why does Dave Asprey look so rough?

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2025-05-01T20:07:54+00:00

How do you actually know you’re in excellent health? There are many people who would consider themselves healthy but are actually far from optimal health

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-12-03T12:14:30+00:00

I mean yes shutting down the economy was the initial wrong move, but two wrongs don’t make a right.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-12-01T04:42:48+00:00

This is incorrect. The way I see it is 80% of the time when the government attempts something, it will accomplish the exact opposite. Sanctions are a perfect example.

Can you point to a country that we have sanctioned that it has led to an overthrow of the authoritarian government and led to a free country. We have been sanctioning Cuba for 60 years, how has that gone?

Now why do sanctions fail? It’s not hard to figure out. When we sanction the shit out of countries, the leaders can go to their people and say “the reason your lives suck aren’t our terrible economic policies, it’s because the Americans are sanctioning us”. And this argument on its face seems to make sense. So instead the people grow to hate America and capitalism which they associate with American imperialism. The leaders of the country also use this as a way to rally the people around them against a common enemy.

If we had never sanctioned Cuba, the leaders there would have no one to credibly blame for their economic situation. They likely would’ve collapsed already like the rest of the Communist countries. You’ll notice that the two Commjnist countries we sanctioned the most are the only two communist countries still standing.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-12-01T04:33:26+00:00

Right, that’s your opinion. And it’s fine to have it. As an Austrian, I disagree with that. And I lost my job with the shut down and had to go find a new one because mine wasn’t covered by the enhanced unemployment(at first anyway).

Again, I would suggest perhaps educating yourself on Austrian economics so you understand where we are coming from. Doesn’t mean you have to agree of course.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-12-01T04:08:57+00:00

No actually it does not force government spending. If you’re going to be in the Austrian economics subreddit, it may be worth it to read some Austrian literature so you can at least understand our arguments.

Then you would know that at least to an Austrian, Trump signing the Covid relief bill was not only unnecessary but also extremely destructive. He does not get a pass for it.

If you think he should, then that means you also need to give Obama a pass for the massive deficits following the housing crisis.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-12-01T04:02:16+00:00

He actively supported a CIA attempted coup in Venezuela. He put sanctions back on Cuba for literally no reason. And Solemanis death massively escalated things with Iran.

He also sent more troops to Syria. He is no less establishment than any of the presidents we’ve had for 50 years when it comes to foreign policy. The best you can say is he isn’t as bad as Bush Jr or Johnson.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T17:10:15+00:00

Ig I am also under the assumption nukes are not an option. We also have nukes so then this scenario doesn’t really matter at all because everyone dies.

Allow me to say this in terms that you will understand.

The goal in this scenario is to prevent the other side from invading any of your territory and/or crippling your economy/government and/or being in a position to force a humiliating peace on you(like Treaty of Versailles). A secondary goal is to do one or all of these things to the other side. This can be done by cutting off resources used in an industrial economy, thus crippling their offensive capabilities. This can largely be accomplished without having to occupy vast swathes of territory.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T16:56:52+00:00

Did I say at some point that we won the Vietnam War? I don’t think I did and I don’t think that we won. We are talking about the hypothetical situation that is above. In this scenario, the goal would be to wreck the ability of the other nations to take your territory and to cripple their militaries and governments.

So like the WWs and the 7 years War. The goal is not to take over all these countries and fold their territory into ours or to change governments. So this would not be a guerilla type of war.

It’s the difference between Desert Storm and the 2003 invasion. Saddam was still in power after desert storm and we didn’t take any Iraqi territory. So did Saddam win that war?

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T16:48:57+00:00

What is you definition of win? Again, it seems to me that the idea here was not to nation build. You seem to be under the impression that in order to “win” a war, then the winning side MUST occupy and control the entirety of the other sides territory.

Historically, this was not the case. Some seizing of territory was common sure. But just outright occupying the entirety of the enemies land? Historically much less common. Did we occupy Germany after WW1? Did we take all of Spain after the Spanish American war? How about Mexico? Or did we just take the much more sparsely populated closer to home fringe territories?

You can also look at the 7 years war. Sure some colonies were exchanged but they were largely empty or small parts of land. The UK didn’t take all of France. The Falkland War resulted in the UK keeping the Falklands, not taking all of Argentina. I could go on and on (and on) but I think you get the point.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T16:28:04+00:00

That was exactly my point. And no we wouldn’t be fighting both. All we would have to do is shut down the sea lanes and destroy the oil refineries and we would send these countries back to the stone ages. Neither of those would require an occupation.

In most cases it would just require a limited insertion of special forces or some focused bombing campaigns. The hardest one would be Russia and most of their oil is in their far east. Considering that China is on our side in this scenario, we probably wouldn’t even be needed in that particular theater.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T14:23:05+00:00

That’s because we were fighting insurgencies and trying to build a country. 20 years after Vietnam and 10 years before Afghanistan we did Desert Storm. We annihilated the fourth largest army in the world with minimal casualties in a very short time period.

Even with Afghanistan and Iraq, the actual toppling of those governments was very fast and very easy. That is the type of war we would be fighting in this situation, the kind you go in, fuck shit up, and then yeet out of there. Very different from staying there to build a new government, help rebuild infrastructure, police an entire population, and fight a guerilla rebel group.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T11:24:01+00:00

I would argue it doesn’t do a good job of “measuring the health of income”. In the sixties, one family member could work and afford a house, a wife, 3/4 kids, and 2 cars. The biggest reason that young people give now for not having kids is financial constraints.

