FUCKING BOLLOCKS: IF CRUELTY AGAINST MAMMALS/VERTEBRATES IS OK THEN LETS BRING BACK GLADIATORIAL GAMES...(It would be much more entertaining).:D xxxxx
Remember "Farm Aid"?...The attack on the private small farmer has been successful....and is on going....Why???....Where do starving families get food if there is none at the stores?....Where?...if all the local farmers have been Regulated and Raided out of buis?......R U Safe cause you own Gold?..ever try to eat gold coins?...THINK....Who Will Be The Only Source Of Food?
The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (H.R. 2751) is a federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on January 4, 2011. This is your New hope and change for you..more inspectipons, more regulation..on and on..next it will be people getting shot for growing and raising thier own food.
I agree with here 100%..this is nothing but the Liberals trying to control everything and are in Bed with the Food industry. This is all caused from Progressive politics. We should destroy all Democratic political organizations. The Demoncrats are the Reason for the FDA in the first place. HEY BUYER BE WARE!!! Be responsible for what you put in your mouth, THE GOvernment is not supposed to be our NANNY. Screw all Psudo forms Government..The agencies. They are UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!
We as buyers and producers of raw milk and products selling and buying through co-ops and farmers markets can and will police our own products. We do not need the state to tell use how and what to sell.
Government is in the pocket of the mega-corporations and the small businesses are their enemy and they mean to destroy them if the American people don't stand up and say NO.
Sheep don't get mad cow. But they do get mad sheep. Mad cow came from sheep that were feed diseased sheep brains. It is a prion disease that jumps species.
I fully support organic farming. I think we need to seize land form the mega farms and have land grants to citizens. Give away free land and make it tax free if they homestead it.
Seizing raw milk and organic farm's products is government mafia racketeering. Local police need to go arrest state FDA officials and hold G.J. Trials.
But she is talking way too softly about the feds and their intentions. There are no "well intentions" here. It is pure monopolism by the corporate mass producers, and as the country slides into corporate fascism, they will seek to control every industry, and eliminate all small business, not just farmers.
I am an organic farmer, and market vendor. I will not stand for any of this crap if they try it in my area. Kill me, and my spirit lives on stronger. Who is with me?
Corporate America does not want people able to feed themselves, heal themselves, or independent of anything they have to offer. eating genetically modified chemical ridden "food", that has like no nutritional value is what they want to force on us, when you get sick eventually the Pharmcos take over. Gov. is not for the peoples best interest, only corporations.
The gov want to get us sick w cancer and sick with genetically modified foods. Sick = money for them. Raw organic = not sick = no profit. Spread the word.
Ever heard of "starved to submission"??....."control from chaos"?.....
remember "Farm Aid"?....."Rain On The Scare Crow"?.....the attach on the small farmer has been successful....and is on going....why???....where do people get food if there is none at the stores?....and small local farms have all been raided and regulated out of business?.....ever try to eat gold coins?...Hmmm.....Who will be the only source of food for a STARVING NATION???......
I love it when people use the term "Revisionist Historian" as a pejorative. Either history is a social science open to revision as new facts and scientific understanding emerge or it is a religion and unquestionable. Anyone who thinks historians from hundreds of years ago using nothing but their own senses and writing of previous historians with similar techniques got it right the first time should immediately go back to Aristotelian 5 elements and 4 humors to describe chemistry and medicine.
Yes, people losers like "swinescales" are the only defenders Ron Paul has left. That and people like John Stossel who claimed that we recovered from the recession in the early 1920s because there was no federal reserve (watch?v=1Zt6mBSJE9Q ).
_
Time in those days must have ran backward because the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act. Plus, in that recession the economy hadn't bottomed out and its duration was actually longer than most post-war recessions.
Correction: Its effects have been one of the causes of the rise of the Nazis.*
_
And Ron Paul encourages this nutty behavior by talking about some kind of carbon-based system implemented by a world government and the New World Order, and his own revisionist history on the World Wars and so on. The claim that the 1800s were somehow more peaceful and prosperous (they weren't, the twentieth century was more prosperous and had the greatest expansion) is just one example.
You're an ignorant robot Suckassfullanal - If you argued with someone who was a Democrat, would you constantly mention Democratic figure heads and politicians or actually discuss their individual beliefs? Not all Libertarians agree with everything Freidman did, or everything Rand says and there may even be those who don't care for those people. Go back to the trailer park and hang yourself with a busted garden hose, you Aids infected abortion failure.
"Strike out money, and one would thereby either be thrown back to a lower stage of production (corresponding to that of auxiliary barter), or one would proceed to a higher stage, in which exchange value would no longer be the principal aspect of the commodity, because social labour, whose representative it is, would no longer appear merely as socially mediated private labour." [Karl Marx,Grundrisse, Ch 4] (Probably learn more from Karl Marx than you could ever learn from Mises or Hayek.)
Austrian economics really is irrelevant because we're on an electronic system and not on the gold standard anymore. Money now has absolutely no intrinsic value, although gold itself really has no intrinsic value either. If you're really an apocalyptic Libertarian, it's be better to stock up on food supplies than gold - as they'd be worth more in a total collapse. Plus, behavior economists have demonstrated conclusively that all market choices are rational is beyond human capacity.
And yes, Friedman won his Nobel Prize for his monetary beliefs, not for anything else. Friedman believed that the money supply needs to expand with growth, which is pretty much normal thinking in economics. He argued against the gold standard and against Mises more than Keynes.
_
Perhaps instead of revising history and ordering the approval of comments because he doesn't like me speaking truth to power maybe little nick gillespie should take an economics class? Never too late to learn.
@successfulbuild You also ignore Hayek's "denationalization of money" concept which would eliminate legal tender laws, and allow any individual or organization to issue its own currency, as paper tickets or coins with their own names and logos. The Govt would retain its monopoly over the dollar but other institutions would be allowed to compete in the money creation business. Markets would choose what work best. If people in the end prefer the dollar notes, then so be it.
Also, where are Libertarians getting their history that it was hyperinflation and World War I that was directly responsible for World War II. First, there are many good explanations for World War I at the individual, organization, and systemic level. So the claim that nobody knows the causes of World War I is news to me. Second, the Weimar republic struggled with the gold standard and its effects have been noted by historians as being one of the causes of the war. Hayek, etc.praised fascism.
And what in the world do these incoherent comments have to do with the credit creation process? Banks create money to meet needs in the market place, an endogenous model according to post keynesians. That's not the government controlling who gets money, but if we were on a gold standard and we banned FRB the govt. certainly would have more of an influence over the MS. The fact is that Austrian economics proposes a fairy-tale, pie in the sky version of capitalism that has never even existed.
And that is not Bernanke's theory. Bernanke blames it on financial disruptions which, "reduced the efficiency of the credit allocation process; and that the resulting higher cost and reduced availability of credit acted to depress aggregate demand, identifying an effect he called the financial accelerator." It was the gold standard itself that prohibited the federal reserve from expanding the money supply.
Kev3d is the best example of why Ron Paul (or any other Libertarian) should never be elected president: revisionist history, incoherent philosophy, and advocacy of deflation which would lead to bank runs, poverty, and more depressions.
@successfulbuild Funny how you would state this after I specifically refuted your claims. Again, you completely misrepresent competing currency. There is no advocacy of "deflation", only advocacy of stability and the reduction in the size and scope of governments. Allowing gold to be used is just one tool markets can use to make markets more efficient. There is nothing incoherent about letting people choose what works best for them.
@successfulbuild Why do you do more research? You asked why Libertarians didn't speak out against farm subsidies, I showed that they do. You challenged me to find a publication of the libertarian position of non-coercion and I gave you one. You constantly conflate austrians with libertarians when there are many schools of economic thought within libertarianism. You harp on and on about the gold standard, ignoring the concept of competing currency and bills introduced to that effect.
Truly, they use nuclear radiation in foods and healthcare?....that can give u CANCER! Wonder why cancer became a big thing today??? I'm makin a vid....
@successfulbuild, if the property owner acquired what he has through voluntary means, it was decided by voluntary agreement. You have a house because you made a deal. Politicians and bureaucrats have houses because they took money from the productive sector for themselves.
So, of course, the gold standard was much worse. Deflationary austerity led into the Hitler revolution in Germany. Economic breakdown in the Weimar republic led to political upheaval which destroyed the status quo. Without the depression Hitler would have never come to power, there would have been no mass unemployment, and the Nazis would have never become a major party (source Adamthwaite, A. P. 1977. The Making of the Second World War, Allen & Unwin).
@successfulbuild "Deflationary austerity led into the Hitler revolution in Germany." It was Inflation, not deflation in the Wiemar Republic that lead to disaster. It was deflation that lead to the great depression. The Period of hyper inflation in Germany was between 1921 and 1923. But Hitler came to power because of WW1, a war that no one can understand, much less justify. In all cases however the causes are clear; Governments that went beyond their duties of rights protection.
Money evolved out of the internal tension in a commodity between its use-value and its value. The value of one commodity is expressed in terms of the use-value of another standard commodity (in this case, gold, previous times slaves, camels, etc.).However, it is poor as a medium of circulation, for obvious reasons. So fiat money evolved out of the requirements of industrial capitalist society, credit relations, etc., and money is now just symbols. The value assigned to it is what it is worth.
Since the economy is driven by demand (hence businessmen go into business to meet a perceived demand). The current crisis for example isn't caused by an inability to produce, but because aggregate demand has fallen. Even to the extent that you need artificial demand to facilitate non-rational production (see John Galbraith) you still need production capacity to do so. This was the problem of the Great Depression where the old classical models couldn't explain the economy continued unemployment.
