Libertarianism and interventionnism

[David Latapie]

I don't know what the opposite to hyperbole (hypobole?)

euphemism

"Person A uses force to take money from person B. Person B has worked for the money. What do you call person A?"

Anyone would call him a thief, yet they call him the taxman when he's sent from the government.
[/quote]Person a uses force => not a thief. Maybe an extorsionnist
What you sentence implies is that Person B doesn't want to give money. My point is that an awful lot of poor souls (me included) wants to give money. The fact that you don't want (and a lot of people neither) doesn't suffice to call it a bad thing (but the fact that you have no choice does).

[1714011559]

1714011559

[1714011559]

1714011559

[1714011559]

1714011559

[1714011559]

1714011559

[1714011559]

1714011559

[Anon136]

1.I requires a long-term vision to put them in place and I can't believe a free market would create them.

2.It would create a road and plumbery for this very building and the next one and it would be done in a ad'hoc way,

3.resulting in a lot of incompatibilities and kludges and thus loss of efficiency.

4.Central planning has its merit.

1.Heavily capitalistic capitalized companies have long term plans, like mining companies. Did you know that the American railway company (in the time of the "wild west") was the biggest capitalization most capitalized of on the American exchange? The Free market can build very big (large would sound more natural but big is acceptable) infrastructure.

2.It would improve the way we build road cause there will be concurrence and different price, we don't need first class road everywhere but companies need them to move their product.

3.If government don't didn't decide what is the language, would everyone will speak a different language and nobody will understand each other ? No, free market can do standardization where we need it (it is needed would be better than where we need). Did you know that big hardware companyies meet to decide what is HDMI, USB, WIFI, ect ?

4.In army yes, everywhere no.

ill give you a free lesson.

[hologram]

ill give you a free lesson.

Thx, wtf i have write  

And in government owned school, government can decide that English is not a priority and you must learn it by yourself (i started two year ago)...

[Anon136]

ill give you a free lesson.

Thx, wtf i have write 

Hey i dont even speak a second language. So dont feel bad.

[David Latapie]

1.Sorry, children was not the point but just an example. So if my own perception of the social contract don't include drug prohibition ?

I don't know if you support drug prohibition, it's just an example. I want to ask you "how to decide without a moral border what to include in the social contract ?".

I'd say we decide depending of the answer to this question: does the action (drug use) by design hurt s someone else? If yes, then the social contract shall prohibit it (except if every member of the social contract is fine with being hurt).
I said "by design". Alcohol doesn't hurt other by design (only indirectly), most hard drugs neither. Cigarette does (in public places)
Then there is the grey area of drunk parents molesting their child because of alcohol. The child is rarely in position to freely decide for himself. Same thing for a pregant women taking hard drugs.

2.Sure, you are in bitcoin  

And please, don't lose time explaining what the fuck is France, this government is a so big pile of shit (but Sarkozy was same). 

I must admit we got a particularly bad one this time. And it seems we could get an even worse one next time (the racist party won the latest city elections).

[hologram]

Hey i dont even speak a second language. So dont feel bad.

I feel bad as many French, we have more difficulty to learn English cause many law prevent anything in English to come here to protect French...

[Jungian]

I don't know what the opposite to hyperbole (hypobole?)

euphemism

"Person A uses force to take money from person B. Person B has worked for the money. What do you call person A?"

Anyone would call him a thief, yet they call him the taxman when he's sent from the government.

Person a uses force => not a thief. Maybe an extorsionnist

Alright, you got me there. Haha

What you sentence implies is that Person B doesn't want to give money. My point is that an awful lot of poor souls (me included) wants to give money. The fact that you don't want (and a lot of people neither) doesn't suffice to call it a bad thing (but the fact that you have no choice does).

If person B wants to give the money then it's not a tax, it's a donation. You may more may not agree with the tax, but it does not matter, because you have to pay it anyway.No anarchist ever had an argument with someone giving away their money, you know this.

The very fact that it involves force is what makes it a bad things. You could just as easily have a tax on peoples bodies (in fact, they were quite common, where noblemen had rights to brides). It's the same difference as between sex and rape.

If you agree with one, it's no moral reason why you shouldn't agree with the other as they imply the same thing. That people have no right to their own body and property.

[David Latapie]

The idea that you can have a legal entity that is other then the persons who commit the deeds is laughable at best.

Sorry, I do not understand. Could you reformulate?

A company (corporation) is a legal entity in itself that might be punished.
For example, a bank can accused and found guilty of laundering money. But a bank can't do anything, only people can, so its actually people who laundered the money, but the guilt is put on the bank and the bank is ordered to pay money instead of the people who commit the crime.

But the bank is just a fictional construct, how can something fictional do anything? It cant. It's just another government sanctioned way to reduce risk for the powerful.[/quote]Oh, I understand. Yes, this is quite an issue.

So we agree on this one. I was not sure at first, but that may be because of the state of politics in France (the rightists are pro-corporations, so it mixes things).

Many rightists confuse free markets with corporations.

Oh, so this is not only in France. I think this is something like "money=company=rich=ennemy of the people"

[Anon136]

Hey i dont even speak a second language. So dont feel bad.

I feel bad as many French, we have more difficulty to learn English cause many law prevent anything in English to come here to protect French...

Wow i knew your government was crazy but that's a special kind of crazy. Next they will be forbidding you to interbreed with people with the wrong skin color. Gotta preserve that french heritage.

