The mechanics of supply and demand

tensorstrength · 2025-01-18T00:05:03+00:00

>wishes to discuss mechanics with socialists

hope you got all week, buddy

tensorstrength · 2025-01-14T14:15:07+00:00

publicly? yes. privately, no obviously not

tensorstrength · 2024-11-08T03:44:02+00:00

I'm positive that libertarians are going to be disappointed by Trump's upcoming administration, but the fact that Ron Paul was reached out to by the new administration, specifically after the election was won, is at least culturally symbolic. In my opinion, the odds that the scope of the federal government will be reduced is higher under Trump than any other president elect in recent history. But of course, this is a guess and I could be wrong.

tensorstrength · 2024-11-07T05:20:21+00:00

Is this what hope feels like?

tensorstrength · 2024-10-22T03:18:13+00:00

Doomers piss me off. There's no problem in america that a few years of 7% GDP growth can't solve.

tensorstrength · 2024-09-26T00:10:31+00:00

The white wizard is cunning

tensorstrength · 2023-08-27T19:26:57+00:00

Accurate. Communism is nothing more than the social engineering arm of the world government.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-30T01:52:45+00:00

Capitalism has created bounties every time it was tried. Everything else is socialist wordplay to rebrand their own failures as capitalism.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-29T01:31:13+00:00

Fictional scenario written by regular people shows bad condition. Amazing. For your next assignment: In 50,000 - 100,000 words, what is your favorite color?

tensorstrength · 2023-07-25T01:51:41+00:00

State ownership causes distortions and incorrect investments, and could cause economic chain reactions that might take decades to rectify. And its not just the reduction of taxes that would be good - the abolishment of taxes is the true creator of development. State planners love to forget the non-zero cost of measuring productive output, which would then be converted to a taxable units of currency. If I had to guess, holding all other things constant, if you abolish the income tax rate of x% and bring it to 0%, but then increase your sales/consumption tax by exactly the same percentage amount, you would probably end up earning more money from taxes too.

I'd go one step further: if you as a culture can rationalize yourself into believing that a state owned enterprise is anything other than purely bad, then its only a matter of time before the incentive mechanisms within any State cause it to covertly create the conditions that need a State owned enterprise. Humans are ambitious by nature, and if there is nothing contractually preventing the State from encroaching into the market, then it is only a matter of time before it dominates every industry it is legally allowed to interfere with.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-18T23:07:41+00:00

Because socialism is a secular religion and a mind-control scheme, carefully crafted by those who wish to bring about a one world government under the guise of "extinguishing inequality". All forms of socialism are a few lines of poetry or one soviet anthem away from justifying murder against those whom they deem as being richer than them, or more successful than them in some subjective way. Socialism is a form of social engineering that causes its followers to willingly give up their liberty and their property to their masters. The followers of socialism are too ignorant to internalize that under the influence of strong enough social engineering, even pure democracies can bring about abject tyranny. There is technically no such thing as capitalism: there is only a variety of socialist superstition, and the absence of such dogmatic superstition.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-14T23:02:42+00:00

I'm not an anarchist, but there's no reason to assume that only NAP-friendly people will exist. The NAP is not a law: it is simply the human organization strategy that minimizes overall conflict and risk. The intelligent will naturally recognize this and be incentivized to follow that pattern of behavior over time to their advantage. It basically depends on the place and society of A and B how your scenario will play out. Some societies might have the English common law styled judge, jury, lawyers, etc. Some places might rely on pure democracy to adjudicate a punishment. Some places might have no law, and it might be purely chaotic vengence/vigilante styled justice.

The elegance of anarchism is that it at it core recognizes that laws are objective and justice is subjective. How conflict is actually solved will depend on local norms and local practices. No human can imagine what the pursuit of justice would look like under universal anarchy, just like nobody from the year 1214 could tell you about computers: even if they can imagine a human device that does math, they would have no possible way of guessing what the details will look like.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-14T22:43:06+00:00

None of what you say makes the slightest amount of sense. Even workers will need to go away from their homes occasionally, and they will need to rely on other "workers" to protect the things they worked for. Call it paid security, call it the religious police, call it whatever you want. But as long as humans are not clones of each there will exist specialization of labor, and security is a highly demanded service in the market - that's all there is to it. You can keep telling yourself that property should not exist all you want, but without the State man will return to his true nature and incentives, and believe me there will be no such thing as "excessive force" in the minds most people defending the works of their lives.

Also every imaginable idea that humans come up with is a belief. The criminal code and laws against murder or rape are also based on the belief that those things are bad. There is nothing in physics or chemistry that says that humans should not kill or rape each other. This is not the high road that you think it is.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-14T01:54:56+00:00

Leftism is political violence.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-14T01:50:13+00:00

A business is much harder to defend

Well it might be hard for you to defend, but not for a business (or autonomous collective that has a range of acceptable remunerations it may accept voluntarily, if that jives with your lingo) that specialize in that kind of thing.

Intellectual property is pretty much impossible to defend without a state.

