeking. Let me spell it out for you. The "special interest groups" are the citizens. The citizens form groups that demand the government give them benefits. For example, you documented this recently "Germany is promising a Woman’s Mother’s Pension for those mothers whose children were born before 1992. They will be entitled to early retirement at 63": http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/18/german-politicians-promise-unfunded-pensions-just-to-win/Politicians get elected when they promise everyone everything. Term limits won't change the fact that citizens view government as a collective trough from which each citizen should vote to get their fair share. Problem is that to appease this it requires politicians to promise more and more share, i.e. government becomes a larger and larger share of the GDP crowding out the private sector and ultimately reaching Totalitarianism as we are entering now with the NSA and the hunt for all wealth to fund the for example $200 trillion of actuarial obligations promised by the U.S. government. Martin you are just masturbating with the term limits idea. In fact, you play right into the plans of the globalists, because reform of the nation-states is part of the globalist agenda taking us towards "international cooperation and oversight for transparency" which is a code phrase for global hegemony and enslavement of the global citizen in the power vacuum of global collectivism. The only solution to rising to periodic end game of collectivism (when it reaches Totalitarianism) has always been for the intellectuals and forthright to seek out frontiers. In fact, your masturbation delusion about term limits as a nirvana is in direct defiance of the your own model which tells you there must always be a cycle. The cycle has always been and will always be an oscillation between rising socialism and rising frontiers. So now the frontier of geography and cash are gone. So what is the next frontier? It is of course technological. Sooner or later you will realize I am correct. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Eliminating career politicians doesn't eliminate the power vacuum of democracy From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 8:24 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/return-of-corruption-sorry-lobbying/it seems remarkable that companies would do anything but
lobby. A particularly vivid example was in 2004, when an aggressive
corporate campaign prompted Congress to grant a one-off tax holiday for
American companies to repatriate foreign earnings. The outright return on
lobbying costs, according to one of the various studies that served as
inspiration for the Strategas index, was $220 for each $1 spent. (see also
CNBC).
An you wonder WHY I say we FIRST need to get rid of career politicians –
one term only. Do that, and most else will start to fall into
place. Martin, setting term limits won't resolve the perils of socialism and collectivism. You are naively expecting that if the people who are elected have no incentive to remain in office then they will try to do what is best for the citizens rather than appeasing lobbyists. Again you fail to understand the deeper implications of the reference I have sent you numerous times as follows. http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984Some Iron Laws of Political Economics
Mancur Olson, in his book The Logic Of Collective Action,
highlighted the central problem of politics in a democracy. The benefits
of political market-rigging can be concentrated to benefit particular
special interest groups, while the costs (in higher taxes, slower economic
growth, and many other second-order effects) are diffused through the
entire population.
The result is a scramble in which individual interest groups perpetually
seek to corner more and more rent from the system, while the incremental
costs of this behavior rise slowly enough that it is difficult to sustain
broad political opposition to the overall system of political privilege
and rent-seeking. Let me spell it out for you. The "special interest groups" are the citizens. The citizens form groups that demand the government give them benefits. For example, you documented this recently "Germany is promising a Woman’s Mother’s Pension for those mothers whose children were born before 1992. They will be entitled to early retirement at 63": http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/18/german-politicians-promise-unfunded-pensions-just-to-win/Politicians get elected when they promise everyone everything. Term limits won't change the fact that citizens view government as a collective trough from which each citizen should vote to get their fair share. Problem is that to appease this it requires politicians to promise more and more share, i.e. government becomes a larger and larger share of the GDP crowding out the private sector and ultimately reaching Totalitarianism as we are entering now with the NSA and the hunt for all wealth to fund the for example $200 trillion of actuarial obligations promised by the U.S. government. Martin you are just masturbating with the term limits idea. In fact, you play right into the plans of the globalists, because reform of the nation-states is part of the globalist agenda taking us towards "international cooperation and oversight for transparency" which is a code phrase for global hegemony and enslavement of the global citizen in the power vacuum of global collectivism. The only solution to rising to periodic end game of collectivism (when it reaches Totalitarianism) has always been for the intellectuals and forthright to seek out frontiers. In fact, your masturbation delusion about term limits as a nirvana is in direct defiance of the your own model which tells you there must always be a cycle. The cycle has always been and will always be an oscillation between rising socialism and rising frontiers. So now the frontier of geography and cash are gone. So what is the next frontier? It is of course technological. Sooner or later you will realize I am correct. |
|
|
|
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Eliminating career politicians doesn't eliminate the power vacuum of democracy From: AnonyMint Date: Wed, May 21, 2014 8:24 pm To: "Armstrong Economics" < armstrongeconomics@gmail.com> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/return-of-corruption-sorry-lobbying/it seems remarkable that companies would do anything but
lobby. A particularly vivid example was in 2004, when an aggressive
corporate campaign prompted Congress to grant a one-off tax holiday for
American companies to repatriate foreign earnings. The outright return on
lobbying costs, according to one of the various studies that served as
inspiration for the Strategas index, was $220 for each $1 spent. (see also
CNBC).