American farms receive way too much in government subsidies for these raids to substantiate "war on farms". It's the most subsidized industry in America.
@successfulbuild I said you live in your mother's womb, not her basement - then I said you need to get laid and you're a big fuckin baby. And yes, shoot Zakaria in his stupid fuckin head. Yes, please. Do that. Since you don't have a whole lot going on, besides enticing youngsters with candy in a dingy van somewhere between Baltimore and Mascoutah, maybe you could make yourself useful and take care of Zakaria, then throw yourself in a grease fire.
By the way, how's bit coin doing for Reason TV? Not too good! Though one Libertarian gave himself permanent brain damage when he suffered a heat stroke from running all his overclocked mining machines in his parents basement. Libertarian ignorance can actually be dangerous.
_
I'm sure little Nick Gillepsie will come out and admit he doesn't understand how the monetary system works.
For example, Nick Gillespie favors the gold standard even though it would make everybody poorer and make everybody worse off, and would lead to more corruption on the government. He doesn't feel he needs to run the gold standard by economists who know what they're talking about, and he certainly doesn't need to run it by the public. He knows what's best for me because he's a Libertarian and he goes from the gut.
_
That is a rejection of democracy, and enforces his views on millions of ppl.
@successfulbuild There is difference between a gold standard and having competing currency. There is nothing undemocratic about competing currencies and having a precious metal standard to back it up. It may not prevent govt shenanigans, but the market will sort out what is more stable. As MIT Economist Jeffry Miron points out " In the case of the money supply, the key problem is that government has control of the money supply, not the fact that this supply is gold versus fiat money."
@kev3d The government does NOT have a monopoly on money creation. A lot of the money is created through private banks. Money is actually loaned into existence. So Miron is actually referring entirely to the issuance of the M0, which makes up a smaller portion of money in circulation. The real increase in money over time is the lending of private banks, so, as usual, Austrians are complaining about the fractional reserve system. Look up the money multiplier for more info.
@successfulbuild Well yes, the government does have a monopoly on money creation and it will convict those who issue competing currency, even though they are not expressly copies of federal reserve notes. Bernard von NotHaus for example was arrested for creating competing silver liberty dollars and called a "domestic terrorist" for doing so. So much for liberty.
@kev3d This little turd doesn't understand how money works or why it's valued. Money evolved out of the tension between its use-value and its value. The value of one commodity is expressed in terms of the use-value of another commodity (it used to be gold, but before that it was slaves, camels, copper, etc.). However, gold doesn't work as a medium of circulation, so fiat money evolved out of the requirements of modern capitalism: credit relations and so on.
@successfulbuild And yet gold is still traded. So is silver and oil and everything else of value. Anything of value can be used to back currency, all Austrians want is for the system to allow these different experiments to be run freely, the market will sort out which options are the most stable and viable. You keep parroting on with lies about "forcing" a return to the gold standard when competing currencies are nothing of the kind.
@kev3d Btw... I looked up "Miron" and he's NOT an MIT economist. He went to MIT. An MIT economist is someone who TEACHES at MIT. He's a Libertarian and thus cannot be taken seriously. Many educated people do believe in dumb things and that statement of Miron's is idiotic. For example, there are over 1,000 engineers who believe in the truther crap, and it has far more support among other disciplines than the Austrian school. So what? What papers has Miron published on the financial system?
@successfulbuild "He's a Libertarian and thus cannot be taken seriously." That's really objective of you. By that reasoning men like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell (Stanford), Walter Williams (George Mason) and many others. But of course economics is just one part of libertarianism, which also concerns itself with social liberty, ending all unnecessary wars and having peaceful relations with all who wish to participate.
@successfulbuild And by the way, not all Libertarians are Austrians. Rather than bitching and moaning and lying about libertarian positions, how about you actually read what they have written in context. To claim libertarians are for "force" or that the folks at Mises are "Nazis" is such a spectacular falsehood that it boggles the mind. Why is liberty so frightening to you? Both economically and socially?
And in Libertarian, property certainly does not come into possession by common agreement. There are three types of Libertarianism, basically: Natural rights, the Nozick version of rights and nightwatchman state, and objectivism. All different forms of justification for property (such as self-ownership) are subsets of one of these. They are all deductive in nature and not based on reference to reality. For everybody else, property, like all other rights, are social constructs, not from god.
@successfulbuild "And in Libertarian, property certainly does not come into possession by common agreement." Horrible grammar aside, where do you get this opinion? Cite a source. Libertarians disagree on many things, but one thing they will always agree upon is the right to mutually voluntary transactions for goods and services. You are more interested in playing semantic games rather than actually refuting the theories.
@kev3d And what matters is how well it functions in the social system, i.e., the value assigned to it is what it's wroth. The current system works much better than the gold standard and cross country studies by Bernanke (who has the best macro-economics text out there, perhaps the best micro is C&F) show that the first countries to abandon the gold standard covered from the depression first.
@successfulbuild Ah yes, that wonderful republican Ben Bernanke...overseeing this wonderful system which has produced 9% unemployment, a 14 trillion dollar debt, prohibition,questionable, if not illegal and ineffective Bailouts, a weakened Dollar and unfunded liabilities that no one can calculate. Oh yeah, and three wars (plus bombing campaigns in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan) Not all Bernanke's fault of course but all are the result of bloated and abusive government.
@successfulbuild RE; the depression Bernanke had an interesting admission in 2002 at Milton Friedman's birthday. “I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression, you’re right. We (federal reserve)did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.” Now if the government actually reduced its size and scope like Friedman suggested in the 60s, then the United States (and the world) would be in MUCH better shape than it is now.
@fleskebille I wont try to post the whole argument here but Friedman essentially demonstrated that the money supply was effectively cut by a third by the banks with the Federal Reserve allowing it to happen. watch?v=O7pnjzCuSv8
@kev3d If you're going to complain about grammar in youtube videos maybe you shouldn't make grammatical errors in the very same post you complain about grammatical errors:
"... but one thing they will always agree upon is the right to mutually voluntary transactions (SIC) for goods..."
_
Show me where a published, right-wing Libertarian author has said property should be decided by voluntary agreement.
@successfulbuild Libertarians are not "Right Wing", nor are they "Left Wing" but embrace the ideas of liberty from both while rejecting the tenets of aggression, coercion, "playing favorites" with public funds and statism in general. "The libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else. " The Libertarian Creed
Chapter 2: Property and Exchange, Murray Rothbard.
Successfulbuild - you need to get laid. You're so upset over a few comments from people. Take a few moments, pull your head out of your mother's cozy womb and feel the fresh air of liberty, ya big fuckin baby.
I wouldn't exactly call Jefferson a left-winger, though, of course. He had his own set of right-wing views such as on racism and slavery (like how Walter Block at the Mises institute is a crazy racist), and so on. But he was not a Libertarian by any means.
@successfulbuild It is true Jefferson owned slaves and did not think much of the darker races, same with most of the founding fathers. But Libertarians are free to pick the qualities that they like and reject those with which they disagree. There is no "purity" in people, in ideas perhaps, but not in individuals or groups. So it is best to decentralize and reduce government as much as possible because it is run by the same flawed humans, but with much more power and OTHER people's money.
The government should be going after agri-business, instead they are protected. That is where the food poisoning is coming from. Our government is so corrupt. The Plutocracy is alive and well.
By the way, those computers I mentioned weren't 'single purpose machines' but were general purpose machines that could perform a variety of functions. After their invention, the history of computing was pretty much that of advancing technology since the architectural foundations and had concepts had been laid out. And while it's often claimed von Neumann invented the stored-program concept, it too can be attributed to J.P. Eckert.
@successfulbuild A variety of functions? Exactly what spreadsheet program could Univac run? No one said Wal Mart or Wallstreet invented the internet, no single entity "invented" the internet. But, before the internet and world wide web were made publically available, Wall Street and Wal Mart were pioneering real-time data transfers. This laid the foundation for all e-commerce, employing millions.
@kev3d You are mentally retarded. That's like saying, "no early cars had cruise control..." And what made spreadsheets possible? Computer science research. And Wal-Mart had absolutely nothing to do with the development of the internet, plus, according to pretty much every book on the history of networking I've ever come across, the government invented the Internet. So you are an idiot.
@successfulbuild Ah, more ad hominem attacks. I never claimed Walmart "invented" the internet. I said computer networks, specifically when it came to bar code scanning for stock ordering. Wallstreet had real-time stock quotes in the pre-internet days. The point is, profitable computer networks were already being privately developed. And besides, the computer could not have existed were it not for the Edisons, Bells, Teslas, Lilienfelds and Westinghouses of the world.
@kev3d You've made this claim several times, and in other ReasonTV videos. That the internet was "in the background" by Wal-Mart and other corporations. You have failed to cite a source for this claim. By your logic, nobody ever invented anything, because everything has the work of other people in it, include the Edison's and the Tesla's and so on -- what are you a socialist now?
@successfulbuild No, I claimed no single entity invented the internet. Unix, Windows, OSX, TCP/IP, HTML, Flash, Browsers, Servers, Phone Lines and all the other structures were developed by different bodies for different purposes. Much like a language, there is no single point at which the light suddenly popped on, but it was a mixture of many techniques and technologies, some which became standard, others withered away. If you are going to quote me, quote me precisely. Don't make shit up.
@kev3d Ok, you are a complete mental case and do not understand what the Internet even is. That's like saying, Einstein didn't invent Relativity because he drove his car to work.
