@miketv How is the notion that no central governing (dictating) force can control human activity successfully a conformist idea? Collectivism is what's conformist.
In fact it would be even better if she dropped the love angle and just made it a real song about the teachings of Hayek with all the same lyrics minus the last verse. It's a topic worth singing about! After all, think about how many real songs are there out there promoting socialism in the lyrics.
@halflifeproductionz Yet Chile prosper under the Neo Liberal policy's that Augusto Pinochet adopted though this had a lot more to do with Milton Friedman than Hayek anyway
@halflifeproductionz That would be called an Ad-Hom and completely negates any valid argument you might have had. Although I doubt you would have much of an argument anyways.
@GamerEnterprise If you knew shit you would know that a theory is the highest level of certainty in SCIENCE, you fucking moron. It is a thoroughly tested and reviewed hypothesis. Pull your head out of your ass son. And physics in no better than any of the social sciences. Unless you just want to live in a shed in the woods by yourself? On second thought, that sounds like a good place for you.
@bbnatedogg all world knows that ur "social science" is simply pile of crap compering with real physics. While Physics study universe and everything within it, social science study why one "monkey" took and ate worm from other monkeys head.
@GamerEnterprise Arrogant much??? It's funny how a lot of the time the dumbest people are also the most arrogant about their opinions! You don't even comprehend what a theory is!
@bbnatedogg dont worry. we will have laught about ur comment with my colleagues. Go study more your "social norms" and why its rude to rub ur pines against other people. We will study universe mean while. Ups. No time to talk with you. Have time machine to invent and dimensions to discover. Go play with fake animal science.
@GamerEnterprise Sure!!!!!! What is a laught????????? You can neither spell nor follow rules of grammar but, I am supposed to believe that you're a big time physicist??? LOL you delusional pole smoker.
@bbnatedogg so did you find out why one primate do this or that? did you? did you find out why one primate sticks banana in others primates ass? real science are going on there. real research. researching primates behaviour. I bet you feel like real scientist. hahahahahaha oh wait, my research about universe is waiting for me. bb
Haha, very well done! Though I would argue that Hayekian anti-rationalism and his belief that in the free market there is not always the capital dispersion for profit that would prevent monopolisation of capital in a sector/removal of price signals of how to use that capital economically a la Socialism, makes him an intellectual to whom one subscribes only with a real caveat.
& Jurisdictional law isn't required to induce people to act safely, as punishments or liability payments can be organised contractually. So Hayek is really wrong about the need to have there be some charge for neighbourhood effecs/cost punishment for environs-derived devaluation of one's property/charge for that which doesn't beget income to encourage it such as freely copyable authorial work or freely usable bins,
since property can exclude to make environs satisfy/charge users 4 included benefits, so that you can subscribe to property surrounded within properties rented and sold on the same covenant to provide like rules for uniformity in proximity to avoid social conflict e.g. to create quiet areas or student areas or family oriented areas or bucolic reserves free from being near industry for subscribers to within that land exclusionary of some other purpose to serve ITS purpose.
For that is the moral of property rights, your rights and others' inalienable from yours, negative unimpingable rights. So the 'problem' of undesirable neighbourhood effects and incompatibility of certain ends such as rowdy and old-age-pensioner-life or power-plant and bucolic reserve life, can be solved by property rights which contractualism also allows fees for desirable externalities within private streets like bins,
or intellectual 'property' to be paid for by fee for original access to those making money on good diffusion of free to copy work since areas in which free copying would be disallowed would probably not be selected by the market.
Property rights would allow those who pay to exclude enjoyment of e.g. bins or local parks to members of the rentier or covenant-vendor established rule of paying for it or they could allow visitors, attracted by the facilities paid for by the residents.
In other words we don't need extra-contractual i.e. jurisdictional i.e. State forced fees for those things that would be positive-externalities. Ordoliberalism IS GARBAGE, anarcho-capitalism refutes it all!
This would also solve the immigration 'problem' since one's 'nation' as they are presently geographically defined wouldn't have to all be under the same agreements and just as bucolic reserves could be put in environs contracted from some investor to be free of that which would reduce value for enjoyers of the bucolic reserve on the market, so too could cultural or even (though I wouldn't say this with gusto) racial groups so isolate themselves & that for which you pay by tenancy or purchase
by tenancy or purchase rules would not necessarily have as part of the rules of that area the allowance of entry to non residents so that residents could pay for local amenities to be free at the point of service for them and not leeched from by immigrants.
Non material i.e. intellectual works of course would not be excludable from non payers enjoying it hence the fees that distributors would pay to first get at that authorial production making writing a book a one off earner rather than always. AnCap removes the problem of persons enjoying what others have paid for that otherwise disables the price system's power to prevent overusage of those resources and need to produce by following desirable exchange in order 2 consume more
That is, without State funding of what is free at the point of service, all material amenities free at the point of service could be relegated to fee payers for them thereby bringing the PRICE SYSTEM into control of motivation of production of those desirable things and into prevention of overuse of those resources by their having their cost for enjoying them linked to their usage.