An you wonder WHY I say we FIRST need to get rid of career politicians –
one term only. Do that, and most else will start to fall into
place. Martin, setting term limits won't resolve the perils of socialism and collectivism. You are naively expecting that if the people who are elected have no incentive to remain in office then they will try to do what is best for the citizens rather than appeasing lobbyists. Again you fail to understand the deeper implications of the reference I have sent you numerous times as follows. http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984Some Iron Laws of Political Economics
Mancur Olson, in his book The Logic Of Collective Action,
highlighted the central problem of politics in a democracy. The benefits
of political market-rigging can be concentrated to benefit particular
special interest groups, while the costs (in higher taxes, slower economic
growth, and many other second-order effects) are diffused through the
entire population.
The result is a scramble in which individual interest groups perpetually
seek to corner more and more rent from the system, while the incremental
costs of this behavior rise slowly enough that it is difficult to sustain
broad political opposition to the overall system of political privilege
and rent-seeking. Let me spell it out for you. The "special interest groups" are the citizens. The citizens form groups that demand the government give them benefits. For example, you documented this recently "Germany is promising a Woman’s Mother’s Pension for those mothers whose children were born before 1992. They will be entitled to early retirement at 63": http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/18/german-politicians-promise-unfunded-pensions-just-to-win/Politicians get elected when they promise everyone everything. Term limits won't change the fact that citizens view government as a collective trough from which each citizen should vote to get their fair share. Problem is that to appease this it requires politicians to promise more and more share, i.e. government becomes a larger and larger share of the GDP crowding out the private sector and ultimately reaching Totalitarianism as we are entering now with the NSA and the hunt for all wealth to fund the for example $200 trillion of actuarial obligations promised by the U.S. government. Martin you are just masturbating with the term limits idea. In fact, you play right into the plans of the globalists, because reform of the nation-states is part of the globalist agenda taking us towards "international cooperation and oversight for transparency" which is a code phrase for global hegemony and enslavement of the global citizen in the power vacuum of global collectivism. The only solution to rising to periodic end game of collectivism (when it reaches Totalitarianism) has always been for the intellectuals and forthright to seek out frontiers. In fact, your masturbation delusion about term limits as a nirvana is in direct defiance of the your own model which tells you there must always be a cycle. The cycle has always been and will always be an oscillation between rising socialism and rising frontiers. So now the frontier of geography and cash are gone. So what is the next frontier? It is of course technological. Sooner or later you will realize I am correct. |
|
|
|
Cross-posting... Those who are expecting dollar collapse and hyperinflation are clueless about history. Never in the history of the world, not even in Rome, has the global reserve currency collapsed. It doesn't happen. Only revolutionary governments which can't sell their own bonds collapse into hyperinflation. Rather what is happening now is the "borrower is slave to lender". The USA is taking control of the globe now and the dollar will become very strong. They will track down all wealth globally and confiscate it. All the pawns of the USA (Europe, Japan, etc) and the fake antagonists (Russia, China) are on board this plan to share information to track down "tax evasion" which is a code word for Totalitarianism. Again find the link in my prior post and read that entire Mad Max thread so you can re-educate yourselves. Civilizations (problem solving societies) collapse because of the diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity. Tainter's Law. http://www.jayhanson.org/page134.htmNo they collapse because of socialism and collectivism when the private sector shrinks to for example 25% of GDP (and govt+regulation compliance is 75% of GDP as is the case in the USA and Europe now), which is an orthogonal property to knowledge formation. Here are a few examples of the cancer upon us now: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/unions-out-of-control-the-real-poison-pill/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/how-bureaucrats-undermine-everything/Don't conflate the perils of collectivism with the beauty of technological advance. We already had this discussion in two other threads already and I am not going to debate you again, as I already shown the idiotic illogic of your conflation of the two: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=564097.msg6513193#msg6513193 |
|
|
|