@successfulbuild Just to let you know, "the government" has never invented anything, nor can it. If "the government" is involved with anything like inventing, it's involvement is usually either co-opting ideas from the outside or using the taxpayer's money to fund politically motivated research. "The government" can't invent anything because the government is not a person. "The government" can't have ideas because it isn't alive. And it certainly isn't all-knowing like you imply.
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. Single purpose machines of "death." Yeah, Arithmetic = evil.
_
You guys are hilarious. Blaming technology for war is like blaming a shotgun wound on the shotgun. Ultimately, it is PEOPLE who are responsible for how technology is used.
_
You fucking Libertarian luddites can't understand that.
@successfulbuild Gee, you mean like blaming gold for the acts of tyrants? I don't blame technology for war and once again you have, through staggering ignorance or willful deception, mischaracterized what I and others have said on the matter. But back to the point, the original government computers were, as you have acknowledged, were instruments of warfare. It took the private market to turn them into affordable tools for a mass market.
@kev3d SOME of them were USED for warfare. They were also used for other tasks. Keep in mind I only outlined the first generation of computers, it continues on into the second and third generations and most of the theories were done by academia.
@successfulbuild Academia and government are not synonymous and just because much research comes from government, it does not justify large, abusive, fiscally irresponsible government. After all, just because lots of our math comes from Archimedes or al-Khwarizmi does not mean we should have a king or a sultan.
There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.
"A wise and frugal Government, which shall retrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned."
Thomas Jefferson
I would argue that a 14 trillion dollar debt, 3 wars, 9% unemployment, prohibition, and rewards for bad banking and manufacturing institutions is neither wise, nor frugal.
@kev3d Perhaps you should quote more often as that is the most intelligent post you've made in this whole thread.
_
And Jefferson advocated a bunch of self-regulated communities - to be regulated ACCORDING TO HOW THEY WANTED IT (Democracy). If a self-governing community wanted to be a bunch of ass-holes, they could, as that is the whole purpose of self-government.
_
Libertarians of course reject Jeffersonian democracy, and advocate a strong govt. telling people what they can do with property.
@successfulbuild Ok you are really on crack now. First of all, Jefferson advocated a constitutional representative republic, not "democracy". Secondly such government should be small and limited in what its duties were, just as Washington did. This is textbook libertarianism. WHERE ON EARTH do you get that libertarians advocate "a strong govt. telling people what they can do with property."?
@kev3d Historians call it "jeffersonian democracy" because jefferson favored majority rule. And that isn't "textbook" Libertarianism. In Libertarianism there is no democracy -- there is only Libertarian rules. Really, Libertarians advocate the strongest government imaginable - one that isn't responsible to the public, so there would be no "taxation with representation."
@successfulbuild "Defining what is and what isn't "property" -- and when it can and cannot be violated -- negates the whole idea of self-governing communities. "
How? Under libertarianism, there is no central authority "defining" property. Property comes into possession by agreement, not force and if there is a dispute that cannot be resolved then, in certain cases, the government has an obligation to impartially hear the case and rule.
@kev3d If you knew anything about American history, you'd know people were advocating democracy prior to the revolution in the colonies and after it. Jefferson also advocated stringent majority rule and this is verifiable in his writings. He also advocated public schools and said that private property should be progressively taxed.
_
So it is you, as usual, who is stupid and has no idea what he's talking about. Even many Libertarians have given up a claim to Jefferson.
@kev3d I am familiar with the work of al-Khwārizmī. And you comparing our government to a monarchy (which Hans-Hermann Hoppe -- the Mises Institute -- says he prefers over democracy and freedom) and a sultan? The founders widely acknowledges the benefits of scientific research. The point is that the govt. did a lot of this research because the market is short-sighted.
@successfulbuild It is hard to imagine someone this obtuse. Learn to read things in context.
And the government did not fund computer research because it thought people might one day use computers for commerce. Rather, the government funded these things for warfare or the occasional pet project. It took the markets to expand them into the useful devices we use today. Short sighted? Hardly. This is why capitalist societies thrive and innovate.
@kev3d No. That is a bald face lie. The government funded DARPA for military AND computer science research.
_
The Government continued funding computers and networking after the war was over. For example, the govt. poured billions into networking in the 80s. And the govt. funded computers in the 90s as well. The exigency of the war of course provided justification for additional expenditures and so on.
_
The only thing you have proven in here is that you like to tell a bunch of lies.
No one has ever said that the government has not pour billions into various projects....it has pour so many billions into projects that no one knows where it all went. The fact is, with a few hundred thousand dollars, college dropouts Bill Gates and Steve Jobs created a revolution in home computing while the government spend money it doesn't have on projects it doesn't need.
@kev3d A lot of projects are funded in the name of "defense' that really don't have all that much to do with defense. Bill Gates was a minor player in the history of computing. He was more of a Rockefeller than an edison. If anything his monopoly has harmed the computer industry, not helped it. And there were other pioneers before Bill Gates and Jobs even came along.
@successfulbuild If such projects are not related to defense then they are unconstitutional and should not be funded at the federal level. "Bill Gates was a minor player in the history of computing."
@kev3d He was. Operating systems existed before bill gates. Bill Gates didn't even really do anything except buy q-dos from some guy. I think computing would have been better without a monopoly player in the OS market.
@successfulbuild There was never a monopoly on Operating systems. What Gates and Jobs did was create something that was user friendly for a mass market. Of course Unix existed long before...and continues mainly in one of the many flavors of linux, but most people don't like or don't know Unix. There were others for Symbolics and other, now defunct computers. By broadening the market, it allowed children and grandmothers alike to use computers without special training.
@kev3d There were monopolies before and after Windows. The patents and so on that exist in computing can also be considered little monopolies. Gates has had always > 90% market share which is a monopoly player according to economics. He can help to set a monopoly price in software and has shares in Apple and so on. This means other areas of computing, such as hardware, are dependent on windows -- and are forced to hide their information from other sellers. That's monopoly power.
But what is amazing is your dishonesty, you have to argue that Gates is "minor"...yet holds 90% or more of the computing market. You cannot have it both ways. Besides, 90% is not a "monopoly" and computing has grown to smart devices, where Apple is king. Servers are mixed, but very often Linux based and so on. Hardware isn't dependent on operating systems, its the other way around.
@kev3d As usual, you provide no real arguments for any of your dumb beliefs, because your beliefs are crazy, incoherent, and wouldn't be backed up by political science or any other field. Like most Libertarians you are useless to society and are, by all indications, a failure.
@successfulbuild Ah yes, my "crazy beliefs" that people, everywhere, should be free to do whatever they wish so long as they do not harm others. That a person should be free to pursue as much money as he wants, or to reject it entirely. That a person can say or publish anything, worship or blaspheme any way they want without fear of arrest. That any two or more parties can enter any social or commercial contract that is mutually voluntary. I know...I'm such a radical and a loser.
@kev3d Look up the reasons that Columbus and the Spanish conquistadors were financed and you will see it was for resources such as gold. And his continued interest in America was gold. His own words: "Hispaniola is a miracle. Mountains and hills, plains and pastures, are both fertile and beautiful... the harbors are unblievably good and there are many wide rivers of which the majority contain gold... There are great mines of gold and other metals..."
I don't know if it's true that FRB makes war "cheaper." I claim it makes it more difficult to go to war. But a lot of things actually make war "cheaper" and help the govt. to engage in wars. For example, computing machines. The Enigma machines was used by the Kriegsmarine to encode messages, and cryptographers in England broke the code after capturing one from a captured submarine. The Colossus in England was used by British codebreakers.
@successfulbuild Nothing makes war "cheaper" but "fiat" money (our worthless paper) certainly makes it easier to engage in war. "Oh no, we're spending billions on useless violence around the world to spread our influence, doing nothing to actually promote freedom. We need more money. What do we do?" "Easy. Print more." That's the logic of the people in power right now. And power is what they want to hold onto. So go ahead and keep defending what they do.
Here in the US, the ENIAC and EDVAC, capable of tabulation and arithmetic, and precursors to the modern computer, were funded by the US military. They invented it because of problems they were having with gun trajectories, where field testing often led to misplaced targets or friendly fire. So the US Army sponsored Moore School of Engineering at the Universtiy of Pennsylvania. (The ENIAC was a functional computer that performed both arithmetic and logical operations.)
Computers have a long history of government involvement, even before the advent of the modern electronic computer. From Baisal Pascal (Pascal's farther was a tax officer and he and his farther spent hours figuring out how much each citizen owed in taxes; he designed mechanical calculators with gears to perform arithmetic ops as a highly trained mathematican), to the Hollerith, which was designed for counting the population, Hollerith himself being employed by the U.S. Census Bureau in the 1890s.
@successfulbuild So? The free market took clunky single-purpose machines of death and turned them into machines of peace, communication, commerce and entertainment at a low price. Such as it is, the governments of the world largely adopted and funded that which was already being developed. While DARPA was developing a network, Walmart was pioneering bar codes and inter-store communication to stock shelves. Wall Street created real-time networks prior to the internet becoming public.
@kev3d LOL. There is no comparsion between bar-codes and the internet. The government created TCP/IP and pretty much all of the computer science work behind the internet. A lot of research on the internet was also done by MIT labs and so on. And the ideas of the internet isn't from Wal-Mart but from J.C.R. Licklider who spoke of intergalactic networks and so on. So the ideas were from him.
_
You're a nutcase kook. And companies like IBM and so on were heavily funded by the government, stupid.