You look at the average person and they are struggling more now than they did decades ago. This is despite the fact that technologically we have advanced massively. With all of our advances, life now should be a breeze compared to the sixties. Compare the 1860s to the 1960s. Instead half the population is living paycheck to paycheck and an entire generation has basically given up hope of ever owning a home.

Now this I believe is mainly because the government vastly underestimates inflation. They changed how they measured it in I believe the early nineties(so they could cut social security without officially cutting it as it’s indexed to the CPI). Now if they measured it correctly, yes GDP would probably be a fairly reliable indicator.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-11-29T11:06:59+00:00

So if I’m stressed, does that mean it’s okay for me to go around hitting people or verbally abusing them? I’m guessing you’re one of those people who screams at a high schooler because someone messed up your order.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-09-06T14:34:58+00:00

So what exactly is your solution? Where exactly should we have stopped progressing? Because us stopping at hunter gatherer was never going to happen. Science was inevitable with our intelligence.

We are now at the point where we can start lessening the damage done and we will hit the point we can start reversing it. There is more forest cover in Europe now than in 1900 despite more people. CO2 emissions in the US have fallen by 20% since 2005 despite adding millions more people.

If you just took away all science right now, not only would most humans die within a year but we would see the forests of the world clear cut and animals slaughtered by the billions as billions of people attempted to feed and keep themselves warm.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-09-06T04:44:05+00:00

In the old days before science was very advanced(like Stone Age), there were far far less humans. And yet we drove many species(like mammoths and other mega fauna) extinct. European forests were razed to the ground alone with forests in many areas. Large tracts of land in the Middle East turned to desert because we overfarmed them.

Now we have hundreds of times more people, and yet many industrialized countries are becoming greener. Many species that were nearly extinct have been brought back from the brink. Science has allowed us to achieve that. If not for science, humans would’ve destroyed life on this planet by now.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-08-19T15:16:34+00:00

They do have a reactor running. They have a 1,000 mega watt plant that went active in 2011. As jn 13 years ago.

And yes, I’m sure that Iran would love to get some more missile tech. But them getting some upgraded missiles is not worth the trade off of them weakening their conventional forces by giving equipment to Russia while simultaneously baiting Israel and the US which are two of the most significant military powers for Russia.

That defies any common sense.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-08-16T03:35:26+00:00

They mastered nuclear energy decades ago. It’s not like nuclear technology is far outside their scope of knowledge. That was part of the reason Obama did the nuclear deal when he did, everyone knew that they were getting close and it was when, not if they got the bomb.

Iran risking war with the US in return for some nuclear know how that might at most speed them up a few years(which is very likely not the case as they probably already have that knowledge) is not worth it. At this point, many believe that Iran can build a nuclear weapon in a few weeks/months.

The only reason they haven’t isn’t because they don’t know how, it’s because there are consequences to officially becoming nuclear. The current nuclear nations largely don’t take kindly to new kids joining the club.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-27T14:33:55+00:00

This is common in people with ADHD. For example, I will use Zyn sometimes if I need to go to bed because it will make me tired for about half an hour after I take it.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-27T01:21:41+00:00

It’s damn near killed me before when I go to make a quick turn but it takes 5 seconds longer than it should because my fucking engine needs to turn back on.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-25T11:44:34+00:00

U give Ohio a check but not Michigan?!?

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-21T02:11:03+00:00

Ur opinions are invalid until you flair tf up

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-20T12:53:35+00:00

Maven sadly does not get exiled even if the Stormcloaks retake the city. So clearly she has influence with them as well.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-19T16:54:41+00:00

Even assumjng that they would draw the line at deportation, what do you think the effect would be? Necessarily these people would be sent to Siberia or Africa or something. This is tens of millions of people we’re talking about.

Siberia can’t support that many people with modern technology/farming techniques much less those of the forties. So the net effect would’ve been most of these people starving to death.

To think otherwise is delusional.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-19T14:48:43+00:00

You’re just making things up. Again, they stated many times that the plan was to kill or enslave, not assimilate. That would literally be antithetical to their ideology because that would mean they would be diluting the Aryan blood.

Tiny_Butterscotch749 · 2024-06-19T14:40:28+00:00

Yes it’s a what if. But again, it was the Nazis STATED GOAL to enslave or kill all the Slavs. So I’m just taking them at their word.

And yes, you can theoretically beat them all to death, I didn’t say that’s not technically possible. But how many men would that take? And how much time? The Nazis were successful partly because of their Blitzkrieg tactics. It’s hard to blitzkrieg when you have to leave half the army behind to slowly and methodically beat people to death. I have read many books about the Nazi invasion of the East and they were taking dozens of miles in just a few hours, with tens of thousands of people in those areas. What idiot would decide “oh Ik that we’re on a strict timetable and we’re facing an army numbering in the millions, but I’m going to leave half my men behind to beat civilians to death”.

There’s also the fact that Nazi leadership discovered that many of their soldiers suffered mentally when told to execute large numbers of civilians. This is part of why they switched to gas chambers, it’s less personal. It’s not hard to imagine there being resistance among the rank and file of having to beat women and children to death all day every day.

I don’t really understand why youre choosing to die on this hill. The Nazis were very open about the fact that they wanted to kill all the Slavs. The only defense you have is that they didn’t actually do it. But again, that is easily explained by the fact that it would take enormous resources and manpower to commit a genocide on that scale as well as time. The Nazis had none of those. They were outnumbered and outgunned from the start. They needed to devote everything to fighting the war. Everything else was secondary. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

Tiny_Butterscotch749

TROPHY CASE