[hologram]

1.I'd say we decide depending of the answer to this question: does the action (drug use) by design hurt s someone else? If yes, then the social contract shall prohibit it (except if every member of the social contract is fine with being hurt).
I said "by design". Alcohol doesn't hurt other by design (only indirectly), most hard drugs neither. Cigarette does (in public places)
Then there is the grey area of drunk parents molesting their child because of alcohol. The child is rarely in position to freely decide for himself. Same thing for a pregant women taking hard drugs.

2.I must admit we got a particularly bad one this time. And it seems we could get an even worse one next time (the racist party won the latest city elections).

1.Drug is like firearm, using them don't allow to hurt people, no food regulation don't mean sell poisoned food is legal.

2.Yes, I plan to leave this country in few years. but i need more valuable working experience and a good plan.

[David Latapie]

Can you elaborate on this?

Free market is an economy where there is very much concurrence cause there is no (minimal, just one simple tax without exemption) market distortion caused by the government. So a trust/monopoly can't stay long cause somebody will find a way to compete with the company or find a disruptive solution that kill his market.

Government intervention in the market create rigidity and distortion, big corporation can deal with them cause they have lobbyist, lot of lawyer and have a bureaucratic organization. Small can't and are killed/never created.

Some market distortion/rigidity:
 
-intellectual property
-taxes on product (don't include value added tax if it's the same rate for everything, but there is other problem with the VAT)
-different corporate taxes rate
-regulation, any kind
-investment restriction
-protectionism
-legal monopoly
-capital control
-...

We agree here to.
Fundamentally, I believe that man is tribal creature (see our ape origine). I doesn't scale beyond the tribal level (200 persons).

I know Norway quite well as I have visited yearly all my life and live close do it. I'm Swedish

So come paying me a visit at Malla, one day, this ain't far

[Jungian]

I know Norway quite well as I have visited yearly all my life and live close do it. I'm Swedish

So come paying me a visit at Malla, one day, this ain't far

I'd love to! If you can stand my hyperbole

[hologram]

Wow i knew your government was crazy but that's a special kind of crazy. Next they will be forbidding you to interbreed with people with the wrong skin color. Gotta preserve that french heritage.

We can't see movie not translated in French, media have a number of French subsided "art" to diffuse, my government plan to prevent netflix from coming here. English class is with funny teacher to do nothing or speak about American history in French. Even in Paris nothing is write in English in the street...

And the more funny is the government funded agency that translate "e mail" to "courriel" or "hash tag" to "mot dièse" even if nobody use their fucking word.

And your far leftist or rightist say that English language is some imperialist conspiracy...

[David Latapie]

4.In army yes, everywhere no.

OK for the first three. On that one, I'd say a project is not a democracy. Look at Monero. Benevolent dictator model does works.

Now I agree the benevolent part is hard to maintain

[Jungian]

1.I'd say we decide depending of the answer to this question: does the action (drug use) by design hurt s someone else? If yes, then the social contract shall prohibit it (except if every member of the social contract is fine with being hurt).
I said "by design". Alcohol doesn't hurt other by design (only indirectly), most hard drugs neither. Cigarette does (in public places)
Then there is the grey area of drunk parents molesting their child because of alcohol. The child is rarely in position to freely decide for himself. Same thing for a pregant women taking hard drugs.

Every action carry a risk, and there is no fair way to asset it. You can easily die from just walking and falling.
Carrying a disease carries a risk, so if you use risk as legal standard you should punish people who have the flu, or young girls who cut their arms. Cutting your arms is probably more dangerous than taking any street drug.

But lets asses your argument here. Yes, a drunk parent could hurt someone, but so could an angry person. So if it's the risk increase, I'd say the average angry person is more of a risk than the angry drunk person. So, still, if you use risk assessment as basis for your law you should make anger illegal

[Jungian]

4.In army yes, everywhere no.

OK for the first three. On that one, I'd say a project is not a democracy. Look at Monero. Benevolent dictator model does works.

Now I agree the benevolent part is hard to maintain

It's an opt in project. Just like any free project you can choose to participate or not. That's the opposite of a dictator.

[David Latapie]

(in fact, they were quite common, where noblemen had rights to brides).

This is an urban legend (Braveheart perpetuated it).

If you agree with one, it's no moral reason why you shouldn't agree with the other as they imply the same thing. That people have no right to their own body and property.

As a transhumanist, I strongly agree.

[David Latapie]

2.Yes, I plan to leave this country in few years. but i need more valuable working experience and a good plan.

I'm leaving it in 15 days. And I should be packing stuff instead of posting on Bitcointalk

[Anon136]

Wow i knew your government was crazy but that's a special kind of crazy. Next they will be forbidding you to interbreed with people with the wrong skin color. Gotta preserve that french heritage.

We can't see movie not translated in French, media have a number of French subsided "art" to diffuse, my government plan to prevent netflix from coming here. English class is with funny teacher to do nothing or speak about American history in French. Even in Paris nothing is write in English in the street...

And the more funny is the government funded agency that translate "e mail" to "courriel" or "hash tag" to "mot dièse" even if nobody use their fucking word.

And your far leftist or rightist say that English language is some imperialist conspiracy...

that is fascinating. i had no idea about any of this. thanks for teaching me a little bit about your culture.

[hologram]

that is fascinating. i had no idea about any of this. thanks for teaching me a little bit about your culture.

It's not my culture it's the absurdity of my government... People here do pretty the same thing than in any western country, but there is people who know what the world is and people who never go outside France and trust government and media bullshit that "France have the better "social model" of the world, we need to protect it against ultra-libertarianism...".