Message from @scaryred24
Discord ID: 465191390675075072
i think people get a bit to worried when its suggested that maybe there is a limit to how much a person can grow in an economy, to think that maybe there should be limitations to the heirarchy to prevent to much power going to one person even if its just money, because eventually money is power
i just dont wanna destroy it all together
yeah i just dont think it will be all snowballish effect in a true free market economy, bcus ultra rich ppl are human beings too and are irrational too, they will make dumb choices just like everyone else and squander their resources too, there will always be ebb and flow
there is a limit..... because you can only generate wealth from creating it in the first place
ppl get rich off a fraction of the wealth/value that they helped to produce
i dont think it will be a snowball effect either, because theres already glacers and icebergs in the marketplace to begin with. you wont see one take over all others, youll simply see them acrete as much as they possibly can as they always do
ya, but to get back to the whole globalism vs fascism thing... i think this technocracy ideology really encapsulates the agenda more accurately
sure, ill watch the videos later like a podcast when im doing something. right now i dont really have the time 😛
and the pentacles of power and wealth will also be much more numerous rather than concentrated in a more free market environment.. i think the real danger comes out of exploiting state power because it has the elephant in the room.... its has the gun, only the government can initiate use of force arbitrarily on people..... so when you have that plus excessive wealth... that is a recipe for dystopia
all good, yeah of course, its super long after all
i always find it ironic how for so long weve had these memes about how the world will be so bad if you had corporations take over governemnt. some of the most famous works of history are themed of that which are still mentioned today, yet when faced with the reality of it no one pays attention
ya ppl love their google, facebook, apple, samsung, etc
the whole water/USPS thing was in the <#463054787336732683> thread, btw lol
so... Fb, twitter and other soc media platforms are private companies. Do I owe my acc or twitter does? What about government accounts? I never went trough faq, gdpr etc... if someone knows the fast answer yes please
in technicality you dont own the rights to your account
it belongs to whatever service you made your account on
so... if you post a video there ... your own creation... is theirs not yours
?
typically in the terms you give them free copyright rights to the video to do as please but you still own the video
exactly
but you agreed to the tos that the company can use your content at any time without your consent
hm ok
it should be treated almost the same as bank acc in my opinion
preety much
but there is no garuntee if the company goes under
just watched @Timcast video on 2nd channel, Is "Healthcare is a Human Right?". Tim is right because you dont have a "right" *to somebody else's labor!*
human rights are best thought of as in the "negative" that is somebody else doesn't have the right to try and prohibit you from seeking healthcare (think "shall not be infringed"). on the other hand, "positive" rights are more coercive that require somebody else's labor to provide something to you and require the act of compelling by force of human action on some level or another
our entire US bill of rights are based on NEGATIVE rights ... that is the govt SHALL NOT do this and and that to you.... get it? they are meant to protect your natural rights from being infringed upon by others
/\
That video actually opened up my perspective on it
Hell, I think even Crowder could agree with that without changing any meaningful position.
To say something is a Human Right is to say that it is something the government cannot deny you.
In that regard, the implications of 'Healthcare' being a human right is right next to the right to self-defense in importance and truthfulness.
You have the right to seek the healthcare you need. The Government should not stop you from looking out for your own best interest in terms of health.
The real difference that needs to be emphasized in the debate is, 'Who is responsible for that right?'
Who is responsible for making good on rights?
Because if the Government has to supply someone healthcare, they should also supply them with means of self-defense.
Both exist for the preservation of one's self.
right, just like the right to self-defense can be considered a "human right" too .... ppl dont really tend to think of "the right to" healthcare, education, housing, etc that way though, as they think they are entitled to have those services provided to them, but just remember that bottom line... *nobody has an inherent right to somebody else's labor*
Mmhmm!