subverter
Joined 9 years ago
Karma
129
Submissions
83
Member since
Jan 13
https://www.subverter.co
View on Hacker NewsRecent submissions
Comment · 9 years ago
> 1. A cap at 21M. It made the currency deflationary by nature. Ask an economist, no one thinks it’s a good idea long term http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/030915...
Most economists, not all economists. And most of those economists are the ones destroying economies, in my opinion.
If you're interested in reading a counter-viewpoint on why deflation is actually good – it's the policies aimed at countering it that are really what's bad – here you go: https://mises.org/blog/deflation-always-good-economy
Comment · 9 years ago
Should not the individual be held responsible for making a poor decision? Taking the stance that we should be protected from every possible bad thing that can happen is a recipe for economic disaster. Especially when the one offering such protection is the one that manipulates us the most.
Comment · 9 years ago
"Crony" is so often followed by "capitalism", but it's really just cronyism that's the issue. You can find it in capitalism and you can find it in government. But they go best hand-in-hand. I'd argue that most crony capitalism is made possible only because they can leverage the monopolistic power of their crony allies in government for mutual gain.
Comment · 9 years ago
Woah, woah – you're telling me people voluntarily help each other pay their medical expenses without the government forcing them to?!
Comment · 9 years ago
Even if you consider death a state of health – which is odd, who says "yeah, they're really unhealthy: they're dead" – the path to that state differs. Some people get sick very quickly right before death, while others are sick their whole life before death. Their required medical care vastly differs.
Comment · 9 years ago
Nowhere. I haven't claimed that. We're having a (mostly) thoughtful discussion with different opinions, which is great.
If you read back through the hierarchy to my comment here[1], you'll see that I ask the hypothetical question, What if gay marriage were rolled back in the U.S.?, to make the point that currently you'd have to move out of the country to escape the law. I do not believe in rolling it back! I used it as an example of a law/idea where there's a difference of opinion among worldviews.
We're actually on the same page here, gnaritas. People should have equal rights, regardless of their race, gender, sexual identity, etc. Nobody should be forcing their worldview on others. But that's exactly what the federal government does by making decisions that affect everyone. Every decision they make is made from a specific worldview. It's impossible for them to make a decision that complies with every unique worldview out there.
Comment · 9 years ago
No, sorry, you're confused with our current system of centralized power in the hands of a few who doll out rewards to their crony friends.
Who gets the money printed by the Federal Reserve first? Banks, where wealthy bankers then loan the money to others who are wealthy enough to be accepted for the loans. By the time the money reaches the poor and needy, inflation has already taken hold.
Comment · 9 years ago
What? That's not what I said at all. In fact, as I initially said, "Please don't think I'm in any way arguing for child labor." How can I make it more clear?
My point is, in the hypothetical situation that a state did allow child labor – which I do not at all condone – people could choose not to buy products from that state, as people already do in not buying products from certain brands and countries that use child labor.
Comment · 9 years ago
If that's what you believe my utopia leads to, then you're completely misunderstanding my worldview. The principal of non-aggression means no one would be allowed to enslave or suppress anyone else. Period. Everyone has equal rights: black, female, gay, whatever.
Comment · 9 years ago
The point is it's completely voluntary for everyone involved. No one is being forced into anything.
Comment · 9 years ago
Absolutely.
Comment · 9 years ago
Not just theft, but aggression of any sort, including the most serious offenses such as rape and murder. Is there not a more fundamental moral value that we can all agree on?
Comment · 9 years ago
No, the myriad that say "we care deeply about diversity and inclusivity" in their job posts. The ones that come out against banning travelers from Muslim-majority countries. The ones that care about climate change and the effects it has on people of this planet.
Comment · 9 years ago
There's a good suggestion for dealing with this above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14556688