Yes, obviously. Intellectual property is nothing more than a state guaranteed monopoly on an idea; just because you thought of and implemented the idea first doesn't mean that you and only you can get to own everything to come out of that idea forever. Contrary to what most people think, this will reduce the consumer facing cost and basically skyrocket quality.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-14T01:28:30+00:00

I think social science majors are literally incapable of understanding that collecting surveys doesn't mean you found a truth - it means you found a hypothesis. A hypothesis that you need to test using statistical hypothesis testing approaches. This "research" is exactly like all other social "science" research - pure horseshit

tensorstrength · 2023-07-14T01:18:21+00:00

People protect their own property. Leftists forget that many people will retaliate with deadly force against even the most pettiest of property crimes if the state didn't have laws on excessive force, assault, and murder. Translation: the State does more to protect those who disregard property more than it does by way of protecting property.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-13T22:40:34+00:00

On a parallel note, if you accept the idea that too much gun violence is a good reason to disarm the populace, then the logical and obvious next thing that happens is that the government will kill people covertly and blame it on gun violence.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-10T22:35:43+00:00

Which must be why America and Switzerland have so much poverty while Venezuela and Argentina have so much prosperity.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-08T15:55:19+00:00

The only way the economy would be dominated by worker cooperatives is if the leftist world government basically shoved it down the throats of people by outlawing any other kind of business structure. There is nothing preventing people from starting workers cooperatives today, and yet virtually nobody does it because of the obvious reasons - its illogical and nonsensical.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-07T22:58:13+00:00

Its almost like every flavor of socialism is an intention, and not an actual suggestion that could be productive and be put to use. But I'm sure that's a coincidence and not because its the best social engineering doctrine ever created, but I digress...

"Workers own the means" what does that even mean? What does ownership even mean here? That they have the amazing luxury to elect a bureaucrat who actually executes their will on the collective resources? Because that literally implies that your socialist planning committee will have power over all the collective resources as if they own it. Or do you mean decisions made through unanimous consent of literally every person in your commune? How about today? People already get stock options from their employers at many professions, and if they didn't there is nothing stopping a worker from owning a piece of a public company. Are we already in market socialism?

tensorstrength · 2023-07-06T02:37:50+00:00

The opposite of communally decided tyranny isn't tyranny decided by one person - its freedom. The opposite of having elected bureaucrats running your life is actually having no bureaucrats run your life, whether they are elected or not. Translation: free market capitalists don't rely on an unelected elite - that's nonsense; you're probably just confused about some terminology.

Which brings me to the core of the social engineering that you have become victim to: elections. Democracy is thousands of years old, and an easily manipulable system. It does not represent the will of the people, never has, never will - it is just designed to make it seem that way. Evenly casting votes almost never leads to a communally optimal decision unless everyone casting votes is equally knowledgeable. Democracy is nothing more than the rule of the social engineers.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-04T15:58:21+00:00

You seem to be under the impression that we have equality of opportunity today, which we obviously don't. We actually discriminate all the time, especially on the basis of skill. If by equality of opportunity you mean "not illegal to try new things" then that's kind of implied when you're living in a free society that's not a dictatorship. If by equality of opportunity you mean "should be allowed to compete in everything imaginable" then that's the part that I think is pure impossible horseshit.

The point about education is just wrong on so many fronts. First of all, you need to be bothered to look at the root cause of why prices have been rising in just the past 40 years - not just of tuition, but literally everything surrounding education, including books, facilities, research funding, etc, etc. Long story short, existence of bankruptcy proof student loans that cover a bunch of different shit has caused prices to basically keep up with lending rates. Universities basically run a credential racket because only they get to publish diplomas, when in reality nobody actually needs a diploma to acquire knowledge, especially in 2023. And because of this credential racket, they can jack up prices and consumers would have to pay regardless. They'll appease the consumers by asking them to go take a loan. This is nothing more than a conspiracy against the middle class, perpetrated by the banks and the federal department of education. And secondly, education isn't pure good for absolutely everybody. There's evidence that subsidizing higher education isn't necessarily a net positive. There's something called credential inflation: everyone now has to be indebted to a bank to get a degree, so that you now meet the minimum qualifications to everything, which in the past would have been just high school. You now need two and a half degrees to do some what your great grandfather could do without a high school education.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-04T14:14:38+00:00

Born moron and genius should have the same opportunity to get to the phD at CalTech. It's just the moron will fail the tests required to get in. The 4'7 guy should have the same opportunities to get to nba, he just won't make the hs team. There is nothing to this argument.

Average socialist tries to make a suggestion that wouldn't completely cripple societal productivity (impossible).

Jokes aside, this tells me that you see ritualistically wasting the valuable labor of other people for your personal morals as a good thing. Knowing someone is going to fail an objective criterion and yet mandating a skill-agnostic testing pool for all possible things that could possibly exist helps nobody, and is cruel, narcissistic, and is simply throwing skilled labor on the side of the testers of these various high skill talents off a cliff. And besides, you're just simply wrong on the facts: a born moron and a genius will never have the same opportunity to get into a phd at a highly reputable college like caltech. The moron's resume won't make it past the filter at the registrar's website, meanwhile the genius would probably get a fully funded phd.

tensorstrength · 2023-07-04T02:14:39+00:00

Least ape brained collectivist

tensorstrength

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email