Intellectual works however can't be excluded from non payers so fees for initial access to then freely copyable works, would arise. Otherwise that would be the one chink in the armour of pure property-rights, the funding for things that are desirable but can't have their enjoyment limited to those who pay the fee for them. These things too can have the Price-System brought into motivating their production but consumption of them once paid 2 be revealed 2 people would be free
So the social rules of private property that the establish price system and suasion to act in certain ways if one is to consume wealth, increase wealth/allow everything but intellectual works to be limited in its enjoyment 2 those who pay for it so that cost signals prevent overusage and induce productivity in order to enjoy those effects (which price system is disabled if people can enjoy for free that for which others pay) and intellectual works can be paid for initial pub
Hayek went wrong in ignoring the capacity of property rights 2 arrange this payment for positive externalities and to locate and segregate different human actors and human-caused phenomena so that negative externalities could be solved without need 2 place an arbitrary State jurisdictional i.e. extra-contractual obligatory fee. He also ignored how liability agreements can set rules for punishments for non deliberate harm caused/private insurance inducing less risky behaviour
So what was Hayek's contribution (outside of his important jurisprudential work) other than elaborating Mises's business cycle theory and theory of the need for economic calculation in money prices to roughly gauge for what ends what use of capital would be worth that expenditure-this is Mises's thought, not Hayek's, who just tilted at windmills in claiming that knowledge is dispersed so we need the price system to guide our use of scarce resources-EVERYONE ALREADY KNEW THAT
Indeed Hayek gives not one reason in e.g. Individualism and Economic Order nor in the Road to Serfdom as to why institutions outside of the propriety of a certain supposed monopoly couldn't find leeway for investors to profit in raising the potential therein, for all the more profit if few investors have the foresight to realise that competitive potential. His monopoly theory is in a word, absent.
And ordoliberalism is garbage too. Not State law but contractual liability agreements and insurance costs induce good behaviour for damages whose source isn't outright banned under the rules of contractualism i.e. for damages not resulting from directly punishable theft. Damages caused by actions with property can be separated by investors selling/renting on accordance to rules to homogenise action in such a way to make environs suitable for what customers wish to do/have.
The price system needs no Ordoliberal State supplement to it to punish such actions that would cause social conflict and loss of utility to social fellows, the price system itself can separate and integrate mores in order to distance mutually incompatible undertakings and lifestyles e.g .bucolic reserves from power plants by customer selection of property within environs homogenously ruled thereby making value for the customer in their removal of what for him is negative
of what for him is negative in externality. As for what is positive, the same methods of customer selection of properties within environs that segregate from that locale the undesirable externality, can provide what externalities he finds positive to make profit for those who so provide customers with those rules which can also exclude non contractors, limiting enjoyment of x to payers for it. Where in this price-system solution for social order is State supplement needed?
What is desirable can be included and limited to payers in the rent or covenant-purchase established fee and what is undesirable can be excluded from those properties by the investor working out what to exclude as ingredient in environs for those who buy into his properties and his rules, making value for solving these social conflicts just as excluders of nuts from some chocolate bars make value for their clientele. And IP can beget a one-off fee for initial publication.
Th reason this would solve the immigration problem is that things which can be enjoyed for free after some party has underwritten their costs, could be excluded from non payers if they are material property. This would allow the price system in rental and purchase covenants to incentivise the provision of these things then free at the point of service and to limit their usage to payers so as to have prices direct how much they are consumed. If property is to encourage guests
then of course those guests having free access to what the tenants and purchasers in that commonly ruled area have paid for, will please those residents who wanted guests to come, and if they don't then they can limit guests according to buying where only residents are allowed, from enjoying what they have paid in their rental and covenant purchase agreements, to have provided that otherwise would have no encouragement to be provided. Private property anarchism would bring
Private property anarchism would bring all material into this price system of payment for use and prices to discourage over use, because contracts for provision of things to be so privately underwritten could be selected that have the common tenants or purchasers of residence somewhere agree contractually to not allow 'immigration' of non residents so that the supposed problem of people enjoying outside of payment what must be paid for such as free to use bins
would be solved as a problem by the order of contracts with property rights, so Hayek was wrong to claim that the State needs to organise rules external to contracts with proprietors that order payment for usage of free at the point of service utilities and payment for costs caused to others, as such rules WITHIN CONTRACTS with proprietors can organise payment for these things, exclusion of non contractors i.e. non payers and homogenisation of commonly sourced property
, homogenisation, that is, for some end attained by e.g. disallowing from your property sold on condition of that disallowance, the existence of smoke emissions so that within those properties value 4 a bucolic reserve that must be segregated from smoke emissions, would increase and the investor would have the signal that his private rules have made utility for people in making profit. Only IP would be excluded from the non payers for that enjoyment and thus only IP would
and thus only IP would not fall under the organising remit of the price system BUT fees for initial publication could allow then free to copy intellectual works or 'IP,' to beget the income that would encourage the effort to make that utility first available.
So Hayek's concessions to a soft form of ordoliberalism on the basis of putting things that would come outside of the scope of the price system, into the price system, in order to encourage positive and punish negative externalities, are concessions based on ignorance of
based on ignorance of: the ability for contracts 2 discourage and remove from near that which it harms, all actions emmitting bad neighbourhood effects and the ability to exclude non payers from enjoyment local good neighbourhood effects to put these discouragements/encouragements INTO the scope of the price system.
