|
jrod posted:Even if we recognize the legal right of people to behave in ways that we might find morally objectionable, that hardly means we need to remain silent on the issue. Decent behavior is encouraged through ostracism, social pressure, persuasion and, for some people, religious, ethical and spiritual teachings.
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
Nolanar posted:Let's play the syllogism game! Okay this is good
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
How malnourished do the children of the thief have to be before he can steal the bread with no repercussions? Is there a BMI scale or an age/weight chart or something? Also if he has the energy for these bread stealing capers he's eating too much imo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
It probably mostly depends on how pale their skin is. From the hunger, you see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I'll give him this, Eripsa at least had the
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:
"Why wasn't there a drone nearby to help defend that poor property owner from the treacherous Negro?!" - Senator Rand Paul, mildly paraphrased.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:06
|
|
more like
|
Jrod, you have stated your support for police racially profiling Arabs, and despite our efforts to shame you, you still seem to support that position. In light of this, why should we believe that public shaming is such a powerful tool it will smooth over all the bumps in Libertopia, like poor folk starving in the streets? It clearly doesn't do anything to you, you still think racial profiling is awesome as long as cops are the ones doing it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Man if our high schools could somehow do a crash course in Bayesian statistics people would realize how ridiculous it is to racially profile. There are so many features that would have far greater specificity than racial profiling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:I can't stop responding to this dumb loving post help help This is the best self-own yet. Theft is permissible in the starving-man situation, which leads directly to taxation being permissible to feed starving people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
JVNO posted:Man if our high schools could somehow do a crash course in Bayesian statistics people would realize how ridiculous it is to racially profile. There are so many features that would have far greater specificity than racial profiling. "High schools?" I think you mean "statist indoctrination complexes." What we need is less government brainwashing and more free market programs to teach young people to think for themselves. Like ACE.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:This is the best self-own yet. Is this going to turn into that example where jrod is all "well it's immoral to accept a job working for the state, but if offered one I would definitely accept"
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
I can't believe that Jrod not only defended the right of the hungry to shoplift, but also said that it was fine to socially ostracize the shopkeeper for being mad about it, in order to socially pressure or shame them into not seeking restitution. Granted, I won't fault a hungry man for stealing to feed himself and his family, but either Jrod is really that inconsistent in his beliefs, or he scrambled for something to try and look like less of a monster. Like, from a time preference perspective (and I don't really care if I'm using that term inappropriately), it seems like a lot of stress and hassle to be a shopkeeper in Jrod's society. All these hungry people, stealing my bread, and I'm the rear end in a top hat if I protest being eaten out of house and home because these thieves are the precious lambs of society? If social disapproval is going to force me to give away loaves of bread anyway, then why is it not simpler and better to, I don't know, make everyone in society pay taxes to the government to fund a social safety net, that then allows the hungry to buy bread? If society cares so much, they can't grumble about it. And even if I, as an enterprising shopkeeper, am a grumbly grouch about it all, I still benefit by a reduction in shoplifters and a possible increase in sales, anyway! Win, win, win! Now I can ring up customers, sweep floors, and stock shelves, instead of wasting my goddamn time with thieving ruffians and listening to mewling bleeding heart types chastise me for watching out for my business. So, I call bullshit on Jrod for being disingenuous. He knows that social ostracism will not really apply (especially if hardly anyone knows of the crime to begin with), or it will be against the shoplifter anyway - "Good thing you got him before he went for my lawnmower!" and all that. Does Jrod really think his society will be like some Norman Rockwell/Thomas Kinkade/Hallmark TV movie small town writ large, where everyone can drop everything and seriously mull over the ramifications of Ol' Man Smith at the corner grocery making a todo over Patches the folksy hobo stealing some apples from him? Or does he know that his rhetoric is hollow, and the more likely penalty for seeking restitution from a shoplifter is none at all, if not outright applause? EDIT: Like, it's not as if we statists like social safety nets and taxes solely out of some bleeding heart, starry-eyed mentality! It's obvious that they're simpler and easier and better for all concerned than having to expend a lot of mental energy every day on dealing with a million little vexations from them not being there. Jrod seems to ignore that there is always a cost to dealing with shoplifters, be it letting them go, detaining them, or even blowing them away with a 12 gauge shotgun (cleaning up blood and guts in the bread aisle, yuck!). Hence, it is in the best interest of everyone to minimize shoplifters, and you do that by enabling them to, you know, actually shop. Kthulhu5000 fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:Let's play the syllogism game! loving savage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
I think I hear jrod's active social life calling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Jrod why do you keep implying that you're being kept in the US against your will? You can leave whenever you want. Your mom doesn't keep you chained in the basement... does she?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
