|
UrbicaMortis posted:He got booed for saying he supports the civil rights act, I think. Oops, you're right. I guess that makes him even more an outlier among his party set.
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:25 |
|
|
Came back to see if Triglav was posting in the Libertarian thread after his stirring defense of Free Market Capitalism and Market Demand as factors for solving Climate Change, while preaching the terrors of Socialism. Was not disappointed 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Came back to see if Triglav was posting in the Libertarian thread after his stirring defense of Free Market Capitalism and Market Demand as factors for solving Climate Change, while preaching the terrors of Socialism. Triglav? Edit: poo poo, that'll teach me to read usernames!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Came back to see if Triglav was posting in the Libertarian thread after his stirring defense of Free Market Capitalism and Market Demand as factors for solving Climate Change, while preaching the terrors of Socialism. And now he's fighting with our resident tankie, Horselord! Maybe there's hope for this thread yet, even with Jrod's final departure.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:And now he's fighting with our resident tankie, Horselord! Horselord vs. Jrod was my fantasy matchup, and I'm sad we'll never get it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Curvature of Earth posted:You didn't really address my point that halving someone's obscene wealth—heck, let's throw in stagflation eating into their wealth, too—doesn't bring rich people to ruin. They're still rich. Downturns actually hurt "normal" rich people (6-7 figure net worths) more than the global elite. At the lower levels, people are likely to have a large portion of their income tied up in a few assets (like US property, ETFs, or even employer stock match plans). At the higher levels, investors with massive wealth can pursue a bunch of different strategies to hedge against market risk without having a huge portion of their return go to management fees. That's what hedge funds were originally created for. US household wealth chart from the economist:  Wealth tanks during WWI and WII, and there's a notable blip during the energy crisis, but with modern financial management the S&L crisis, the dotcom bust, and the Great Recession barely made a dent.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Triglav, your point is very clear and obviously not a "all men are islands" point IMHO. Of course people are presented with opportunities that are out of their control. What you're saying, if I'm hearing you correctly, is that there are still strategies that are more effective than others in the realm of business/making fat stacks and it's possible for someone to independently squander their opportunities, whatever those openings may be. Arguing various definitions of "self-made" isn't remotely as pedantic as this thread gets. From reading this thread half the time you'd think all libertarians are ancaps. DeusExMachinima fucked around with this message at 18:44 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 18:39
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
We mainly talk about ancaps because they're the ones who show up and tell us what they believe. If you want us to argue with whatever brand of minarchism or somesuch that you believe in, state your dang thesis.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:We mainly talk about ancaps because they're the ones who show up and tell us what they believe. If you want us to argue with whatever brand of minarchism or somesuch that you believe in, state your dang thesis. Its gonna be good. He was basically littering the Climate Change thread with his thesis
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:We mainly talk about ancaps because they're the ones who show up and tell us what they believe. If you want us to argue with whatever brand of minarchism or somesuch that you believe in, state your dang thesis. Not sure he has a thesis beyond "the second amendment is the only valid part of the constitution"
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
If your entire worldview rests on the necessity of the Great Man theory perhaps it is time to reexamine your assumptions.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Triglav, your point is very clear and obviously not a "all men are islands" point IMHO. Of course people are presented with opportunities that are out of their control. What you're saying, if I'm hearing you correctly, is that there are still strategies that are more effective than others in the realm of business/making fat stacks and it's possible for someone to independently squander their opportunities, whatever those openings may be. make another thread to "discuss gun control" that's really just an excuse for you to post a polemic and tell everyone else they're wrong and not discuss anything and go the gently caress away Goon Danton posted:We mainly talk about ancaps because they're the ones who show up and tell us what they believe. If you want us to argue with whatever brand of minarchism or somesuch that you believe in, state your dang thesis. no don't just go away
