arg01

15 ms·

91.
by arg01 13y ago
Don't worry comcast will make you pay more after the merger, so you'll get your wish granted by an evil genie.
92.
by arg01 13y ago
I agree, I'd also add that when you let the juniors sit at the same pay for longer than a year and a half they'll start to build a bit of resentment (even if they don't change jobs as they probably should). Even a pay rise at
93.
by arg01 13y ago
I'm sorry I misread what you were saying as the thread came from one saying government control of force is not rquired as an open market on force is an alternative. I find a libertarian position much more defensible (at least as someth
94.
by arg01 13y ago
Sorry this got longer than I thought. Though I feel it isn't a main point (and giving this reasoning doesn't prove a monopoly will form) I will point out that on the ground sending a patrol to an area is inherently more efficient
95.
by arg01 13y ago
I think your question is overly broad, there were and are many types of government and they all had different effects. I don't think it's even simple to answer if one government is a positive or negative. Was the soviet union goo
96.
by arg01 13y ago
Yes that's great if everyone abides by your philosophy. But if we're doing that and expecting others to abide by it why is the statement not just "reject the use of force or fraud to compel others". The whole catch 22 is
97.
by arg01 13y ago
The problem is when it comes to force. I've read a couple of libertarian leaning books after having similar conversations on HN and they all seem to believe that a monopoly won't spring up on force due to market forces and people
98.
by arg01 13y ago
I'd have to say that the law looks like a monopoly to me. If the only way I can avoid being subject to the local law is to move a large distance and that's the only way to opt out how is this not a monopoly, or rather how is it an
99.
by arg01 13y ago
Firstly the entire point of my comment was that capitalism is not the best system in all cases and that there are situations especially those involving externalities where an approach involving regulation is the better solution. I repeat it
100.
by arg01 13y ago
Tragedy of the commons type problems. Concrete example: CFC Regulations. Prisoners Dilema type problems. Concrete example: Cigarette advertising bans. (I'll clarify that this is better for the companies involved on a competition betwee
101.
by arg01 13y ago
I struggle with picturing 4D rotating objects, I find it easier to deal with slicing the object up and picturing that. To clarify if you think of a single picture from an MRI it's a slice of a 3D object and you can move up and down the
102.
by arg01 13y ago
Cheers, I've enjoyed the discussion. I'll have a look at that book, though I will admit that I would be surprised if he can surmount the issue of abuse of force with out setting up an external construct that is some form of compul
103.
by arg01 13y ago
Yes my main problem is I don't see how a free market system on protection would not devolve into a mafia-esque extortion scheme. I cover a bit more what powers I'd assume they effectively have in the other thread. Please correct m
104.
by arg01 13y ago
Sorry this is quite long. I'll provisionally agree that enough people could buy into regulatory information assuming it's useful enough. I'll even allow that it's not corrupted (though I have written a paragraph below on
105.
by arg01 13y ago
Probably depends how frugal you are. I'd expect for a lot of people it would come to carelessly misplacing $10,000. Especially in the sense of being happy to change the money in to a frivolous good that you forget about or believing yo
106.
by arg01 13y ago
I didn't miss the point, I was being flippant in that they can call it what they like and there is little you can do about it, you can call it extortion among your friends but that doesn't change the outcome. I also think you&#x27
107.
by arg01 13y ago
Why in the world would I pay these regulators? It's an extra cost and their service is provided even if I don't pay because somebody else will pay for it. Why should these protection firms cooperate. How do we know the regulators
108.
by arg01 13y ago
While interesting philosophically what the AI would do without restrictions is a hard enough question that placing that restriction on it is just as impossible to answer. I'd put it in the same ball park as "what would that grurpl
109.
by arg01 13y ago
I understand that they cannot grow indefinitely but being the sole survivor in a city is not far fetched. Ofcourse the higher income with less service in that city gives them additional funds to operate in other cities. As to your second po
110.
by arg01 13y ago
But you seem to be unhappy with the current system of the hundred or more big firms and are advocating disbanding these current governments and switching from this to even smaller firms. I'm confused because I believe this will natural
111.
by arg01 13y ago
"and trust me, there will be plenty willing to have my money and do a better job" See this is the bit I don't understand, my understanding of market forces is that those that do the job better will grow if they are in anyway
112.
by arg01 13y ago
That's what India is doing it's allowing other businesses to step in and compete in production of the drug. If the original drug company can't compete then that's not the governments fault. Obviously that isn't what
113.
by arg01 13y ago
As a contrived example to my thinking: If it had taken us another 100 years to figure out combustion engines would we all be riding in steam cars? Would the industry focusing on building better and better steam cars have been a waste? Would
114.
by arg01 13y ago
I would just like to point out that it can also have a negative affect on job liquidity. For instance why would I move, at expense to myself, for a job if there is a reasonable chance of being fired for something unrelated to my work and wi
115.
by arg01 13y ago
They may not move their country forward, that doesn't mean they don't move the world forward. Say what you will about the French revolution's effect on France but it greatly influenced the spread of democracies and republics
116.
by arg01 13y ago
The point is they are not potential elite, they are already elite. The fact that they can get hold of the treatment when the majority can not shows they're already placed at the top of society. Personally I agree with the logic that if
117.
by arg01 13y ago
There have been several times in human history where the majority have decided it would be best if the 'elite' should have their lifespans shortened. Arguably with positive results.
118.
by arg01 13y ago
Yes but a far lower risk of casual use ending up with you charged with something. It would be hard to argue that people smoke marijuana because it is less likely to have a negative effect on their lives. This doesn't mean we disagree
119.
by arg01 13y ago
Which is why the founding fathers decided it was best to get arrested by the British.
120.
by arg01 13y ago
What's your alternative? Put them in prison and pay more than the basic income cost or leave them free with no support or way to earn a living except by being a menace to society? Something else entirely?

More ›