To reiterate, you can buy into rental or purchase agreements surrounded by property that is, from the same investor, ruled in such a like way that by your subscription to those rules you ensure others around you follow the same rules so that old age pensioner or loud music areas or factory areas or natural reserve areas, can be duly segregated,
,segregated as the market attempts 2 do anyway without the enforcement of this contractual order that is supposedly unable 2 segregate non payers from paid for good neighbourhood effects/unable to segregate bad neighbourhood effects from x human activity. The PURE contractual system and the price system derived from it therefore DO include, despite what Hayek ignorantly thought, the encouragements for positive externalities/discouragements of negative externalities in prices
Of course I say all this presuming that one reading it would have the basic economic knowledge to understand why inclusion of costs for usage of things and incomes for provision of usable useful things, are desirable, and thus why Hayek thought that the State should solve these problems of externality when in fact the market, property rights, can do so by including in contracts
including in contracts the payment for useful externalities and limitation of use to payers for them by the same exclusion powers that allow segregation of some people and actions via property rights away from each other so that within one's environs social externalities will not cause social conflict, so that in his Ordoliberal contentions of the price system not being able to in itself without the State solve these problems of social order, Hayek was dead wrong.
If Hayek wasn't wrong, then be my guest and try to draw out how you would calculate State i.e. extra-contractual charges for free enjoyment of costly underwritten positive externalities and how you would calculate charges for impingement of others' enjoyment of their property, OR
OR you could heed me and realise that by the ability to subscribe to property within environs sold by the same investor on the same covenant, one can exclude non payers from enjoying resident-paid externalities and that these exclusions allow direct contracting for what will be around you so that things that in proximity would mutually aggravate each other like elderly areas vs family areas can be removed from proximity to avoid social conflict, all thanks to property rights
The final elaboration I will make of this point before I buzz off (hooray cheer the parties involved in my tedious but necessary baracking of fallacy with the truth) is that things which are supposed to be enjoyed without charge at the point of service and damages caused that don't bear costs like consumption of saleable resources bear as signal, ARE NOT EXTERNAL TO THE MARKET PRICE SYSTEM as non payers for some utility can be excluded from the streets of its covenant payers
by the same contract that excludes non payers into that contract (in the sense that your not paying for a chocolate bar excludes you from that contract) so that contract for fees for local things can include for the customers of those rules (get it now?) the exclusion of non members of this financial arrangement to bring into market exchange the use of resources that directly beget no fee for their usage so to access them, living there and thus paying according to the
by the same contract that excludes non payers into that contract (in the sense that your not paying for a chocolate bar excludes you from that contract) so that contract for fees for local things can include for the customers of those rules (get it now?) the exclusion of non members of this financial arrangement to bring into market exchange the use of resources that directly beget no fee for their usage so to access them, living there and thus paying according to the
according to the rules of the contract that the customers wish to include that for which they are paying such as local bins in the exclusive community they are buying into, becomes necessary to even go near those amenities so that only those who don’t contract for exclusivity of movement there would suffer guests or ‘immigrants’ to use the resources that the local covenant on which maintenance of ownership there is based, has caused to be locally underwritten in costs
so that prices would arise for those who would use them i.e. non payers of this price in the contract could be excluded from using these things! This same method of contractually selected rules, exclusions and inclusions allow one, an institution or an action or a group to nestle him/themselves/it/that process within property bought on the same rule so that the homogeneity of no power plants in that area would allow nestling of high value bucolic reserve land
thereby removing the need for the Hayekian Ordoliberal state to intervene and charge arbitrary cost prices for damage caused to mutually conflicting actions/actors in devaluationary proximity (just as this Ordoliberal State doesn’t need to bring positive externalities internal to the price system as exclusion of non covenant members can limit access of users of free to use utilities to those underwriting them as customers paying the provider so that the price system
is there brought into full effect as it is with normal property that is limitable to enjoyment to payers and has signals indicating how much it is being used as per the price system that can be extended by community charge by covenant-agreement dependant purchase also excluding non covenant members or ruling that guests must pay so that usage of informal free to use e.g. local rubbish bins would still beget cost for their usage bringing their usage within payment in order to
be near and to use them; thus imposing by that contractual order a price on those things supposedly external to the price system), although even without the nestling within such areas ruled for some exclusion the market will work to locate x and y where it is less devalued by environs, though this is helped out by customer ability to select
to select (via the integrity and enforcement of contracts) environs which are obliged to be free of a or b if one is to own that thing or land as per the original contract so that within those environs, x and y whose ends a or b would bring to utter ruin, can be free from proximity to a or b, with less discriminating customers able to enjoy lower costs
from not compelling exclusion of resources from a broader range of uses/broader range of willing paying customers which costs exclusivity therefore compels, thereby dissuading over-service of niche wants but nonetheless providing for them with other property of course used, sold, constructed, ruled by rent or covenant-sale in any other totally alternative way.
'coercion' by negative property rights can include in the price system the incentives for production and discouragement for overuse of those positive externalities considered to require forced State funding, by exclusion from some property bought on covenant to pay the fee to provide that utility, of non payers of that fee in order to organise local positive externalities WITHIN the price system by the same contracts that can segregate incompatible acts from mutual proximity
@cannotbebothered100 Dude too many comments and why are you responding to me? I'm a defender of Hayek and can't stand marx. and what you just responded and stated in 30 comments is what I stated as the theory of interest in the value of labor, that marx did not understand. Instead of typing all of that why don't you just forward a link of bahm-bowerk's critique. I've been to mises academy, you are explaining to the wrong person.
It's about time necrophilia cast off the shackles of ignorance and declared the love that dare not speak it's name. (You DID know Hayek's dead, right?) Thanks for posting, as well as singing and playing.