I mean it kind of makes sense, he's just down there with a laptop, constantly mumbling about the Fed, surrounded by the discarded husks of various melons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:Jrod, you have stated your support for police racially profiling Arabs, and despite our efforts to shame you, you still seem to support that position. In light of this, why should we believe that public shaming is such a powerful tool it will smooth over all the bumps in Libertopia, like poor folk starving in the streets? It clearly doesn't do anything to you, you still think racial profiling is awesome as long as cops are the ones doing it. Perhaps shaming is an ineffective strategy, much like prohibition of drugs and alcohol. Edit: Did not read context, am dumb Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 00:40 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Jrod why do you keep implying that you're being kept in the US against your will? You can leave whenever you want. Your mom doesn't keep you chained in the basement... does she? The police told him not to skip town while the investigation is open.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Kthulhu5000 posted:I can't believe that Jrod not only defended the right of the hungry to shoplift, but also said that it was fine to socially ostracize the shopkeeper for being mad about it, in order to socially pressure or shame them into not seeking restitution. Granted, I won't fault a hungry man for stealing to feed himself and his family, but either Jrod is really that inconsistent in his beliefs, or he scrambled for something to try and look like less of a monster. It occurred to me that jrod also treated the theft as a fait accompli - the hungry man has already gotten away with the bread and eaten it, but then got caught after the fact. What if we have the same situation, but the baker sees the theft happening and can prevent it? The baker is justified in doing so, surely - we can't expect an entrepreneur to just sit back and knowingly let people waltz off with his product. So now we're in a situation where whoever ends up with the bread gets to keep it. The hungry man can't force the baker to hand over the bread, since it's not his; but the baker can't punish the hungry man for eating the bread, since (per jrod's argument) society would ostracize him for it. Possession is effectively 100% of the law. Furthermore, both participants have every incentive to make sure they end up with the bread - the hungry man because he is starving, and the baker because if it becomes known that he can't defend his goods, every hungry person in the city would flock to his bakery and pick him clean. It seems to me that the result would be a sort of bizarre arms race, where the hungry man does everything he can to get the bread away from the baker (short of using force and violating the NAP) and the baker does everything he can to prevent that. Since the baker will certainly have more money, and won't be as hampered by the NAP (since the hungry man is trying to steal from him, not vice versa), it seems like the baker is going to win that contest - it's just a question of how much it will cost him. And if the cost of defending a loaf of bread is greater than the value of the bread itself, the baker is just gonna flat-out go bankrupt, either because all his product has been stolen, or because he went bankrupt trying to stop it. An interesting demonstration of what happens when the solution to "people cannot legally get what they need to survive" is not "change the law," but instead "let people break the law if they really need to."
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
What if the criminal steals fancy expensive healthnut bread? Is he now more punishable because he should only steal the cheap stuff, or does the healthfulness of the more expensive bread justify him stealing beyond the minimal necessary for survival?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:If we had never abandoned the Gold Standard but instead Nixon vowed to cut government spending and resume the link between the dollar and gold, we would have seen far less income inequality, less corporate greed, fewer (or none at all) speculative bubbles and Wall Street gambling. Jrod, it would really benefit you to get information from sources beyond Mises.org. Simple research shows you to be completely out of your depth on basically every topic.  The chart above shows that prior to the Great Depression (which, really, was the ultimate climax of the old laissez faire order), American recessions were far more frequent and far more severe than recessions post-Great Depression. The major reasons for this increased level of stability were: 1. Tighter regulation of the financial sector, 2. Deposit insurance, 3. The creation of "automatic stabilizers" aka "welfare state" programs to put money into peoples' hands when they lost their jobs, 4. Creation of government "pump priming" policies and subsidies. In the 19th century, after the failure to recharter the Second Bank - which accounted for roughly 20% of all issued bank notes in 1836-, states were essentially free to issue more bank notes than they could support with specie payouts, which they proceeded to do. The obvious result was massive over-leveraging in state banks, large money supply disparities between states, and susceptibility to runs and panics. Central banking, lender-of-last resort, deposit insurance, some healthy degree of inflation, and the existence of state-backed safety nets would almost certainly have made for a more stable economy. Edit: fixed my own retarded inability to read charts. Grand Theft Autobot fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
