andrenth

86 ms·

841.
by andrenth 9y ago
Has that been done? I think it would be quite hard to provide any meaningful comparison between countries, because the results would be clouded by many other factors that can influence them.
842.
by andrenth 9y ago
> Criminals can expect not to be shot when they try to pull something, thus they don't have to shoot first. This doesn't seem to match reality, at least in my country.
843.
by andrenth 9y ago
I don't think we're in complete disagreement. I'd just to comment on two points: > but on the other hand the chance that someone has a semi auto high velocity gun at a church service in the first place is almost zero Indee
844.
by andrenth 9y ago
The correct question following your line of reasoning is not the one about gun ownership, but "Laws against murders are only effective on people who care about laws about murder". However these cases are fundamentally different. O
845.
by andrenth 9y ago
Those are absolutely flawed comparisons, because a criminal, by definition, is someone who doesn't care about the law. You cannot make that assumption about smokers or drivers.
846.
by andrenth 9y ago
Australia also had reduced number of gun-unrelated deaths. In fact the percent reduction in those cases was larger than the reduction of gun deaths. So the stricter gun laws can't be considered the sole explanation for fewer deaths.
847.
by andrenth 9y ago
> You are picking the country that fits that narrative but forget about all of the rest A proof by contradiction only requires one single example. > Brazil compared to US is so poor and with shitty corrupted police That's true bu
848.
by andrenth 9y ago
A law to ban guns will lead to less guns... but only in the hands of people who care about laws.
849.
by andrenth 9y ago
> less handguns = less deaths. This does not follow. Take Brazil for example. 60k homicides per year, and guns are pretty much forbidden. Of course, criminals don’t seem to care.
850.
by andrenth 9y ago
People who oppose a free market economy are the ones who haven’t lived outside of one.
851.
Is Health Care a Human Right?(fee.org)
2 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
852.
by andrenth 9y ago
The way to fix this is by design: to have a government small enough that buying it wouldn’t bring you advantages comparable to succeeding in the free market. Most people disagree with that and seem to think it’s possible to have angels from
853.
Neoliberalism Was Never about Free Markets(fee.org)
2 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
854.
The Logic of Risk Taking(medium.com)
2 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
855.
How to be Rational about Rationality(medium.com)
3 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
856.
Why the “Paradox of Tolerance” Is No Excuse for Attacking Free Speech(fee.org)
3 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
857.
by andrenth 9y ago
I never mentioned Trump, so your little rant makes no sense. I'm talking about western values: private property, freedom of speech, the right to live. These are historically conservative causes. These are judeo-christian values. How ca
858.
by andrenth 9y ago
Not to mention being backed by Open Society. George Soros' hand is everywhere you look.
859.
by andrenth 9y ago
The association of Nazis with conservatives, who defend JUDEO-Christian values, is dishonest to say the least.
860.
A Mixed Hero: A Libertarian Reassessment of Elon Musk(mises.org)
1 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
861.
by andrenth 9y ago
Did you just equate "non-progressives" with "racists and sexists"?
862.
by andrenth 9y ago
Personally I'm waiting for Alpaca :) https://github.com/alpaca-lang/alpaca
863.
The EU Is Keeping Poor Countries Poor(fee.org)
2 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
864.
Why First World Countries Have Third World Cities(fee.org)
1 points by andrenth 9y ago|0 comments
865.
by andrenth 9y ago
You've been downvoted but your answer is spot-on.
866.
by andrenth 9y ago
This is an ok summary, although it gets some facts wrong (e.g. They mention the PPS party as a member of the ruling coalition and bribery recipient, but PPS was in fact an opposition party. They probably meant PP, which was a government all
867.
by andrenth 9y ago
Here's an article listing infrastructure projects abroad funded by (or partly by) Brazilian taxpayer money from BNDES. Note that they all involve companies who have been shown to be related to multiple corruption scandals, but even if
868.
by andrenth 9y ago
Thanks for labelling me on a subject you have no understanding. "Roussef and co worse than capitalist-style corruption"? They are not worse, they are the state of the art in that. Who do you think most of the corruption money went
869.
by andrenth 9y ago
Please see my reply to dmichulke for my opinion on that.
870.
by andrenth 9y ago
It is true that they are all corrupt. However the level of corruption introduced by the workers' party is unprecedented. It's not merely corruption for personal gain, as in most other cases, but to support a project that had the g

More ›