Greta video! Ron Paul is the only polition these days that truly follows Austrian theory and Hayek's advice and he is running for President! Ron Paul 2012.
Do you want to share your love for liberty through video production? Apply for the spring Koch Internship Program to develop your talent! Google Koch Internship Program to learn about this and other great internship opportunities.
I am fantastic at trivia. Be MY groupie.
MMODoubter 2 days ago
Credit and interest, eh? I see what you did there.
Typical girls, always after a credit card.
chriseatschopsuey 2 days ago
LOL go kayak with Hayek.
Batta0909 2 days ago
obviously, kayaking was mentioned in this song.
kleshco 3 days ago
I m gonna stop watching or i may turn straight ......not sure i want that
SuperObjectivist 3 days ago
where can I find a girl like her?
codewarrior05 5 days ago in playlist Liked videos
Awesome!!
I second the request for a Ron Paul song!
ThereAreManyLikeIt 5 days ago
I think I love you....liberty-loving women are oh-so beautiful.
enjoiskaterguy 6 days ago
How about a love song for Murray Rothbard? Or, better yet, a love song for Dr. Ron Paul?
maidenak 1 week ago 3
cute video... Wish I knew some girls like this...
fender7802 1 week ago
Hayek .. kayak .. lyrical genius!!!
The worlds economy is going to shit, everybody get on board the kayak.
v35tan27 1 week ago
I love this!
TheAtheistRising 1 week ago
keynesian chicks are hotter
ThePoserDISposer 1 week ago
with conformists like this spreading like herpes, punk rock is gonna be a valid form of social rebellion again soon
miketv 1 week ago
@miketv How is the notion that no central governing (dictating) force can control human activity successfully a conformist idea? Collectivism is what's conformist.
dubified89 1 week ago
<3 ... can we talk about the economy?
Darthwannabe 1 week ago
I hate you and your video, annoying thing keeps popping up everywhere.
TWSceptic 1 week ago
Her wig and glasses are perfect.
Aurini 1 week ago
NICE
baydood510 1 week ago
Well done!!~!!!!
PETEYPABLO1977 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I got something you'd love right here if you know what I mean... It's an austrian economics book.
TradingTutor 1 week ago
I got something you'd love right here if you know what I mean... It's an austrian economics book.
TradingTutor 1 week ago
I am in that weird side of yotube again
Engravingsful 1 week ago
I approve of this lady.
THEerizzow 1 week ago
How do these videos not have a million plus views each?
cooljj82 2 weeks ago
This is what Libertarians fap to.
ParisianColour 2 weeks ago 4
This is great ahah, I love Hayek either. Him and Friedman mostly builded up my vision while my studies in economics.
Alvelyan 2 weeks ago
I thought that this would be a joke but it's actually a really good song with great lyrics.
dubified89 2 weeks ago
In fact it would be even better if she dropped the love angle and just made it a real song about the teachings of Hayek with all the same lyrics minus the last verse. It's a topic worth singing about! After all, think about how many real songs are there out there promoting socialism in the lyrics.
dubified89 2 weeks ago
Will you marry me? :)
matti1003 3 weeks ago
hot chicks and austrian economics? sign me up.
jasonkops 3 weeks ago 11
Hayek is dead. What do you think about loving a man still alive? :-) I love girls with brains. What do you think about loving me? ;-)
NetzKaiser 3 weeks ago in playlist dorianelectra 3
How about doing a song on Ron Paul...
upyr1 3 weeks ago
@upyr1 I almost forgot about how he replaced God.....
ZmanHot 2 weeks ago
i cant love Hayek enough
ticklewit 3 weeks ago
Ron Paul 2012!!!
wookeye 3 weeks ago
where can I download this?
Pattydog9 4 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
XD Awesome. Looks like you had a lot of fun.
slaughtz 4 weeks ago
shes probably getting beat up by a cop at some occupy movement somewhere right now.
Quiksilver385 4 weeks ago
71 people are on the road to serfdom.
s219016 4 weeks ago 19
Love it!
Smullet90 1 month ago
You're freaking adorable and your voice is actually pretty good! I was surprised. =]. Now make a song about Milton Friedman!
naihanLikesPie 1 month ago 5
Haha, great song. I wish more people knew about the likes of Hayek. We might not have as much of a problem in the U.S. as we currently do.
YannickGuitarist 1 month ago
Hayek-splosives!
zdrux 1 month ago 4
It turns out that 70 people don't know who Hayek was lol..... sucks for them
wfudannyboy 1 month ago
That was hot!
immortalizer08 1 month ago
so, who are you voting for you economist tart?
triflind 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm in love with Salma Hayek. Just kidding.
libertyeconomics 1 month ago
I'm in love with Salma Hayek. Just kidding.
libertyeconomics 1 month ago
I'm in love with Salma Hayek. Just kidding.
libertyeconomics 1 month ago
I really enjoyed that
Causarius 1 month ago
Best video I've seen in a while! Thanks for posting!
