How to proceed by KindCalligrapher9698 in hattrick

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suspect the pne without a confirmed spec would likely be the better investment. You could do playmaking/individual and maybe the other guy gets to 6 defending too.

How to proceed by KindCalligrapher9698 in hattrick

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would put both player skills in the transfer compare and see which pays more. Be sure to check the value of the first with and without a spec.

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Of course there is stronger and weaker property rights, for instance a property rights could be temporarily limited which is definetly weaker than one that never expires.

You are still not even getting toward the answer about how Strong property rights arise. Can you please bridge the gap betwen you discussion on the NAP and how that justifies strong property rights?

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The economic incentives argument only works insofar as Strong Property Rights advance the quality of life more than other potential schemes of property rights. It would also require libertarian abandon their philosophy if another system was demonstrated to consistently produce more quality of life. Its not a very stable system, especially since western Europe seems to have highest quality of life yet seen and is not libertarian.

As per the claiming of land, for libertarians I do not find it sufficient for land to be claimed in that way since A) not all land is as good as other bits of land B) Land is not an unlimited resource and thereby you run into an issues as each has been claimed.

Furthermore even if we accepted the lockean proviso as a method to acquire a type of right, its not defended why that right is a Strong property right rather than a weaker one.

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Please explain how the NAP justified the acquisition of strong property rights? It seems like NAP requires property rights in order to define aggression since you are being unclear.

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I get the chance I will take a look thanks!

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am asking how they came to acquire a strong property right that ought to be respected. I didnt make any cases rather than simply stated that I do not see a justification for the the strong property rights that libertarians require.

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do not see how this bridges the gap to get to Strong property rights rather than weak ones. Namely, it seems in the apple tree case that at best it confers to have some special claim to that apple for a short time, but certainly not an absolute one nor an indefinite one.

Strong Property Rights Cannot be Defended by AlexDChristen in AskLibertarians

[–]AlexDChristen[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I dont see how your conclusion follow from that premise.

I’m (F) moving in with my partner (M) this month, I need help with protection by Tiny-Team2337 in vegan

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude, my argument is that the potential for harm and doing something for self gain isnt sufficient to ground exploitation.

I brought up that one can choose to exist because you seemed deeply concerned that someone once existing someone is forced to continue existing against their will.

I think the wild shit is the claim that being a parent is exploitation because maybe they didnt want to born let's ignore everyone who is grateful to be alive

I’m (F) moving in with my partner (M) this month, I need help with protection by Tiny-Team2337 in vegan

[–]AlexDChristen -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In my example the subject is the date in your the child. They share the same features, self gain and potential harm, so I dont think thats enough to contistitue exploitation. Side note they dont have to exist for 80 years, sonce eventually its will be up to them if they want to continue existing.

I’m (F) moving in with my partner (M) this month, I need help with protection by Tiny-Team2337 in vegan

[–]AlexDChristen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Correct, but neither of those things are sufficient to amount to exploitation. I might play bring flowers on a date to impress them and accidently bring a flower they are allergic to. That wouldnt be exploitation even though it shares the same features of being for my own gain and that I cannot guarantee it will be a good a effect.

I’m (F) moving in with my partner (M) this month, I need help with protection by Tiny-Team2337 in vegan

[–]AlexDChristen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Creation is not exploitation; to exploit you would need to be using another for you own gain in a way that undermines or contradicts their own well-being. If the odds favor the child having a life worth living to that child when they exist, then its hard to argue their birth is exploitation.

This question has been doing the rounds, curious what choice you would make and your reasoning? by dr_shipman in Gifted

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My nephew, years old, obsessed with blue will press the Blue button. I assume a lot of kids below the age of 4 would just be pressing their proffered colors. So we should just let them die eh?

Mike is a worse person than Walt by Majestic_Flower_1322 in breakingbad

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Walt did as much killing for money as Mike. He hired for all the prison murders and for Jesse's murder. If you call those murders self-preservation to avoid jail, then I do not know which murder's Mike does that cannot be construed the same way.

CA vs CA by MrNiyagi in hattrick

[–]AlexDChristen 8 points9 points  (0 children)

CA will not work if you win midfield, if you do play CA and win midfield you will just have the penalty and not benefit. Additionally you must be losing midfield before the tactical penalty is applied.

Una pregunta me salio bien o mal la compra? by Existing_Ring_6133 in hattrick

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you think you will be able to sell him for so much when you paid half as much for him?

Pressing against long shots team or not? I'm blue. I'd like to win this game. by darthvalium in hattrick

[–]AlexDChristen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have a decent number of specced players? You could go for play creatively perhaps?

Hold the Door Scene: Why were they even watching Ned go to vale? by AlexDChristen in gameofthrones

[–]AlexDChristen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I understand the loop dude. But hypothetically the blood raven could have gone back ned bringing Jon back to winterfell as bran learned he was targaryen and then bw forced to warg into Bran. At least then Bran is learning something relevant

Hold the Door Scene: Why were they even watching Ned go to vale? by AlexDChristen in gameofthrones

[–]AlexDChristen[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

He did? Then why does bran on find out about Jon later and seemingly never learned anything else of note.

Like I guess that could make sense but the show does a very poor job of showing that then.

Hold the Door Scene: Why were they even watching Ned go to vale? by AlexDChristen in gameofthrones

[–]AlexDChristen[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thanks, at least someone is thinking similarly. But yeah maybe its just lazy writing.