@successfulbuild MIT is a private school. IBM, Corning, Xerox, Microsoft, AT&T/Bell Labs, Apple and so on are private companies. The fact that some of those companies received government contracts is beside the point because A. The constitution allows for scientific research funds, particularly for Military use and B. WW2 and the Cold War especially required investment in communications. The Soviet Union couldn't keep up because there was no private enterprise to provide good research.
@kev3d MIT, harvard, and other private schools were receiving billions of dollars from the government, stupid. Private schools like Harvard take in billions of dollars a year, much more than even many public schools. Like anything in America, "privatized" often means more government support. It's like with the Koch brothers. They want the government to privatize resources and hand it over to Koch industries.
@successfulbuild And once again, during the cold war, there is a constitutional case for paying for scientific pursuits for military use. But there is no cold war any longer and certainly there is no justification for federal funding when private industries ought to be shouldering those research costs and not some random tax payer.
@successfulbuild WalMart became especially good at exploiting the information behind the bar code and is considered a pioneer in developing sophisticated technology to track its inventory and cut the fat out of its supply chain. " from How stuff works.
@successfulbuild And no, the world wide web does not come from the US government, but CERN in europe, and not for defense but as a way that scientists could share information. CERN of course had nothing to do with computer network technology and the world wide web was started as a side project. Such as it was, the world wide web was essentially a scientific curiosity until the private market saw the potential.
@kev3d I didn't say it was from the US government. And yes, it was a government project to allow physicists and so on to more easily share information.
But here are some other things that definitely make war "cheaper": the aeronautical industry, gun powder, modern agriculture, science, and, in fact, technology in general. So let's ban everything that makes war and stuff "cheaper" because Ron Paul and the Nazis at the Mises Institute think this will end all war. Fucking idiots.
@successfulbuild Do you enjoy trolling? What satisfaction it must give you to take things so entirely out of context, to intentionally mislabel, mischaracterize, defame and distort libertarian ideas. Mises was himself a Jew, an anti-fascist and anti-communist. To call the institute associated with him as a bunch of "Nazis" is akin to a creationist denying the existence of dinosaur fossils. It is so blatantly disingenuous on your part that you immediately lose all credibility.
@kev3d I would actually say Robert Murphy's views on the human race are than those of the Nazis. And Mises said that fascism saved human civilization. He was a total crank.
@successfulbuild cont. Mises then goes on to explain the position of (classical) liberals, of which he was one. "As the liberal sees it, the task of the state consists solely and exclusively in guaranteeing the protection of life, health, liberty, and private property against violent attacks. Everything that goes beyond this is an evil."
One could not take a more anti-fascist or anti-tyrannical stance than that. See how reading things in context can be helpful?
@successfulbuild "Mises was not a classical liberal" Then please define your terms and explain exactly by what authority you make your claim. Otherwise, it is just yet another baseless assertion on your part.
@kev3d DARPA's spectacular failure rate and noteworthy successes stem from its high-risk ventures. For years DARPA has funded extremely unconventional, sometimes beyond-the-pale, avant-garde research in all realms of science and technology. It is, perhaps, the most creative place in our vast government for a scientist who wants to stretch his or her mind in adventurous directions and be well paid to do so.
@successfulbuild And exactly why should John Q Public fund some scientist's dream job, where in all probability, their ideas will come to nothing? In fact military funding is so screwed up that the Pentagon cannot account for missing Billions, not Millions of dollars. Let private companies fund research, if there is a necessary war that requires it, they will step up to the plate and contribute, but if we are fighting a few thousand cave men with AKs then let there is hardly a point.
@kev3d The only place where you have "ideas that come to nothing" are in the Libertarian movement and the economics department.
_
I'm all for abolishing govt. funding for economics and other religions. Economists have proven to be useless. I don't think the govt. should fund an ethnic studies department either.
_
The fallacy in your argument is that nothing is stopping private markets from competing with govt. funded astronomers and so on.
@successfulbuild Astronomy is not exactly profitable, but such as it is, lots and lots of astronomers exist who do it just as a hobby and every once in a while, they spot something that NASA or the ESA couldn't, like Hale-Bopp. Good for them. There is also increased interest in private space tourism. If the cost of going into space is ever going to come down, it will be through competing market forces.
@kev3d First you acknowledge that all this govt. funding had a huge impact on the health and happiness of the human race, now you're saying it all "comes to nothing." You're now contradicting yourself, and are a troll.
_
Can you name a single theory of economics in the last 40 years that has had a direct application in any engineering field or anything? Of course not. Economists may as well have been playing patty cake in there.
@kev3d Dinosaur fossils are visible and we can see them in the real world. This is a debate about IDEAS, and, yes, there are similarities between Libertarianism and fascism: rejection of democracy, "natural/organic" order, absolutism, and so on. You fascists believe you get to tell everybody what to do based on your twisted economics (less supported in academia than crationism or even AIDS denialism) and belief in absolutism.
Just as an informational point, sheep get a disease called scrapie, which may in fact be one of the earliest know examples of the family of diseases of which mad cow is a member.
You mean regulations are increasing as farmers are finding ways to reach the customer directly? But I thought regulations help the little guy against the big bad businesses.
I wish people would realize that regulations are set up to perpetuate monopolies and crush the little guy.
The government should force them to have a big warning sign where these products are sold stating the possible dangers of raw milk or whatever they're selling. Then, they should leave them alone. As long as the customer is informed, he should be able to make his own decisions.
@blogegog The government should have nothing to do with this. I agree that the customer should be informed they are purchasing raw milk, but that is the customer's responsibility to be educated about the product they are purchasing. But I agree we should all be able to make the decision to drink raw milk if we want.
@ryanpmurphy No, it's not. This is one of the somewhat rare instances where government plays a huge role. Necessarily so. And that role is to inform and enforce. You and I need to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what we are purchasing when it comes to food.
You may be informed, but everyone is not. And never will be, unless the gov't forces the sellers to inform them. A gov't that gives me the information and then lets me choose... that's my kind of government.
@blogegog When has the FDA ever protected us from bad food? We don't go six months without an ecoli outbreak or some other food scare. They only react after the fact. And I for one don't think the rest of society is so stupid that they don't realize there is a risk in drinking unpasteurized milk. People know that McDonalds will make you fat if you eat it every day and that smoking cigarettes can lead to cancer. We don't need the government forcing private individuals to put up signs or labels.
FUCKING BOLLOCKS: IF CRUELTY AGAINST MAMMALS/VERTEBRATES IS OK THEN LETS BRING BACK GLADIATORIAL GAMES...(It would be much more entertaining).:D xxxxx
verysmartmart 2 weeks ago
That old "BIG BROTHER is Watching" has finally caught up in this 21st Century.
bbukid 2 weeks ago
Federal Govt: "DON'T EAT fresh organic food. Eat GE(Genetically Engineered) Foods and McDonalds, Wendy's, etc."
bbukid 2 weeks ago
Well intentioned laws? lol there is no well intention when the gov starts to pry into your personal life or how you live it
FloridianAsshole22 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ever heard of "Starved To Submission"?...
."Food Riots:"?..."Control From Chaos"?...
Remember "Farm Aid"?...The attack on the private small farmer has been successful....and is on going....Why???....Where do starving families get food if there is none at the stores?....Where?...if all the local farmers have been Regulated and Raided out of buis?......R U Safe cause you own Gold?..ever try to eat gold coins?...THINK....Who Will Be The Only Source Of Food?
Anyone see a "Food Crises" Coming???
songforamericans 4 months ago
The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (H.R. 2751) is a federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on January 4, 2011. This is your New hope and change for you..more inspectipons, more regulation..on and on..next it will be people getting shot for growing and raising thier own food.
doobersmanster 4 months ago
@efherne RIGHT ON...Down with Cronism and Facism. Freedom or Death!!!!!
doobersmanster 4 months ago
I agree with here 100%..this is nothing but the Liberals trying to control everything and are in Bed with the Food industry. This is all caused from Progressive politics. We should destroy all Democratic political organizations. The Demoncrats are the Reason for the FDA in the first place. HEY BUYER BE WARE!!! Be responsible for what you put in your mouth, THE GOvernment is not supposed to be our NANNY. Screw all Psudo forms Government..The agencies. They are UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!
doobersmanster 4 months ago
Great start to knocked down the war on food brought to you by the very king pins that control every aspect of our life, not to mention overseas.
goodtimesrock 5 months ago
We just channeled predictions on THE ENVIRONMENT - Sept. 24.11- Our Changing Food Environment in our CR News Reports©
ChanneledReadings 5 months ago
What can we do???
Shiretb 6 months ago
I really hope this and other vids like it go viral so that people can see that the FDA can care less about your safety.
SuperPhdiva 6 months ago
Watch this online for understanding Codex Alimentarius "Nutricide - Criminalizing Natural Health, Vitamins, and Herbs"
The FDA are controlled under this evil, Codex Alimentarius and the depopulation agenda.
Ayelyah 6 months ago 3
We as buyers and producers of raw milk and products selling and buying through co-ops and farmers markets can and will police our own products. We do not need the state to tell use how and what to sell.
Thanks,
Doug
lookingbears 6 months ago
The government dosent care about you wake upppp
aman111501 7 months ago
Government is in the pocket of the mega-corporations and the small businesses are their enemy and they mean to destroy them if the American people don't stand up and say NO.
paulrprichard 7 months ago 2
They are following Codex Alimentarius guidelines.
paulrprichard 7 months ago
“A whole flock of sheep were killed because of the threat of mad cow disease but sheep don’t get mad cow disease.”