Patience1138 1 month ago
I don't even agree with the Austrian school of economics, but this song was awesome
KeithHartranft 1 month ago
@KeithHartranft You don't agree? Have you written a successful refutation?
jkovert 1 month ago
We are all Keynesians now...
ernestdauto 1 month ago
you look like the wikipedia girl
DustedDom 1 month ago
Hey! We have the same glasses!
pookatim 1 month ago
hayek supported the brutal dictator augusto pinochet.
halflifeproductionz 1 month ago
@halflifeproductionz cool story bro
diablo98188 1 month ago
@halflifeproductionz Yet Chile prosper under the Neo Liberal policy's that Augusto Pinochet adopted though this had a lot more to do with Milton Friedman than Hayek anyway
Darkwizzrobe 1 month ago
@halflifeproductionz That would be called an Ad-Hom and completely negates any valid argument you might have had. Although I doubt you would have much of an argument anyways.
Joe11Blue 1 month ago
And I thought the left had a monopoly on creepy personality cults.
t3hpighouse 1 month ago
haha. wow. this is THE nerdiest. love it.
johnidavey 1 month ago 2
i disagree with what you say but damn this is a good song
trotskychu 1 month ago
I have searched for years for someone like you...
mattsmith20111 1 month ago
This is why women shouldn't leave the fucking kitchen! Trying to think with their little 1/3 the size of a mans' brain!
bbnatedogg 1 month ago
I love girls who love Hayek.
evilmarscapone 1 month ago
I particularly like the rhyming of Hayek with Kayak!
bigbadbetts 1 month ago
Everbody loves Hayek :)
RammHaifisch 1 month ago 36
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Social science? hahahaha you are nothing more than science wannabe. Physics is real science. "Social science" is simply bullshit
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@GamerEnterprise Whatever. Physics is just a theory anyways...
zoikles1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zoikles1 "Physics is just a theory" go back to school and learn basics!
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@GamerEnterprise Said like a true idiot...
trumpetscrub 1 month ago
@trumpetscrub I am idiot because? Because I DONT consider physics to be just a theory?
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@GamerEnterprise If you knew shit you would know that a theory is the highest level of certainty in SCIENCE, you fucking moron. It is a thoroughly tested and reviewed hypothesis. Pull your head out of your ass son. And physics in no better than any of the social sciences. Unless you just want to live in a shed in the woods by yourself? On second thought, that sounds like a good place for you.
bbnatedogg 1 month ago
@bbnatedogg xDDD "physics in no better than any of the social sciences" hahahahaha xDDDD
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@GamerEnterprise Great point, fucking retard!!!!!
bbnatedogg 1 month ago
@bbnatedogg all world knows that ur "social science" is simply pile of crap compering with real physics. While Physics study universe and everything within it, social science study why one "monkey" took and ate worm from other monkeys head.
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@GamerEnterprise Arrogant much??? It's funny how a lot of the time the dumbest people are also the most arrogant about their opinions! You don't even comprehend what a theory is!
bbnatedogg 1 month ago
@bbnatedogg dont worry. we will have laught about ur comment with my colleagues. Go study more your "social norms" and why its rude to rub ur pines against other people. We will study universe mean while. Ups. No time to talk with you. Have time machine to invent and dimensions to discover. Go play with fake animal science.
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@GamerEnterprise Sure!!!!!! What is a laught????????? You can neither spell nor follow rules of grammar but, I am supposed to believe that you're a big time physicist??? LOL you delusional pole smoker.
bbnatedogg 1 month ago
@bbnatedogg Im am physicist. My poor knoweladge in eng gramma dont prove anyting -.-
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
@bbnatedogg so did you find out why one primate do this or that? did you? did you find out why one primate sticks banana in others primates ass? real science are going on there. real research. researching primates behaviour. I bet you feel like real scientist. hahahahahaha oh wait, my research about universe is waiting for me. bb
GamerEnterprise 1 month ago
I'm in love with you.
instantpestering 1 month ago 44
This comment has received too many negative votes show
youtube should ban fucking idiots like this
gbt722 1 month ago
Haha, very well done! Though I would argue that Hayekian anti-rationalism and his belief that in the free market there is not always the capital dispersion for profit that would prevent monopolisation of capital in a sector/removal of price signals of how to use that capital economically a la Socialism, makes him an intellectual to whom one subscribes only with a real caveat.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
& Jurisdictional law isn't required to induce people to act safely, as punishments or liability payments can be organised contractually. So Hayek is really wrong about the need to have there be some charge for neighbourhood effecs/cost punishment for environs-derived devaluation of one's property/charge for that which doesn't beget income to encourage it such as freely copyable authorial work or freely usable bins,
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
since property can exclude to make environs satisfy/charge users 4 included benefits, so that you can subscribe to property surrounded within properties rented and sold on the same covenant to provide like rules for uniformity in proximity to avoid social conflict e.g. to create quiet areas or student areas or family oriented areas or bucolic reserves free from being near industry for subscribers to within that land exclusionary of some other purpose to serve ITS purpose.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
For that is the moral of property rights, your rights and others' inalienable from yours, negative unimpingable rights. So the 'problem' of undesirable neighbourhood effects and incompatibility of certain ends such as rowdy and old-age-pensioner-life or power-plant and bucolic reserve life, can be solved by property rights which contractualism also allows fees for desirable externalities within private streets like bins,
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
or intellectual 'property' to be paid for by fee for original access to those making money on good diffusion of free to copy work since areas in which free copying would be disallowed would probably not be selected by the market.
Property rights would allow those who pay to exclude enjoyment of e.g. bins or local parks to members of the rentier or covenant-vendor established rule of paying for it or they could allow visitors, attracted by the facilities paid for by the residents.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
@cannotbebothered100
In other words we don't need extra-contractual i.e. jurisdictional i.e. State forced fees for those things that would be positive-externalities. Ordoliberalism IS GARBAGE, anarcho-capitalism refutes it all!
