The Electric Lizard
Discord ID: 386231382717890562
15,041 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Prev |
Page 2/151
| Next
To be fair though it would work to an extent in Rapture because if your business started flooding or running out of oxygen for example it would be in your interest to use your money to fix it, I think it all comes down to your opinion on Human Nature
Again it would be the idea of self interest because it would effect Business workers and owners since it could make it harder to get to and from your business or home
The theory is that everyone would be rational enough to know what things they needed to collectively fund for the interest of everyone
Well funding it would be a collective good even Strong Individualists know that funding infrastructure would benefit the community as well as the individual but i presume the idea would be that everyone would be funding it out of their own interest instead of out of altruism towards the community
Theoretically people could be doing it out of either reason so it wouldn't completely clash with individualism
I don't think banning any exit from Rapture would actually be supported by Objectivists realistically. I think that is part of his 'Parasite' philosophy though because if you could come and go it could be abused by people taking from Rapture but not giving anything back.
I don't think Tim Pool is that bad
I prefer PSA Sitch
The youtuber PSA Sitch
Haven't you heard of him?
He is another commentator
I don't know his age, he is basically one of the only moderate and reasonable democrats that i have seen though
We are almost certainly leaving with a No Deal
I am 99% sure that we will leave with a No Deal
Purely because they will not be able to negotiate a deal with the EU which is acceptable to both parties within the timeframe and then any deal that was negotiated would likely be voted down by Parliament so No Deal is the only likely outcome because it does not need to be voted on by Parliament and it is unlikely that Boris will extend Article 50
Something else to note is that even if Boris had a change of heart on the extension which is unlikely Macron has hinted that he would Veto any extension attempt
So in short, Boris will not Revoke or Extent, The current deal is unacceptable and the EU will not renegotiate it so the only likely outcome is No Deal
They can't stop Brexit, Boris just needs to wait until October
MP's authorised No Deal Brexit when they invoked Article 50 so they can't stop it
They won't
Brexit is all they care about
They are obsessed with fighting Brexit despite it being completely useless
To be fair the Queen would probably have handled it better
We would have a unified goal then
Rather then a bunch of people who want to accomplish different things
It depends on the Royal, The current Queen is quite good
Prince Harry is probably the worst of the Royals
This is an Off Topic question but what do people here think about the philosophy of the Unabomber?
Ok
I don't know why they banned it in the UK though, Surely just studying the manifesto should be fine
To be fair in modern political debate there is a thin line between expressing your opinion and spreading propaganda since people care so much about tribal loyalty instead of looking at objective facts
Well not really, If you gain enough influence and support you could just rebuild the machine metaphorically
@Cowlitz Is that Nihilism that i am seeing
We should just get rid of all religion in general
It causes nothing but harm and supports outdated ideals
Every Religion considers itself to be the true faith
We should just try and get rid of all religion
I think Global Atheism would be much better
I want to get rid of all religion
Its all just awful
Here's a controversial idea, Why don't we just nationalise Google and Social Media?
Why not?
The Government is legislated to not damage freedoms whereas Google is not
Don't get me wrong, I would consider myself to be a strong supporter of Free Markets but this would be a time when i would approve of Nationalisation as a possible solution because companies like Google simply have too much power
I am a supporter of the Free Market but i also want to increase freedoms for Individuals which is what Google is restricting
I support Both Economic Freedom and Individual Freedom however if i had to choose one i would choose Individual Freedom over Economic Freedom
I don't think Google essentially having a monopoly on Social Media is a good thing
Monopiles only damage the free market
Its a problem of Free Markets of course, I don't support Laissez Faire Capitalism i do believe that there should be some restrictions on companies that have monopiles
I am not even close to being a Communist although i used to be
No
Just no
Even Adam Smith opposed Monopolies and he was a very important figure in the creation of Capitalism
Its just one example though, Monopolies are not a good thing they don't really provide any benefit to society
I would consider myself to be a right leaning minor libertarian, Not a Liberal
We shouldn't Abolish the State
They are, And the State can deal with it, However if the State did not interfere in the market at all it would be more difficult for Monopolies to develop
If we could reset the economy a Minarchist State would likely work best
However because the state has already interfered with the economy if this was done now it would only increase the power of monopiles
The State may have a monopoly on violence but that is necessary, I don't like it but i is necessary
For example what if someone steals something and refused to give it back, How does the owner of it get it back without calling on the state to inflict violence on the thief?
You would still end up with a central power albeit a smaller central power but a central power nonetheless with a monopoly on violence
In order to have any semblance of order the state needs to have the power to inflict violence
And those local lords had a monopoly on the use of violence in their county
The monopoly of violence is not removed it is just spread to local areas
You are just moving the monopoly around, You are not actually removing it
It is a monopoly in their local area, Its a different type sure, But the result is the same, The government body whether they be many or few having the right to inflict violence
So your plan is just to split up the monopoly into local areas?
Monopolies damage the economy, Just look at Fascist Italy for example which is a good example, Mussolini wanted one company to be responsible for one thing which led to their being no innovation since the companies had no competition
What is your main idea then?
I am to an extent, I would prefer for the economy to just run itself however there would be times when the government should intervene and the government is better suited to do that if it is not completely decentralised
I support some Decentralisation however the State should still have the power to stop monopolies
Because local areas don't have the power to prevent a National Monopoly like Google for example
Because they simply don't have the influence, A group of largely decentralised counties will not have the same influence as a largely centralised state
They can't influence the economy enough if they can just effect it in their local area
Your assuming that they would all agree to stop the monopoly
If 30% decided to ban it would have an effect sure, but the monopoly would still have substantial power
I guess
I think you've got me on the economic argument however i still maintain my belief that the state or local county should have a right to violence for the simple maintenance of order
Well that could just be stopped by elections and the second amendment
Police Chief Greg Allen mentioned the "manifesto" during a press conference, adding that the attack might have a โnexusโ to hate crime. He said, however, that the police are still looking into whether the document was indeed penned by the shooter.
This is definitive proof that Trump is literally Hitler
No, i think he should still have a fair trial
Even if someone commits a bad crime we shouldn't just consider their rights forfeit because of it
That's depending on politicians not him
Currently the Democrats going Far Left does not seem like it will help them gain electoral success so it will likely just give the Republicans more power
Well that is essentially your choice in the US, You have two bad options and have to choose the one you think is slightly less worse then the other
I think Huey Long was right when he said โThe only difference Iโve found in Congress between the Republican and Democratic leadership is that one of them is skinning us from the ankle up and the other from the ear down.โ
There seems to be very limited information on the shooting in Ohio
We don't have a name or any kind of motive so far, The only thing being reported by the police is the weapon used
Guns won't be banned
There is not enough support in Congress for it
If Trump banned guns he would lose any hope of winning the next election
His base supports the second amendment
I think the US would fall into Civil War before the Second Amendment is removed
We still don't know the motive
Has the manifesto from the El Paso Shooting been confirmed yet?
Ok
Well thats not surprising
Well they want to push the gun control agenda
15,041 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Prev |
Page 2/151
| Next