Sounds like a case of mad government disease.
paulrprichard 7 months ago
Sheep don't get mad cow. But they do get mad sheep. Mad cow came from sheep that were feed diseased sheep brains. It is a prion disease that jumps species.
I fully support organic farming. I think we need to seize land form the mega farms and have land grants to citizens. Give away free land and make it tax free if they homestead it.
Seizing raw milk and organic farm's products is government mafia racketeering. Local police need to go arrest state FDA officials and hold G.J. Trials.
ewetoobblowsbigtime 7 months ago 6
But she is talking way too softly about the feds and their intentions. There are no "well intentions" here. It is pure monopolism by the corporate mass producers, and as the country slides into corporate fascism, they will seek to control every industry, and eliminate all small business, not just farmers.
I am an organic farmer, and market vendor. I will not stand for any of this crap if they try it in my area. Kill me, and my spirit lives on stronger. Who is with me?
funkhead999 7 months ago 2
Corporate America does not want people able to feed themselves, heal themselves, or independent of anything they have to offer. eating genetically modified chemical ridden "food", that has like no nutritional value is what they want to force on us, when you get sick eventually the Pharmcos take over. Gov. is not for the peoples best interest, only corporations.
gilgamesh1962 7 months ago 4
@gilgamesh1962
Excellent facts.
abel1leal 7 months ago
@gilgamesh1962 Remember that corps are people too...GARBAGE!
SuperPhdiva 6 months ago
The gov want to get us sick w cancer and sick with genetically modified foods. Sick = money for them. Raw organic = not sick = no profit. Spread the word.
MRBLACKPEARL04 7 months ago 14
Ever heard of "starved to submission"??....."control from chaos"?.....
remember "Farm Aid"?....."Rain On The Scare Crow"?.....the attach on the small farmer has been successful....and is on going....why???....where do people get food if there is none at the stores?....and small local farms have all been raided and regulated out of business?.....ever try to eat gold coins?...Hmmm.....Who will be the only source of food for a STARVING NATION???......
See a "Food Crises" looming on the horizon?....
songforamericans 8 months ago 2
This is the new government War on bacteria. The people are just colaterial damage.
ferval59 8 months ago
I love it when people use the term "Revisionist Historian" as a pejorative. Either history is a social science open to revision as new facts and scientific understanding emerge or it is a religion and unquestionable. Anyone who thinks historians from hundreds of years ago using nothing but their own senses and writing of previous historians with similar techniques got it right the first time should immediately go back to Aristotelian 5 elements and 4 humors to describe chemistry and medicine.
bullpcp 8 months ago
Yes, people losers like "swinescales" are the only defenders Ron Paul has left. That and people like John Stossel who claimed that we recovered from the recession in the early 1920s because there was no federal reserve (watch?v=1Zt6mBSJE9Q ).
_
Time in those days must have ran backward because the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act. Plus, in that recession the economy hadn't bottomed out and its duration was actually longer than most post-war recessions.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild LOL you're so confused!!! thanks for the read.
tmac9938 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Every hear of a chartered bank?LOL.Your something else.
MRELTUCO2 6 months ago
Correction: Its effects have been one of the causes of the rise of the Nazis.*
_
And Ron Paul encourages this nutty behavior by talking about some kind of carbon-based system implemented by a world government and the New World Order, and his own revisionist history on the World Wars and so on. The claim that the 1800s were somehow more peaceful and prosperous (they weren't, the twentieth century was more prosperous and had the greatest expansion) is just one example.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
You're an ignorant robot Suckassfullanal - If you argued with someone who was a Democrat, would you constantly mention Democratic figure heads and politicians or actually discuss their individual beliefs? Not all Libertarians agree with everything Freidman did, or everything Rand says and there may even be those who don't care for those people. Go back to the trailer park and hang yourself with a busted garden hose, you Aids infected abortion failure.
swinescales 8 months ago
"Strike out money, and one would thereby either be thrown back to a lower stage of production (corresponding to that of auxiliary barter), or one would proceed to a higher stage, in which exchange value would no longer be the principal aspect of the commodity, because social labour, whose representative it is, would no longer appear merely as socially mediated private labour." [Karl Marx,Grundrisse, Ch 4] (Probably learn more from Karl Marx than you could ever learn from Mises or Hayek.)
successfulbuild 8 months ago
Austrian economics really is irrelevant because we're on an electronic system and not on the gold standard anymore. Money now has absolutely no intrinsic value, although gold itself really has no intrinsic value either. If you're really an apocalyptic Libertarian, it's be better to stock up on food supplies than gold - as they'd be worth more in a total collapse. Plus, behavior economists have demonstrated conclusively that all market choices are rational is beyond human capacity.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
And yes, Friedman won his Nobel Prize for his monetary beliefs, not for anything else. Friedman believed that the money supply needs to expand with growth, which is pretty much normal thinking in economics. He argued against the gold standard and against Mises more than Keynes.
_
Perhaps instead of revising history and ordering the approval of comments because he doesn't like me speaking truth to power maybe little nick gillespie should take an economics class? Never too late to learn.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild You also ignore Hayek's "denationalization of money" concept which would eliminate legal tender laws, and allow any individual or organization to issue its own currency, as paper tickets or coins with their own names and logos. The Govt would retain its monopoly over the dollar but other institutions would be allowed to compete in the money creation business. Markets would choose what work best. If people in the end prefer the dollar notes, then so be it.
kev3d 8 months ago
Also, where are Libertarians getting their history that it was hyperinflation and World War I that was directly responsible for World War II. First, there are many good explanations for World War I at the individual, organization, and systemic level. So the claim that nobody knows the causes of World War I is news to me. Second, the Weimar republic struggled with the gold standard and its effects have been noted by historians as being one of the causes of the war. Hayek, etc.praised fascism.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
And what in the world do these incoherent comments have to do with the credit creation process? Banks create money to meet needs in the market place, an endogenous model according to post keynesians. That's not the government controlling who gets money, but if we were on a gold standard and we banned FRB the govt. certainly would have more of an influence over the MS. The fact is that Austrian economics proposes a fairy-tale, pie in the sky version of capitalism that has never even existed.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
And that is not Bernanke's theory. Bernanke blames it on financial disruptions which, "reduced the efficiency of the credit allocation process; and that the resulting higher cost and reduced availability of credit acted to depress aggregate demand, identifying an effect he called the financial accelerator." It was the gold standard itself that prohibited the federal reserve from expanding the money supply.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
Kev3d is the best example of why Ron Paul (or any other Libertarian) should never be elected president: revisionist history, incoherent philosophy, and advocacy of deflation which would lead to bank runs, poverty, and more depressions.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Funny how you would state this after I specifically refuted your claims. Again, you completely misrepresent competing currency. There is no advocacy of "deflation", only advocacy of stability and the reduction in the size and scope of governments. Allowing gold to be used is just one tool markets can use to make markets more efficient. There is nothing incoherent about letting people choose what works best for them.
kev3d 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Why do you do more research? You asked why Libertarians didn't speak out against farm subsidies, I showed that they do. You challenged me to find a publication of the libertarian position of non-coercion and I gave you one. You constantly conflate austrians with libertarians when there are many schools of economic thought within libertarianism. You harp on and on about the gold standard, ignoring the concept of competing currency and bills introduced to that effect.
kev3d 8 months ago
"What are you gonna be doing after this?" --Nick Gillespie asking her out.
erismo23 8 months ago
Truly, they use nuclear radiation in foods and healthcare?....that can give u CANCER! Wonder why cancer became a big thing today??? I'm makin a vid....
Licmycat 8 months ago
AMA refuses to admit ionized radiation which is all the corporate requirements now. DIE milk drinkers...DIE.
Licmycat 8 months ago
this is intersting- the ppl who provided raw milk to me n my family shut down thier production last month - this is serious
denzelswifey86 8 months ago
@successfulbuild, if the property owner acquired what he has through voluntary means, it was decided by voluntary agreement. You have a house because you made a deal. Politicians and bureaucrats have houses because they took money from the productive sector for themselves.
themensoguidetowar 8 months ago
So, of course, the gold standard was much worse. Deflationary austerity led into the Hitler revolution in Germany. Economic breakdown in the Weimar republic led to political upheaval which destroyed the status quo. Without the depression Hitler would have never come to power, there would have been no mass unemployment, and the Nazis would have never become a major party (source Adamthwaite, A. P. 1977. The Making of the Second World War, Allen & Unwin).
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild "Deflationary austerity led into the Hitler revolution in Germany." It was Inflation, not deflation in the Wiemar Republic that lead to disaster. It was deflation that lead to the great depression. The Period of hyper inflation in Germany was between 1921 and 1923. But Hitler came to power because of WW1, a war that no one can understand, much less justify. In all cases however the causes are clear; Governments that went beyond their duties of rights protection.
kev3d 8 months ago
Point. Set. Match.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
Money evolved out of the internal tension in a commodity between its use-value and its value. The value of one commodity is expressed in terms of the use-value of another standard commodity (in this case, gold, previous times slaves, camels, etc.).However, it is poor as a medium of circulation, for obvious reasons. So fiat money evolved out of the requirements of industrial capitalist society, credit relations, etc., and money is now just symbols. The value assigned to it is what it is worth.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
Since the economy is driven by demand (hence businessmen go into business to meet a perceived demand). The current crisis for example isn't caused by an inability to produce, but because aggregate demand has fallen. Even to the extent that you need artificial demand to facilitate non-rational production (see John Galbraith) you still need production capacity to do so. This was the problem of the Great Depression where the old classical models couldn't explain the economy continued unemployment.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
Because stupid men, in stupid uniforms, will enforce stupid laws.
order9066 8 months ago
American farms receive way too much in government subsidies for these raids to substantiate "war on farms". It's the most subsidized industry in America.