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
This would also solve the immigration 'problem' since one's 'nation' as they are presently geographically defined wouldn't have to all be under the same agreements and just as bucolic reserves could be put in environs contracted from some investor to be free of that which would reduce value for enjoyers of the bucolic reserve on the market, so too could cultural or even (though I wouldn't say this with gusto) racial groups so isolate themselves & that for which you pay by tenancy or purchase
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
by tenancy or purchase rules would not necessarily have as part of the rules of that area the allowance of entry to non residents so that residents could pay for local amenities to be free at the point of service for them and not leeched from by immigrants.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Non material i.e. intellectual works of course would not be excludable from non payers enjoying it hence the fees that distributors would pay to first get at that authorial production making writing a book a one off earner rather than always. AnCap removes the problem of persons enjoying what others have paid for that otherwise disables the price system's power to prevent overusage of those resources and need to produce by following desirable exchange in order 2 consume more
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
That is, without State funding of what is free at the point of service, all material amenities free at the point of service could be relegated to fee payers for them thereby bringing the PRICE SYSTEM into control of motivation of production of those desirable things and into prevention of overuse of those resources by their having their cost for enjoying them linked to their usage.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Intellectual works however can't be excluded from non payers so fees for initial access to then freely copyable works, would arise. Otherwise that would be the one chink in the armour of pure property-rights, the funding for things that are desirable but can't have their enjoyment limited to those who pay the fee for them. These things too can have the Price-System brought into motivating their production but consumption of them once paid 2 be revealed 2 people would be free
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
So the social rules of private property that the establish price system and suasion to act in certain ways if one is to consume wealth, increase wealth/allow everything but intellectual works to be limited in its enjoyment 2 those who pay for it so that cost signals prevent overusage and induce productivity in order to enjoy those effects (which price system is disabled if people can enjoy for free that for which others pay) and intellectual works can be paid for initial pub
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Hayek went wrong in ignoring the capacity of property rights 2 arrange this payment for positive externalities and to locate and segregate different human actors and human-caused phenomena so that negative externalities could be solved without need 2 place an arbitrary State jurisdictional i.e. extra-contractual obligatory fee. He also ignored how liability agreements can set rules for punishments for non deliberate harm caused/private insurance inducing less risky behaviour
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
So what was Hayek's contribution (outside of his important jurisprudential work) other than elaborating Mises's business cycle theory and theory of the need for economic calculation in money prices to roughly gauge for what ends what use of capital would be worth that expenditure-this is Mises's thought, not Hayek's, who just tilted at windmills in claiming that knowledge is dispersed so we need the price system to guide our use of scarce resources-EVERYONE ALREADY KNEW THAT
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Indeed Hayek gives not one reason in e.g. Individualism and Economic Order nor in the Road to Serfdom as to why institutions outside of the propriety of a certain supposed monopoly couldn't find leeway for investors to profit in raising the potential therein, for all the more profit if few investors have the foresight to realise that competitive potential. His monopoly theory is in a word, absent.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
And ordoliberalism is garbage too. Not State law but contractual liability agreements and insurance costs induce good behaviour for damages whose source isn't outright banned under the rules of contractualism i.e. for damages not resulting from directly punishable theft. Damages caused by actions with property can be separated by investors selling/renting on accordance to rules to homogenise action in such a way to make environs suitable for what customers wish to do/have.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
The price system needs no Ordoliberal State supplement to it to punish such actions that would cause social conflict and loss of utility to social fellows, the price system itself can separate and integrate mores in order to distance mutually incompatible undertakings and lifestyles e.g .bucolic reserves from power plants by customer selection of property within environs homogenously ruled thereby making value for the customer in their removal of what for him is negative
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
of what for him is negative in externality. As for what is positive, the same methods of customer selection of properties within environs that segregate from that locale the undesirable externality, can provide what externalities he finds positive to make profit for those who so provide customers with those rules which can also exclude non contractors, limiting enjoyment of x to payers for it. Where in this price-system solution for social order is State supplement needed?