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:If your entire worldview rests on the necessity of the Great Man theory perhaps it is time to reexamine your assumptions. Hey, I've won games purely by the use of Great People - both for the cultural AND the space conditions.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Triglav posted:Do you speak English as a second language, or are you autistic? "Self-made" is an idiom for "worked hard." No, it isn't "Self-made" is an idiom for "achieved great economic success without relying on others". In this country's history there has not been a single "self-made" person. Some idiot journalists have also used "self-made" as an idiom for "did not inherit their wealth", which is clearly a misnomer. Business Insider says that Steve Ballmer is a "self-made man", but he went to loving Harvard and became CEO of Microsoft because he was best friends with Bill Gates in school. There's nothing "self-made" about that kind of good fortune. e: "My plumber did a great job replacing my sewer line, he's a self-made man" is not something that you'd have ever said, so obviously it doesn't just mean "worked hard" QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 20:11 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:We mainly talk about ancaps because they're the ones who show up and tell us what they believe. If you want us to argue with whatever brand of minarchism or somesuch that you believe in, state your dang thesis.  I think that's the neatest packed description. Tesseraction posted:Not sure he has a thesis beyond "the second amendment is the only valid part of the constitution" Don't forget about my right to be free from DUI checkpoints!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:
I don't know where Serfdom is but you should go there and stay there and never post again
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
Self-made man has meant achieving success without major family money since the 1800s when the phrase was coined. See the Republican Star and General Advertiser, 10-07-1828, A Self Made Man. You're welcome to argue that the implications or framing are dumb or whatever, but arguing that the phrase by definition discounts every outside contribution to one's success is tilting at strawmen.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:
Are you trying to troll or do you really think that book makes sense?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Etalommi posted:Self-made man has meant achieving success without major family money since the 1800s when the phrase was coined. See the Republican Star and General Advertiser, 10-07-1828, A Self Made Man. You're welcome to argue that the implications or framing are dumb or whatever, but arguing that the phrase by definition discounts every outside contribution to one's success is tilting at strawmen. Right, certainly words and phrases don't change meaning over time, that would require that we invent an entire field in order to study that kind of thing, which would just be crazy
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:
It's nice that you're upfront about what your philosophy is all about for everybody who isn't upper class.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Right, certainly words and phrases don't change meaning over time, that would require that we invent an entire field in order to study that kind of thing, which would just be crazy Do you think that this isn't the common usage currently? Because I'm pretty sure "not starting with money" is what's been meant in 95%+ of the times I've encountered it, and was in the context of how it came up in this thread (inheritance). Edit: Again, there are framing and connotational issues, but treating it like the people using it intentionally mean "this person did everything 100% themselves" is dumb. Tom Clancy is Dead fucked around with this message at 20:58 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Etalommi posted:Do you think that this isn't the common usage currently? Because I'm pretty sure "not starting with money" is what's been meant in 95%+ of the times I've encountered it, and was in the context of how it came up in this thread (inheritance). Like I said, it was pretty obvious to me what he meant by it because it's what most people I've run into mean by it. Acknowledging that there's always some element of luck due to outside actors doesn't require expunging "self-made" e.g. someone who made good business calls when given the chance, from the dictionary. fishmech posted:Are you trying to troll or do you really think that book makes sense? I agree with Hayek that socialism and/or centralization lends itself to power abuse. I think basic income and environmental protections of the sort discussed in the book resolve a lion's share of the dangers presented by overcentralization and abusive billionaires.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:
The Road to Serfdom is about the problems with centralized planning. It's not a generalized argument against all forms and roles of government or intended to rebut all alternatives to capitalism. It's fully compatible with, say, market socialism, or social democracy, or libertarian socialism. Hell, Hans-Hermann Hoppe dismissed Hayek as a "moderate social democrat" because Hayek accepts the necessity of government regulation, provided it's applied equally to all actors in the market. This book is an argument against North Korea, not the Netherlands. I don't think this is the Ultimate Libertarian Handbook you seem to think it is. Curvature of Earth fucked around with this message at 21:05 on May 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Ok, you guys know that DeusExMachinima had never claimed to be a hardcore libertarian right? I mean he's annoying, but try and pay attention to who is speaking and why they are saying what they are saying.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Etalommi posted:Self-made man has meant achieving success without major family money since the 1800s Obviously not, nor do many other posters in the thread. Merriam-Webster agrees with me that this phrase is associated with more than just family money. quote:Because I'm pretty sure "not starting with money" is what's been meant in 95%+ of the times I've encountered it, and was in the context of how it came up in this thread (inheritance). In 95%+ of the times I've encountered it, it's been in the context of describing someone who hasn't benefited from inherited privilege, which is more than just money. It's most often used in this way by people who assume that "white" and "male" are not privileged classes of people