MadPutz 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
On 311 the World woke up and decided NO NUKES and NO FLUKES.
We ask for the END OF THE NUCLEAR NIGHTMARE ON EARTH.
We DEMAND THE END OF TOXIC POWER SYSTEMS ON EARTH.
Let us BAN HYDRO FRACKING IN AMERICA as this POISONS MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF WATER
OnenessNow 8 months ago
@successfulbuild I said you live in your mother's womb, not her basement - then I said you need to get laid and you're a big fuckin baby. And yes, shoot Zakaria in his stupid fuckin head. Yes, please. Do that. Since you don't have a whole lot going on, besides enticing youngsters with candy in a dingy van somewhere between Baltimore and Mascoutah, maybe you could make yourself useful and take care of Zakaria, then throw yourself in a grease fire.
swinescales 8 months ago
By the way, how's bit coin doing for Reason TV? Not too good! Though one Libertarian gave himself permanent brain damage when he suffered a heat stroke from running all his overclocked mining machines in his parents basement. Libertarian ignorance can actually be dangerous.
_
I'm sure little Nick Gillepsie will come out and admit he doesn't understand how the monetary system works.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
For example, Nick Gillespie favors the gold standard even though it would make everybody poorer and make everybody worse off, and would lead to more corruption on the government. He doesn't feel he needs to run the gold standard by economists who know what they're talking about, and he certainly doesn't need to run it by the public. He knows what's best for me because he's a Libertarian and he goes from the gut.
_
That is a rejection of democracy, and enforces his views on millions of ppl.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild There is difference between a gold standard and having competing currency. There is nothing undemocratic about competing currencies and having a precious metal standard to back it up. It may not prevent govt shenanigans, but the market will sort out what is more stable. As MIT Economist Jeffry Miron points out " In the case of the money supply, the key problem is that government has control of the money supply, not the fact that this supply is gold versus fiat money."
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d The government does NOT have a monopoly on money creation. A lot of the money is created through private banks. Money is actually loaned into existence. So Miron is actually referring entirely to the issuance of the M0, which makes up a smaller portion of money in circulation. The real increase in money over time is the lending of private banks, so, as usual, Austrians are complaining about the fractional reserve system. Look up the money multiplier for more info.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Well yes, the government does have a monopoly on money creation and it will convict those who issue competing currency, even though they are not expressly copies of federal reserve notes. Bernard von NotHaus for example was arrested for creating competing silver liberty dollars and called a "domestic terrorist" for doing so. So much for liberty.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d This little turd doesn't understand how money works or why it's valued. Money evolved out of the tension between its use-value and its value. The value of one commodity is expressed in terms of the use-value of another commodity (it used to be gold, but before that it was slaves, camels, copper, etc.). However, gold doesn't work as a medium of circulation, so fiat money evolved out of the requirements of modern capitalism: credit relations and so on.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild And yet gold is still traded. So is silver and oil and everything else of value. Anything of value can be used to back currency, all Austrians want is for the system to allow these different experiments to be run freely, the market will sort out which options are the most stable and viable. You keep parroting on with lies about "forcing" a return to the gold standard when competing currencies are nothing of the kind.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Btw... I looked up "Miron" and he's NOT an MIT economist. He went to MIT. An MIT economist is someone who TEACHES at MIT. He's a Libertarian and thus cannot be taken seriously. Many educated people do believe in dumb things and that statement of Miron's is idiotic. For example, there are over 1,000 engineers who believe in the truther crap, and it has far more support among other disciplines than the Austrian school. So what? What papers has Miron published on the financial system?
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Oh, I beg your pardon, yes, his Alma Mater is MIT he teaches Economics at that school if ill repute Harvard.
kev3d 8 months ago
@successfulbuild "He's a Libertarian and thus cannot be taken seriously." That's really objective of you. By that reasoning men like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell (Stanford), Walter Williams (George Mason) and many others. But of course economics is just one part of libertarianism, which also concerns itself with social liberty, ending all unnecessary wars and having peaceful relations with all who wish to participate.
kev3d 8 months ago
@successfulbuild And by the way, not all Libertarians are Austrians. Rather than bitching and moaning and lying about libertarian positions, how about you actually read what they have written in context. To claim libertarians are for "force" or that the folks at Mises are "Nazis" is such a spectacular falsehood that it boggles the mind. Why is liberty so frightening to you? Both economically and socially?
kev3d 8 months ago
And in Libertarian, property certainly does not come into possession by common agreement. There are three types of Libertarianism, basically: Natural rights, the Nozick version of rights and nightwatchman state, and objectivism. All different forms of justification for property (such as self-ownership) are subsets of one of these. They are all deductive in nature and not based on reference to reality. For everybody else, property, like all other rights, are social constructs, not from god.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild "And in Libertarian, property certainly does not come into possession by common agreement." Horrible grammar aside, where do you get this opinion? Cite a source. Libertarians disagree on many things, but one thing they will always agree upon is the right to mutually voluntary transactions for goods and services. You are more interested in playing semantic games rather than actually refuting the theories.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d And what matters is how well it functions in the social system, i.e., the value assigned to it is what it's wroth. The current system works much better than the gold standard and cross country studies by Bernanke (who has the best macro-economics text out there, perhaps the best micro is C&F) show that the first countries to abandon the gold standard covered from the depression first.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Ah yes, that wonderful republican Ben Bernanke...overseeing this wonderful system which has produced 9% unemployment, a 14 trillion dollar debt, prohibition,questionable, if not illegal and ineffective Bailouts, a weakened Dollar and unfunded liabilities that no one can calculate. Oh yeah, and three wars (plus bombing campaigns in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan) Not all Bernanke's fault of course but all are the result of bloated and abusive government.
kev3d 8 months ago
@successfulbuild RE; the depression Bernanke had an interesting admission in 2002 at Milton Friedman's birthday. “I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression, you’re right. We (federal reserve)did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.” Now if the government actually reduced its size and scope like Friedman suggested in the 60s, then the United States (and the world) would be in MUCH better shape than it is now.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d didn't Friedman say that they didn't expand the supply fast enough?
fleskebille 8 months ago
@fleskebille I wont try to post the whole argument here but Friedman essentially demonstrated that the money supply was effectively cut by a third by the banks with the Federal Reserve allowing it to happen. watch?v=O7pnjzCuSv8
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d If you're going to complain about grammar in youtube videos maybe you shouldn't make grammatical errors in the very same post you complain about grammatical errors:
"... but one thing they will always agree upon is the right to mutually voluntary transactions (SIC) for goods..."
_
Show me where a published, right-wing Libertarian author has said property should be decided by voluntary agreement.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Libertarians are not "Right Wing", nor are they "Left Wing" but embrace the ideas of liberty from both while rejecting the tenets of aggression, coercion, "playing favorites" with public funds and statism in general. "The libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else. " The Libertarian Creed
Chapter 2: Property and Exchange, Murray Rothbard.
kev3d 8 months ago
Successfulbuild - you need to get laid. You're so upset over a few comments from people. Take a few moments, pull your head out of your mother's cozy womb and feel the fresh air of liberty, ya big fuckin baby.
swinescales 8 months ago 12
@swinescales LOl. Swine's post history:
_
"Shoot this Zakaria fascist right in his stupid (f word) heard... Then move to (rant about CNN and MSNBC)..."
_
Libertarians sure are different, aren't they? And my idea of liberty isn't living in my mother's basement mining for bit coins.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
I wouldn't exactly call Jefferson a left-winger, though, of course. He had his own set of right-wing views such as on racism and slavery (like how Walter Block at the Mises institute is a crazy racist), and so on. But he was not a Libertarian by any means.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild It is true Jefferson owned slaves and did not think much of the darker races, same with most of the founding fathers. But Libertarians are free to pick the qualities that they like and reject those with which they disagree. There is no "purity" in people, in ideas perhaps, but not in individuals or groups. So it is best to decentralize and reduce government as much as possible because it is run by the same flawed humans, but with much more power and OTHER people's money.
kev3d 8 months ago
That is one cute hippie chick.
blogegog 8 months ago
The government should be going after agri-business, instead they are protected. That is where the food poisoning is coming from. Our government is so corrupt. The Plutocracy is alive and well.
666sigma 8 months ago
By the way, those computers I mentioned weren't 'single purpose machines' but were general purpose machines that could perform a variety of functions. After their invention, the history of computing was pretty much that of advancing technology since the architectural foundations and had concepts had been laid out. And while it's often claimed von Neumann invented the stored-program concept, it too can be attributed to J.P. Eckert.
Who says Wal-Mart invented the internet?
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild A variety of functions? Exactly what spreadsheet program could Univac run? No one said Wal Mart or Wallstreet invented the internet, no single entity "invented" the internet. But, before the internet and world wide web were made publically available, Wall Street and Wal Mart were pioneering real-time data transfers. This laid the foundation for all e-commerce, employing millions.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d You are mentally retarded. That's like saying, "no early cars had cruise control..." And what made spreadsheets possible? Computer science research. And Wal-Mart had absolutely nothing to do with the development of the internet, plus, according to pretty much every book on the history of networking I've ever come across, the government invented the Internet. So you are an idiot.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Ah, more ad hominem attacks. I never claimed Walmart "invented" the internet. I said computer networks, specifically when it came to bar code scanning for stock ordering. Wallstreet had real-time stock quotes in the pre-internet days. The point is, profitable computer networks were already being privately developed. And besides, the computer could not have existed were it not for the Edisons, Bells, Teslas, Lilienfelds and Westinghouses of the world.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d You've made this claim several times, and in other ReasonTV videos. That the internet was "in the background" by Wal-Mart and other corporations. You have failed to cite a source for this claim. By your logic, nobody ever invented anything, because everything has the work of other people in it, include the Edison's and the Tesla's and so on -- what are you a socialist now?