Cross-posting... Those who are expecting dollar collapse and hyperinflation are clueless about history. Never in the history of the world, not even in Rome, has the global reserve currency collapsed. It doesn't happen. Only revolutionary governments which can't sell their own bonds collapse into hyperinflation. Rather what is happening now is the "borrower is slave to lender". The USA is taking control of the globe now and the dollar will become very strong. They will track down all wealth globally and confiscate it. All the pawns of the USA (Europe, Japan, etc) and the fake antagonists (Russia, China) are on board this plan to share information to track down "tax evasion" which is a code word for Totalitarianism. Again find the link in my prior post and read that entire Mad Max thread so you can re-educate yourselves. Civilizations (problem solving societies) collapse because of the diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity. Tainter's Law. http://www.jayhanson.org/page134.htmNo they collapse because of socialism and collectivism when the private sector shrinks to for example 25% of GDP (and govt+regulation compliance is 75% of GDP as is the case in the USA and Europe now), which is an orthogonal property to knowledge formation. Here are a few examples of the cancer upon us now: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/unions-out-of-control-the-real-poison-pill/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/how-bureaucrats-undermine-everything/Don't conflate the perils of collectivism with the beauty of technological advance. We already had this discussion in two other threads already and I am not going to debate you again, as I already shown the idiotic illogic of your conflation of the two: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=564097.msg6513193#msg6513193 |
|
|
|
Those who are expecting dollar collapse and hyperinflation are clueless about history. Never in the history of the world, not even in Rome, has the global reserve currency collapsed. It doesn't happen. Only revolutionary governments which can't sell their own bonds collapse into hyperinflation. Rather what is happening now is the "borrower is slave to lender". The USA is taking control of the globe now and the dollar will become very strong. They will track down all wealth globally and confiscate it. All the pawns of the USA (Europe, Japan, etc) and the fake antagonists (Russia, China) are on board this plan to share information to track down "tax evasion" which is a code word for Totalitarianism. Again find the link in my prior post and read that entire Mad Max thread so you can re-educate yourselves. Civilizations (problem solving societies) collapse because of the diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity. Tainter's Law. http://www.jayhanson.org/page134.htmNo they collapse because of socialism and collectivism when the private sector shrinks to for example 25% of GDP (and govt+regulation compliance is 75% of GDP as is the case in the USA and Europe now), which is an orthogonal property to knowledge formation. Here are a few examples of the cancer upon us now: http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/unions-out-of-control-the-real-poison-pill/http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/05/21/how-bureaucrats-undermine-everything/Don't conflate the perils of collectivism with the beauty of technological advance. We already had this discussion in two other threads already and I am not going to debate you again, as I already shown the idiotic illogic of your conflation of the two: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=564097.msg6513193#msg6513193 |
|
|
|
Now attack scenario. Suppose there is attacker with more than 50% of hashing power. He takes hash of current best block N and tries generating a next one but instead of using real account database he just create new one in which he holds all coins. If he is able to keep this chain in front of original one for as long as original network looses block N contents he can reveal his chain and it would look perfectly valid for all nodes because they lost track of how account database looked on block N.
It looks like algorithm presented in this paper is only as secure as mini blockchain is secure and if attacker could sustain 51% hashing power for as long as mini blockchain cycle completes it could cause much more severe problems than in bitcoin, because attacker could rewrite entire account balances database and not just make some double spends. Essentially Bitcoin has the same risk for clients that don't download the entire transaction history, and the solution is the same which is to ask the peers that have the relevant transaction history to prove which chain is not valid. On further thought, aaaxn's proposed attack is impossible if the cryptographic hash used to construct the Account Tree and Proof Chain can't be preimaged. Because there is no way the attacker can find a suitable set of replacement addresses and balances to match the hash in the Proof Chain. Thus all the discussion that followed aaaxn's post above regarding centralization and the need to remember transaction data history is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