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:Ok, you guys know that DeusExMachinima had never claimed to be a hardcore libertarian right? I mean he's annoying, but try and pay attention to who is speaking and why they are saying what they are saying. The difference between a jrod and a DeusEx is one worships the NAP and one worships the right to Agress at the cost of human life via the second amendment. I can't say I really care enough to treat the latter as a reasonable position just because a larger proportion of the populace agrees with it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Curvature of Earth posted:It's fully compatible with, say, market socialism, or social democracy, or libertarian socialism. I can't see market socialism being compatible, assuming you mean state-owned monopolies. Libertarian socialism is fine by me too as long as everyone involved has agreed to live in the commune or what have you. I'd probably prefer that to some of the HOA's I've seen. Social democracy is more iffy depending on who you're talking to. Plenty of Trump supporters would probably call Milton Friedman's negative income tax the worst kind of socialism. Curvature of Earth posted:I don't think this is the Ultimate Libertarian Handbook you seem to think it is. For sure. I get that it's primarily about market economics. That just seemed to be the thing people are most interested in talking about in this thread.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:Ok, you guys know that DeusExMachinima had never claimed to be a hardcore libertarian right? I mean he's annoying, but try and pay attention to who is speaking and why they are saying what they are saying. I would rather not read his posts
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Isn't DeusExMachinima the one that always pops up in gun threads with witty conservative retorts?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Isn't DeusExMachinima the one that always pops up in gun threads with witty conservative retorts? He literally started a thread under the pretext of discussing gun control and then responded to everything tat wasn't "you can't have new gun control laws period they are all unacceptable" with that same quote
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:He literally started a thread under the pretext of discussing gun control and then responded to everything tat wasn't "you can't have new gun control laws period they are all unacceptable" with that same quote Yup. That's him.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Isn't DeusExMachinima the one that always pops up in gun threads with witty conservative retorts? When you post like a libertarian, that is to say, unconcernedly with the consequences of policy, you tend to be considered an advocate for praxeology and thus not visually distinct from them.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Isn't DeusExMachinima the one that always pops up in gun threads with witty conservative retorts? At last, I have usurped what's his name's throne. The gay gun owner guy, I can't remember his account name.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:At last, I have usurped what's his name's throne. The gay gun owner guy, I can't remember his account name. To speak it is to summon him. Even to whisper it during the dreaming hours is to invite his malevolent spirit.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:To speak it is to summon him. Even to whisper it during the dreaming hours is to invite his malevolent spirit. LeJackel LeJackel LeJackel It's showtime!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
This thread's closer is upon your hands, archangel!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:The difference between a jrod and a DeusEx is one worships the NAP and one worships the right to Agress at the cost of human life via the second amendment. While he's certainly more moderate than Jrod, he still thought "military invasion" and "doing nothing" were the only options for enforcing human rights internationally. So the silly libertarian totalitarianism/FREEEEDOOOMMM binary is definitely part of his thought process.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:This thread's closer is upon your hands, archangel! Some men just want to watch the world burn. Others of us grab the popcorn and watch the carnage.  Gonna roast a marshmallow on the smoldering wreckage of the thread.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:I can't see market socialism being compatible, assuming you mean state-owned monopolies. Libertarian socialism is fine by me too as long as everyone involved has agreed to live in the commune or what have you. I'd probably prefer that to some of the HOA's I've seen. Social democracy is more iffy depending on who you're talking to. Plenty of Trump supporters would probably call Milton Friedman's negative income tax the worst kind of socialism. Market socialism is actually an attempt to blend decentralized/competitive economics with worker ownership of the means of production. So, for example, a system where companies aren't owned by the state, but rather are owned by their employees (as if every employee owned one share). They all share equally in the profits, and there's probably some kind of Workplace Democracy in place, but these worker-owned firms are free to rise and fall in the market like a privately owned company in capitalism. And out of curiosity, what is your definition of social democracy that you think is iffy? I'm a social democrat myself, so I'm curious.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:25 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Isn't DeusExMachinima the one that always pops up in gun threads with witty conservative retorts? You make it sound as if there's only one.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 01:28
|
|