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild No, I claimed no single entity invented the internet. Unix, Windows, OSX, TCP/IP, HTML, Flash, Browsers, Servers, Phone Lines and all the other structures were developed by different bodies for different purposes. Much like a language, there is no single point at which the light suddenly popped on, but it was a mixture of many techniques and technologies, some which became standard, others withered away. If you are going to quote me, quote me precisely. Don't make shit up.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Ok, you are a complete mental case and do not understand what the Internet even is. That's like saying, Einstein didn't invent Relativity because he drove his car to work.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Just to let you know, "the government" has never invented anything, nor can it. If "the government" is involved with anything like inventing, it's involvement is usually either co-opting ideas from the outside or using the taxpayer's money to fund politically motivated research. "The government" can't invent anything because the government is not a person. "The government" can't have ideas because it isn't alive. And it certainly isn't all-knowing like you imply.
DaddyRTO 8 months ago
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. Single purpose machines of "death." Yeah, Arithmetic = evil.
_
You guys are hilarious. Blaming technology for war is like blaming a shotgun wound on the shotgun. Ultimately, it is PEOPLE who are responsible for how technology is used.
_
You fucking Libertarian luddites can't understand that.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Gee, you mean like blaming gold for the acts of tyrants? I don't blame technology for war and once again you have, through staggering ignorance or willful deception, mischaracterized what I and others have said on the matter. But back to the point, the original government computers were, as you have acknowledged, were instruments of warfare. It took the private market to turn them into affordable tools for a mass market.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d SOME of them were USED for warfare. They were also used for other tasks. Keep in mind I only outlined the first generation of computers, it continues on into the second and third generations and most of the theories were done by academia.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Academia and government are not synonymous and just because much research comes from government, it does not justify large, abusive, fiscally irresponsible government. After all, just because lots of our math comes from Archimedes or al-Khwarizmi does not mean we should have a king or a sultan.
kev3d 8 months ago
There is nothing which can better deserve our patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.
George Washington
address to Congress, January 8, 1790
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Hey look, I can quote too!
"A wise and frugal Government, which shall retrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned."
Thomas Jefferson
I would argue that a 14 trillion dollar debt, 3 wars, 9% unemployment, prohibition, and rewards for bad banking and manufacturing institutions is neither wise, nor frugal.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Perhaps you should quote more often as that is the most intelligent post you've made in this whole thread.
_
And Jefferson advocated a bunch of self-regulated communities - to be regulated ACCORDING TO HOW THEY WANTED IT (Democracy). If a self-governing community wanted to be a bunch of ass-holes, they could, as that is the whole purpose of self-government.
_
Libertarians of course reject Jeffersonian democracy, and advocate a strong govt. telling people what they can do with property.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Ok you are really on crack now. First of all, Jefferson advocated a constitutional representative republic, not "democracy". Secondly such government should be small and limited in what its duties were, just as Washington did. This is textbook libertarianism. WHERE ON EARTH do you get that libertarians advocate "a strong govt. telling people what they can do with property."?
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Historians call it "jeffersonian democracy" because jefferson favored majority rule. And that isn't "textbook" Libertarianism. In Libertarianism there is no democracy -- there is only Libertarian rules. Really, Libertarians advocate the strongest government imaginable - one that isn't responsible to the public, so there would be no "taxation with representation."
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild No, libertarianism is SELF-Government as much as possible and Freedom, with the limit being on harming others or their property.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Defining what is and what isn't "property" -- and when it can and cannot be violated -- negates the whole idea of self-governing communities.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild "Defining what is and what isn't "property" -- and when it can and cannot be violated -- negates the whole idea of self-governing communities. "
How? Under libertarianism, there is no central authority "defining" property. Property comes into possession by agreement, not force and if there is a dispute that cannot be resolved then, in certain cases, the government has an obligation to impartially hear the case and rule.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d If you knew anything about American history, you'd know people were advocating democracy prior to the revolution in the colonies and after it. Jefferson also advocated stringent majority rule and this is verifiable in his writings. He also advocated public schools and said that private property should be progressively taxed.
_
So it is you, as usual, who is stupid and has no idea what he's talking about. Even many Libertarians have given up a claim to Jefferson.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@kev3d I am familiar with the work of al-Khwārizmī. And you comparing our government to a monarchy (which Hans-Hermann Hoppe -- the Mises Institute -- says he prefers over democracy and freedom) and a sultan? The founders widely acknowledges the benefits of scientific research. The point is that the govt. did a lot of this research because the market is short-sighted.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild It is hard to imagine someone this obtuse. Learn to read things in context.
And the government did not fund computer research because it thought people might one day use computers for commerce. Rather, the government funded these things for warfare or the occasional pet project. It took the markets to expand them into the useful devices we use today. Short sighted? Hardly. This is why capitalist societies thrive and innovate.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d No. That is a bald face lie. The government funded DARPA for military AND computer science research.
_
The Government continued funding computers and networking after the war was over. For example, the govt. poured billions into networking in the 80s. And the govt. funded computers in the 90s as well. The exigency of the war of course provided justification for additional expenditures and so on.
_
The only thing you have proven in here is that you like to tell a bunch of lies.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild What does the D in DARPA stand for?
No one has ever said that the government has not pour billions into various projects....it has pour so many billions into projects that no one knows where it all went. The fact is, with a few hundred thousand dollars, college dropouts Bill Gates and Steve Jobs created a revolution in home computing while the government spend money it doesn't have on projects it doesn't need.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d A lot of projects are funded in the name of "defense' that really don't have all that much to do with defense. Bill Gates was a minor player in the history of computing. He was more of a Rockefeller than an edison. If anything his monopoly has harmed the computer industry, not helped it. And there were other pioneers before Bill Gates and Jobs even came along.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild If such projects are not related to defense then they are unconstitutional and should not be funded at the federal level. "Bill Gates was a minor player in the history of computing."
Wow......
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d He was. Operating systems existed before bill gates. Bill Gates didn't even really do anything except buy q-dos from some guy. I think computing would have been better without a monopoly player in the OS market.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild There was never a monopoly on Operating systems. What Gates and Jobs did was create something that was user friendly for a mass market. Of course Unix existed long before...and continues mainly in one of the many flavors of linux, but most people don't like or don't know Unix. There were others for Symbolics and other, now defunct computers. By broadening the market, it allowed children and grandmothers alike to use computers without special training.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d There were monopolies before and after Windows. The patents and so on that exist in computing can also be considered little monopolies. Gates has had always > 90% market share which is a monopoly player according to economics. He can help to set a monopoly price in software and has shares in Apple and so on. This means other areas of computing, such as hardware, are dependent on windows -- and are forced to hide their information from other sellers. That's monopoly power.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild
But what is amazing is your dishonesty, you have to argue that Gates is "minor"...yet holds 90% or more of the computing market. You cannot have it both ways. Besides, 90% is not a "monopoly" and computing has grown to smart devices, where Apple is king. Servers are mixed, but very often Linux based and so on. Hardware isn't dependent on operating systems, its the other way around.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d As usual, you provide no real arguments for any of your dumb beliefs, because your beliefs are crazy, incoherent, and wouldn't be backed up by political science or any other field. Like most Libertarians you are useless to society and are, by all indications, a failure.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Ah yes, my "crazy beliefs" that people, everywhere, should be free to do whatever they wish so long as they do not harm others. That a person should be free to pursue as much money as he wants, or to reject it entirely. That a person can say or publish anything, worship or blaspheme any way they want without fear of arrest. That any two or more parties can enter any social or commercial contract that is mutually voluntary. I know...I'm such a radical and a loser.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Look up the reasons that Columbus and the Spanish conquistadors were financed and you will see it was for resources such as gold. And his continued interest in America was gold. His own words: "Hispaniola is a miracle. Mountains and hills, plains and pastures, are both fertile and beautiful... the harbors are unblievably good and there are many wide rivers of which the majority contain gold... There are great mines of gold and other metals..."
successfulbuild 8 months ago
I don't know if it's true that FRB makes war "cheaper." I claim it makes it more difficult to go to war. But a lot of things actually make war "cheaper" and help the govt. to engage in wars. For example, computing machines. The Enigma machines was used by the Kriegsmarine to encode messages, and cryptographers in England broke the code after capturing one from a captured submarine. The Colossus in England was used by British codebreakers.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Nothing makes war "cheaper" but "fiat" money (our worthless paper) certainly makes it easier to engage in war. "Oh no, we're spending billions on useless violence around the world to spread our influence, doing nothing to actually promote freedom. We need more money. What do we do?" "Easy. Print more." That's the logic of the people in power right now. And power is what they want to hold onto. So go ahead and keep defending what they do.