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
What is desirable can be included and limited to payers in the rent or covenant-purchase established fee and what is undesirable can be excluded from those properties by the investor working out what to exclude as ingredient in environs for those who buy into his properties and his rules, making value for solving these social conflicts just as excluders of nuts from some chocolate bars make value for their clientele. And IP can beget a one-off fee for initial publication.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Th reason this would solve the immigration problem is that things which can be enjoyed for free after some party has underwritten their costs, could be excluded from non payers if they are material property. This would allow the price system in rental and purchase covenants to incentivise the provision of these things then free at the point of service and to limit their usage to payers so as to have prices direct how much they are consumed. If property is to encourage guests
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
then of course those guests having free access to what the tenants and purchasers in that commonly ruled area have paid for, will please those residents who wanted guests to come, and if they don't then they can limit guests according to buying where only residents are allowed, from enjoying what they have paid in their rental and covenant purchase agreements, to have provided that otherwise would have no encouragement to be provided. Private property anarchism would bring
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Private property anarchism would bring all material into this price system of payment for use and prices to discourage over use, because contracts for provision of things to be so privately underwritten could be selected that have the common tenants or purchasers of residence somewhere agree contractually to not allow 'immigration' of non residents so that the supposed problem of people enjoying outside of payment what must be paid for such as free to use bins
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
would be solved as a problem by the order of contracts with property rights, so Hayek was wrong to claim that the State needs to organise rules external to contracts with proprietors that order payment for usage of free at the point of service utilities and payment for costs caused to others, as such rules WITHIN CONTRACTS with proprietors can organise payment for these things, exclusion of non contractors i.e. non payers and homogenisation of commonly sourced property
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
, homogenisation, that is, for some end attained by e.g. disallowing from your property sold on condition of that disallowance, the existence of smoke emissions so that within those properties value 4 a bucolic reserve that must be segregated from smoke emissions, would increase and the investor would have the signal that his private rules have made utility for people in making profit. Only IP would be excluded from the non payers for that enjoyment and thus only IP would
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
and thus only IP would not fall under the organising remit of the price system BUT fees for initial publication could allow then free to copy intellectual works or 'IP,' to beget the income that would encourage the effort to make that utility first available.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
So Hayek's concessions to a soft form of ordoliberalism on the basis of putting things that would come outside of the scope of the price system, into the price system, in order to encourage positive and punish negative externalities, are concessions based on ignorance of
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
based on ignorance of: the ability for contracts 2 discourage and remove from near that which it harms, all actions emmitting bad neighbourhood effects and the ability to exclude non payers from enjoyment local good neighbourhood effects to put these discouragements/encouragements INTO the scope of the price system.
Sorry Hayek!
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
To reiterate, you can buy into rental or purchase agreements surrounded by property that is, from the same investor, ruled in such a like way that by your subscription to those rules you ensure others around you follow the same rules so that old age pensioner or loud music areas or factory areas or natural reserve areas, can be duly segregated,
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
,segregated as the market attempts 2 do anyway without the enforcement of this contractual order that is supposedly unable 2 segregate non payers from paid for good neighbourhood effects/unable to segregate bad neighbourhood effects from x human activity. The PURE contractual system and the price system derived from it therefore DO include, despite what Hayek ignorantly thought, the encouragements for positive externalities/discouragements of negative externalities in prices
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
Of course I say all this presuming that one reading it would have the basic economic knowledge to understand why inclusion of costs for usage of things and incomes for provision of usable useful things, are desirable, and thus why Hayek thought that the State should solve these problems of externality when in fact the market, property rights, can do so by including in contracts
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
including in contracts the payment for useful externalities and limitation of use to payers for them by the same exclusion powers that allow segregation of some people and actions via property rights away from each other so that within one's environs social externalities will not cause social conflict, so that in his Ordoliberal contentions of the price system not being able to in itself without the State solve these problems of social order, Hayek was dead wrong.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
If Hayek wasn't wrong, then be my guest and try to draw out how you would calculate State i.e. extra-contractual charges for free enjoyment of costly underwritten positive externalities and how you would calculate charges for impingement of others' enjoyment of their property, OR
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
OR you could heed me and realise that by the ability to subscribe to property within environs sold by the same investor on the same covenant, one can exclude non payers from enjoying resident-paid externalities and that these exclusions allow direct contracting for what will be around you so that things that in proximity would mutually aggravate each other like elderly areas vs family areas can be removed from proximity to avoid social conflict, all thanks to property rights
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
The final elaboration I will make of this point before I buzz off (hooray cheer the parties involved in my tedious but necessary baracking of fallacy with the truth) is that things which are supposed to be enjoyed without charge at the point of service and damages caused that don't bear costs like consumption of saleable resources bear as signal, ARE NOT EXTERNAL TO THE MARKET PRICE SYSTEM as non payers for some utility can be excluded from the streets of its covenant payers
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
by the same contract that excludes non payers into that contract (in the sense that your not paying for a chocolate bar excludes you from that contract) so that contract for fees for local things can include for the customers of those rules (get it now?) the exclusion of non members of this financial arrangement to bring into market exchange the use of resources that directly beget no fee for their usage so to access them, living there and thus paying according to the
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
by the same contract that excludes non payers into that contract (in the sense that your not paying for a chocolate bar excludes you from that contract) so that contract for fees for local things can include for the customers of those rules (get it now?) the exclusion of non members of this financial arrangement to bring into market exchange the use of resources that directly beget no fee for their usage so to access them, living there and thus paying according to the
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
according to the rules of the contract that the customers wish to include that for which they are paying such as local bins in the exclusive community they are buying into, becomes necessary to even go near those amenities so that only those who don’t contract for exclusivity of movement there would suffer guests or ‘immigrants’ to use the resources that the local covenant on which maintenance of ownership there is based, has caused to be locally underwritten in costs
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
so that prices would arise for those who would use them i.e. non payers of this price in the contract could be excluded from using these things! This same method of contractually selected rules, exclusions and inclusions allow one, an institution or an action or a group to nestle him/themselves/it/that process within property bought on the same rule so that the homogeneity of no power plants in that area would allow nestling of high value bucolic reserve land
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
thereby removing the need for the Hayekian Ordoliberal state to intervene and charge arbitrary cost prices for damage caused to mutually conflicting actions/actors in devaluationary proximity (just as this Ordoliberal State doesn’t need to bring positive externalities internal to the price system as exclusion of non covenant members can limit access of users of free to use utilities to those underwriting them as customers paying the provider so that the price system
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
is there brought into full effect as it is with normal property that is limitable to enjoyment to payers and has signals indicating how much it is being used as per the price system that can be extended by community charge by covenant-agreement dependant purchase also excluding non covenant members or ruling that guests must pay so that usage of informal free to use e.g. local rubbish bins would still beget cost for their usage bringing their usage within payment in order to
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
be near and to use them; thus imposing by that contractual order a price on those things supposedly external to the price system), although even without the nestling within such areas ruled for some exclusion the market will work to locate x and y where it is less devalued by environs, though this is helped out by customer ability to select
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
to select (via the integrity and enforcement of contracts) environs which are obliged to be free of a or b if one is to own that thing or land as per the original contract so that within those environs, x and y whose ends a or b would bring to utter ruin, can be free from proximity to a or b, with less discriminating customers able to enjoy lower costs
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
from not compelling exclusion of resources from a broader range of uses/broader range of willing paying customers which costs exclusivity therefore compels, thereby dissuading over-service of niche wants but nonetheless providing for them with other property of course used, sold, constructed, ruled by rent or covenant-sale in any other totally alternative way.