You forgot the line that says "tyranny" and is just a diagonal line going from the lower left to upper right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Ah, but think of all the liberty that was lost. Would it not be better to be a liberty-infused corpse than a statist ... living person?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:Jrod, it would really benefit you to get information from sources beyond Mises.org. Simple research shows you to be completely out of your depth on basically every topic. poo poo, I misinterpreted this. The shaded vertical lines indicate recessions, the text highlights various historical events. So, there were in fact more recessions pre-Depression and they were far more severe. Get owned, jrod.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:poo poo, I misinterpreted this. The shaded vertical lines indicate recessions, the text highlights various historical events. So, there were in fact more recessions pre-Depression and they were far more severe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:poo poo, I misinterpreted this. The shaded vertical lines indicate recessions, the text highlights various historical events. So, there were in fact more recessions pre-Depression and they were far more severe. I love how this misinterpretation was in fact in favour of your position and just makes it stronger. drat these statistics!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:poo poo, I misinterpreted this. The shaded vertical lines indicate recessions, the text highlights various historical events. So, there were in fact more recessions pre-Depression and they were far more severe. Yes, in the 1800s it was commonplace to have boom and bust cycles as well as multiple runs on banks. Things were definitely less stable pre-Great Depression because modern economic science was not yet developed and financial policy was more or less winging it, similar to trying to figure out alchemy before chemistry was developed as a science.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:gently caress you and get the gently caress off of my thread. I don't have any goddamn patience for your loving poo poo anymore. hi jrode remember this post it's the only time that you've ever addressed me, because you're a basic fuckin bitch with balls so tiny that if you put them in a drinking straw it'd look like kernels of corn rolling into a storm drain. you don't have the fuckin nads to address me unless i scream at you about what a loving piece of poo poo you are, and then you have the chutzpah to play internet tough guy. so now that we've established what a pussy rear end babyman you are, let's talk about minimum wage jobs, and how they're useless for getting better ones. tell me what your actual personal experience with these jobs is, because i would like to hear how your anecdote trumps mine. tell me about how dishwashing alone got you a job doing literally anything that wasn't for minimum wage or barely above (call center work, for example, paid me 10/hr. it was still a poo poo rear end job and i didnt really make enough to get by easily) or are you too much of a chickenshit pansy to actually argue about things instead of just proclaiming them to be true, oval office BENGHAZI 2 fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Yes, in the 1800s it was commonplace to have boom and bust cycles as well as multiple runs on banks. Things were definitely less stable pre-Great Depression because modern economic science was not yet developed and financial policy was more or less winging it, similar to trying to figure out alchemy before chemistry was developed as a science. Ah, but what of Theoretical History??? Checkmate, liberals 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
ps jrode you're a loving coward
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
J I think you should kick this guy's rear end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:hi jrode remember this post Now Jrod should imagine, if he will, how it would be if we could all gang up on him in real life and exile him from our community. Or string him up as a warning / for fun, depending on the whims of Lowtax and the terms of our community covenant. Suddenly, being a lone member of a despised minority in a world that can be openly hostile and violent to you isn't so peachy to envision now, is it, Jrodefeld?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Hey I'd love to find a libertarian who learned good hand-to-hand skills but they end up learning mall ninjutsu due to the same lack of critical thinking that made them libertarians
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Fake edit: And it's legal to demand your subordinates sleep with you to keep their job anc health insurance and DRO coverage during a recession but this isn't coercive because People don't coerce people, Maslow's hierarchy coerces people! If your stomach commits violence against you, you should retaliate against your stomach by shooting it with a liberty cannon. The only true freedom is freedom from our mortal coil. JVNO posted:Man if our high schools could somehow do a crash course in Bayesian statistics people would realize how ridiculous it is to racially profile. There are so many features that would have far greater specificity than racial profiling. The trouble is getting them to recognize situations where they can and should apply it. Stinky_Pete fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Feb 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:hi jrode remember this post This guy is violating the non-aggression principle! Somebody please help! *gets a swirly, then shoved bodily into a locker*
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
I mean, speaking of the NAP, there's an interesting implication behind jrod saying that Literally The Worst would not dare to call him a racist irl. Like, why not? What is there to be afraid of, if jrod is being consistent in his principles? Or are we to believe that he would initiate force against someone just for speaking his mind?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:hi jrode remember this post I have a feeling that jrod's work history is nothing but a long list of positions gained through nepotism and/or failed get-rich-quick and Ponzi schemes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Jrod why do you keep implying that you're being kept in the US against your will? You can leave whenever you want. Your mom doesn't keep you chained in the basement... does she? Jrod, is there a reason leaving the United States is not an option for you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I have a feeling that jrod's work history is nothing but a long list of positions gained through nepotism and/or failed get-rich-quick and Ponzi schemes. The latter I can understand but it's depressing to think he got the former job position of pirate blu-ray burner via nepotism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
Obviously in the mind of jrodefeld (or any covert white supremacist), getting called a racist is the ultimate aggression.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:24
|
|