DaddyRTO 8 months ago
Here in the US, the ENIAC and EDVAC, capable of tabulation and arithmetic, and precursors to the modern computer, were funded by the US military. They invented it because of problems they were having with gun trajectories, where field testing often led to misplaced targets or friendly fire. So the US Army sponsored Moore School of Engineering at the Universtiy of Pennsylvania. (The ENIAC was a functional computer that performed both arithmetic and logical operations.)
successfulbuild 8 months ago
Computers have a long history of government involvement, even before the advent of the modern electronic computer. From Baisal Pascal (Pascal's farther was a tax officer and he and his farther spent hours figuring out how much each citizen owed in taxes; he designed mechanical calculators with gears to perform arithmetic ops as a highly trained mathematican), to the Hollerith, which was designed for counting the population, Hollerith himself being employed by the U.S. Census Bureau in the 1890s.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild So? The free market took clunky single-purpose machines of death and turned them into machines of peace, communication, commerce and entertainment at a low price. Such as it is, the governments of the world largely adopted and funded that which was already being developed. While DARPA was developing a network, Walmart was pioneering bar codes and inter-store communication to stock shelves. Wall Street created real-time networks prior to the internet becoming public.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d LOL. There is no comparsion between bar-codes and the internet. The government created TCP/IP and pretty much all of the computer science work behind the internet. A lot of research on the internet was also done by MIT labs and so on. And the ideas of the internet isn't from Wal-Mart but from J.C.R. Licklider who spoke of intergalactic networks and so on. So the ideas were from him.
_
You're a nutcase kook. And companies like IBM and so on were heavily funded by the government, stupid.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild MIT is a private school. IBM, Corning, Xerox, Microsoft, AT&T/Bell Labs, Apple and so on are private companies. The fact that some of those companies received government contracts is beside the point because A. The constitution allows for scientific research funds, particularly for Military use and B. WW2 and the Cold War especially required investment in communications. The Soviet Union couldn't keep up because there was no private enterprise to provide good research.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d MIT, harvard, and other private schools were receiving billions of dollars from the government, stupid. Private schools like Harvard take in billions of dollars a year, much more than even many public schools. Like anything in America, "privatized" often means more government support. It's like with the Koch brothers. They want the government to privatize resources and hand it over to Koch industries.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild And once again, during the cold war, there is a constitutional case for paying for scientific pursuits for military use. But there is no cold war any longer and certainly there is no justification for federal funding when private industries ought to be shouldering those research costs and not some random tax payer.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Show me your sources for Wal-Marts pioneering of e-commerce. You know where the world-wide-web comes from, right? (Pro-tip: the government)
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild WalMart became especially good at exploiting the information behind the bar code and is considered a pioneer in developing sophisticated technology to track its inventory and cut the fat out of its supply chain. " from How stuff works.
kev3d 8 months ago
@successfulbuild And no, the world wide web does not come from the US government, but CERN in europe, and not for defense but as a way that scientists could share information. CERN of course had nothing to do with computer network technology and the world wide web was started as a side project. Such as it was, the world wide web was essentially a scientific curiosity until the private market saw the potential.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d I didn't say it was from the US government. And yes, it was a government project to allow physicists and so on to more easily share information.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@kev3d Computer history:
w w w 1 [dot] fccj [dot] org / jdebo / new_page_3 [dot] htm (no spaces)
crews [dot] org / curriculum / ex / compsci / articles history [dot] htm
Eniac:
ideafinder [dot] com / history / inventions /comeniac [dot] htm
DARPA:
envirosagainstwar [dot] org know read [dot] php?itemid=8627
successfulbuild 8 months ago
But here are some other things that definitely make war "cheaper": the aeronautical industry, gun powder, modern agriculture, science, and, in fact, technology in general. So let's ban everything that makes war and stuff "cheaper" because Ron Paul and the Nazis at the Mises Institute think this will end all war. Fucking idiots.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Do you enjoy trolling? What satisfaction it must give you to take things so entirely out of context, to intentionally mislabel, mischaracterize, defame and distort libertarian ideas. Mises was himself a Jew, an anti-fascist and anti-communist. To call the institute associated with him as a bunch of "Nazis" is akin to a creationist denying the existence of dinosaur fossils. It is so blatantly disingenuous on your part that you immediately lose all credibility.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d I would actually say Robert Murphy's views on the human race are than those of the Nazis. And Mises said that fascism saved human civilization. He was a total crank.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild cont. Mises then goes on to explain the position of (classical) liberals, of which he was one. "As the liberal sees it, the task of the state consists solely and exclusively in guaranteeing the protection of life, health, liberty, and private property against violent attacks. Everything that goes beyond this is an evil."
One could not take a more anti-fascist or anti-tyrannical stance than that. See how reading things in context can be helpful?
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d Mises was not a classical liberal and his vision is a distortion of classical liberalism, both in politics and in economics.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@successfulbuild "Mises was not a classical liberal" Then please define your terms and explain exactly by what authority you make your claim. Otherwise, it is just yet another baseless assertion on your part.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d DARPA's spectacular failure rate and noteworthy successes stem from its high-risk ventures. For years DARPA has funded extremely unconventional, sometimes beyond-the-pale, avant-garde research in all realms of science and technology. It is, perhaps, the most creative place in our vast government for a scientist who wants to stretch his or her mind in adventurous directions and be well paid to do so.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild And exactly why should John Q Public fund some scientist's dream job, where in all probability, their ideas will come to nothing? In fact military funding is so screwed up that the Pentagon cannot account for missing Billions, not Millions of dollars. Let private companies fund research, if there is a necessary war that requires it, they will step up to the plate and contribute, but if we are fighting a few thousand cave men with AKs then let there is hardly a point.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d The only place where you have "ideas that come to nothing" are in the Libertarian movement and the economics department.
_
I'm all for abolishing govt. funding for economics and other religions. Economists have proven to be useless. I don't think the govt. should fund an ethnic studies department either.
_
The fallacy in your argument is that nothing is stopping private markets from competing with govt. funded astronomers and so on.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Astronomy is not exactly profitable, but such as it is, lots and lots of astronomers exist who do it just as a hobby and every once in a while, they spot something that NASA or the ESA couldn't, like Hale-Bopp. Good for them. There is also increased interest in private space tourism. If the cost of going into space is ever going to come down, it will be through competing market forces.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d First you acknowledge that all this govt. funding had a huge impact on the health and happiness of the human race, now you're saying it all "comes to nothing." You're now contradicting yourself, and are a troll.
_
Can you name a single theory of economics in the last 40 years that has had a direct application in any engineering field or anything? Of course not. Economists may as well have been playing patty cake in there.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild I never said anything of the kind. Cite a precise quote in context and it can be discussed.
Your question is meaningless.
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d It is common knowledge and found in basically all of his writings. How is my question "meaningless"?
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@kev3d Dinosaur fossils are visible and we can see them in the real world. This is a debate about IDEAS, and, yes, there are similarities between Libertarianism and fascism: rejection of democracy, "natural/organic" order, absolutism, and so on. You fascists believe you get to tell everybody what to do based on your twisted economics (less supported in academia than crationism or even AIDS denialism) and belief in absolutism.
successfulbuild 8 months ago
@successfulbuild Nothing like a little reductio ad hitlerum to buttress your arguments...
kev3d 8 months ago
@kev3d And I don't need to source my arguments because they source themselves, this is all basic history, but these links will help:
successfulbuild 8 months ago
FDA is just a shill agency to protect large food and drug corporations from smaller competition
ForTehNguyen 8 months ago
Man fuck the fuzz.
ChanneloftheRepublic 8 months ago
Eating this way could result in people being healthier... Ba we can't have that..
Stutch13 8 months ago
Jeez, Nick, I'm surprised you managed to stay awake during the whole interview.
sco08y 8 months ago
Just as an informational point, sheep get a disease called scrapie, which may in fact be one of the earliest know examples of the family of diseases of which mad cow is a member.
tallentjack 8 months ago
You mean regulations are increasing as farmers are finding ways to reach the customer directly? But I thought regulations help the little guy against the big bad businesses.
I wish people would realize that regulations are set up to perpetuate monopolies and crush the little guy.
ryanpmurphy 8 months ago
Wouldn't a respectable cop quit if ordered to do something like this. Raiding a farm for raw food or raiding a farm that grows food, period. WTF!!
countupir 8 months ago
fuck the police!
islamiscrap8888 8 months ago
The government should force them to have a big warning sign where these products are sold stating the possible dangers of raw milk or whatever they're selling. Then, they should leave them alone. As long as the customer is informed, he should be able to make his own decisions.
blogegog 8 months ago 2
@blogegog Makes sense.
rgmztxy 8 months ago
@blogegog The government should have nothing to do with this. I agree that the customer should be informed they are purchasing raw milk, but that is the customer's responsibility to be educated about the product they are purchasing. But I agree we should all be able to make the decision to drink raw milk if we want.
ryanpmurphy 8 months ago
@ryanpmurphy No, it's not. This is one of the somewhat rare instances where government plays a huge role. Necessarily so. And that role is to inform and enforce. You and I need to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what we are purchasing when it comes to food.
You may be informed, but everyone is not. And never will be, unless the gov't forces the sellers to inform them. A gov't that gives me the information and then lets me choose... that's my kind of government.
blogegog 8 months ago
@blogegog With guns drawn to shot anyone who doesn't obey, move to Russia or China where you belong!
you4080 8 months ago
@you4080 Stop posting for the day. You're drunk. Don't worry, all is forgiven. This is the internet for Christ's sake. See you tomorrow!
blogegog 8 months ago
@blogegog When has the FDA ever protected us from bad food? We don't go six months without an ecoli outbreak or some other food scare. They only react after the fact. And I for one don't think the rest of society is so stupid that they don't realize there is a risk in drinking unpasteurized milk. People know that McDonalds will make you fat if you eat it every day and that smoking cigarettes can lead to cancer. We don't need the government forcing private individuals to put up signs or labels.
ryanpmurphy 8 months ago