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
I said it best as follows:
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
'coercion' by negative property rights can include in the price system the incentives for production and discouragement for overuse of those positive externalities considered to require forced State funding, by exclusion from some property bought on covenant to pay the fee to provide that utility, of non payers of that fee in order to organise local positive externalities WITHIN the price system by the same contracts that can segregate incompatible acts from mutual proximity
cannotbebothered100 1 month ago
@cannotbebothered100 Dude too many comments and why are you responding to me? I'm a defender of Hayek and can't stand marx. and what you just responded and stated in 30 comments is what I stated as the theory of interest in the value of labor, that marx did not understand. Instead of typing all of that why don't you just forward a link of bahm-bowerk's critique. I've been to mises academy, you are explaining to the wrong person.
batman93oo 1 month ago
H-Town!
JessMenu 1 month ago
Totally wonderful! Awesome awesome awesome.
54fordgasser 1 month ago
Brains AND beauty!! My heart started racing at 2:03, you are gorgeous! Awesome video! Subscribed!
s13iLLuminati 2 months ago
Mises not Hayek.
dirtbagstatus 2 months ago
I just came in my pants watching this video.
stebecool 2 months ago
Was not she born creative
She who knows where beauty liveth?
Please tell her I love her
And we will talk tonight about Hayek
~~cc
carefulcarpenter 2 months ago
Great song, even better lyrics.
skaftih1 2 months ago
@All boys who fell in love with her: She doesnt date loosers.
2000deg 2 months ago
@2000deg damnit.
pintinify 2 months ago
i wanne marry u
Szarik1989 2 months ago
great song. i love it. i played it at least 100 times the last days. thanks!
mbrebstock 2 months ago
Hm. Still, who made this melody?
2000deg 2 months ago
Ok. I've read it :) "Original song by Dorian Electra."
2000deg 2 months ago
By whom is this melody?
2000deg 2 months ago
It's about time necrophilia cast off the shackles of ignorance and declared the love that dare not speak it's name. (You DID know Hayek's dead, right?) Thanks for posting, as well as singing and playing.
dantean 2 months ago
Oh dear.
dantean 2 months ago
Greta video! Ron Paul is the only polition these days that truly follows Austrian theory and Hayek's advice and he is running for President! Ron Paul 2012.
TheGreatTamara 2 months ago
I wish all the females on earth were like you, then we wouldn't be in the huge mess that we're all in.
SuperSpidey25 2 months ago
I think I'm enamored.
outkid 2 months ago
damm i love you
mainguysimon 2 months ago in playlist Autres vidéos de DORIANELECTRA
you are a beautiful girl and clearly one with a brain. /approve
TherticusPrime 2 months ago
hangin out on allen prkwy? i know where you live gurrl.
leakhead666 2 months ago
Do you want to share your love for liberty through video production? Apply for the spring Koch Internship Program to develop your talent! Google Koch Internship Program to learn about this and other great internship opportunities.
alissamt1 2 months ago
Comment removed
Andersll11 2 months ago
Wow, what does that mean
CaidansCross 3 months ago
waa wa wa waa wa wa waa
StupidJedi 3 months ago
how PhDs in wannabe_economics spend their time.mp3
distopiadnb 3 months ago
Good to delay rhyming Hayek with kayak until the two minute mark, keeps everyone waiting for it.
tcorourke2007 3 months ago 6
@tcorourke2007 lol
Trimbler00 3 months ago
Personally I prefer Rothbard.
Otzmatron 3 months ago
lady, Keynes has a bigger dick
TheMarksmenCat 3 months ago
@TheMarksmenCat But he also liked dick
oshory 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Check me out please, anyone <3
ftamfbrah 3 months ago
Thumbs up for saddle shoes!
0Enidan0 3 months ago
Hayek hat meinen tief empfunden Respekt.
Und ich bin, Ach, so verliebt in dich.
Wenn du mal nach Deutschland kommst, dann sei mein Gast.
Soma671 3 months ago
Hahah, love it! - Also, you rhymed Hayek with Kayak!
hahaha
AlecTaylor666 3 months ago
Good work, Miss.
garghamell 3 months ago
My name is Hayek. I like you. I Like Sex.
ThiagoDescortes 3 months ago
Aside from the splendidness of your music, you're really cute, too.
carlosandregoes 3 months ago in playlist carlosandregoes's favorites