CapeXit 2

[vigras rojara]

You are the one implying special treatment before the law for aggressive acts, not me.

The burden of proof is on you, to show why you can't simultaneously have open competition AND have equality before the law.

Aaaaand....go!

You have missed the point completely. It's like debating philosophy with my cat.

 

[Cray]

vigras doesn't like to give real examples for some reason.

If you want to talk about barriers to entry, I'm down with that.

So, give me an example in which you think the factor of barriers to entry would sustain a cartel, in a free market.

Startup costs, technological barriers, scarce resources (raw materials), lack of economies of scale, lack of logistics for supply and distribution... Need I go on?

It's you who are saying the profit would be so obscenely high that we need to give a few fellow-citizens legal privilege, and a money printer, to protect us from them. Sacrificing property rights and freedom of association, in the process.

I don't recall saying anything of the sort. This is the second time you have misattributed things to me, I think your memory is failing you.

I think the burden of proof is on you to show there is genuinely a problem with markets that are completely open to competition.

Nope, you are arguing about something that doesn't exist anywhere in the world. If you want to convince people that we have all been doing it wrong for all this time, it's up to you to demonstrate why.

 

[Brian_G]

there may be some out there - at this point it would seem none are devoted to the cause.

perhaps there is a lack of confidence in the ability of phil muh cavity's leadership skills.
perhaps phyllis is not putting much effort into "jackpotting" those with deep pockets.
perhaps phallus this and perhaps phallus that - who knows

maybe, just maybe, phillistine should start courting the likes of hersov, in a language they enjoy and place offers on the table that may satisfy personalities & in doing so, mitigate any perceived risk they may feel exposed to.

The whole current issue is a typical public reaction one; "why isn't Phil & co. running fast enough?" (While some wish he'd leave well alone... stretched indeed.)

I did it as well, forgot to remember his recent performance. Sure, I could be wrong, as you too pointed out many things could be in play instead, but some of us still have some faith in his abilities. For a few months more anyway.

IMO his only real failure to date was misreading the political voting arena.
Though if I'm honest, personally can't see any more rabbits for "him" to pull out of the hat. It's certainly make or break time. That said, I'm an optimist

in my humble opinion, "fill" is not the right person for the task.
one needs people with a strong commanding presence to seize attention and maintain it

Methinks his partially gentler approach is a win-win, people are looking for representatives they can trust in massively potential-stress circumstances.

He's strong enough...

 

[vigras rojara]

The whole current issue is a typical public reaction one; "why isn't Phil & co. running fast enough?" (While some wish he'd leave well alone... stretched indeed.)

I did it as well, forgot to remember his recent performance. Sure, I could be wrong, as you too pointed out many things could be in play instead, but some of us still have some faith in his abilities. For a few months more anyway.

IMO his only real failure to date was misreading the political voting arena.
Though if I'm honest, personally can't see any more rabbits for "him" to pull out of the hat. It's certainly make or break time. That said, I'm an optimist



Methinks his partially gentler approach is a win-win, people are looking for representatives they can trust in massively potential-stress circumstances.

He's strong enough...

Very Phil o' Sophical of you, Brian.

 

[ToxicBunny]

The whole current issue is a typical public reaction one; "why isn't Phil & co. running fast enough?" (While some wish he'd leave well alone... stretched indeed.)

I did it as well, forgot to remember his recent performance. Sure, I could be wrong, as you too pointed out many things could be in play instead, but some of us still have some faith in his abilities. For a few months more anyway.

IMO his only real failure to date was misreading the political voting arena.
Though if I'm honest, personally can't see any more rabbits for "him" to pull out of the hat. It's certainly make or break time. That said, I'm an optimist



Methinks his partially gentler approach is a win-win, people are looking for representatives they can trust in massively potential-stress circumstances.

He's strong enough...

You are very forgiving of someone who has had 20 years (at least) to achieve fsck all of any real value.

And yeah it is a win-win... he gets to grift, and the rest of us get to ignore him.

 

[Brian_G]

This forum is not moderated and run by the state Lexie, dont be obtuse. However if you were to engage in threats or hate speech, the state might become involved.

It most certainly is.

How do you see that, Lex?

I could agree their influence is present, and their new overstretch with censorship may well be playing a bit of a part, but little more. This forum does allow a lot of leeway with our choice of topics and response, best I've seen.

 

[Brian_G]

You are very forgiving of someone who has had 20 years (at least) to achieve fsck all of any real value.

And yeah it is a win-win... he gets to grift, and the rest of us get to ignore him.

Phil's rise to power of note was only in the last few years, you know that.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Phil's rise to power of note was only in the last few years, you know that.

rise to power??!?!?!

Again, you say this with a straight face and not pee in your broekies?

He has been involved in this independence farce for 20+ years now Brian. I'd call a person with a 20 year "career" in a specific focus area achieving as little as Phil-muh-pockets as an abject failure.

 

[Cray]

How do you see that, Lex?

I could agree their influence is present, and their new overstretch with censorship may well be playing a bit of a part, but little more. This forum does allow a lot of leeway with our choice of topics and response, best I've seen.

100% agree, very little is off limits as long as it's in the right area.

 

[Brian_G]

Nope, you are arguing about something that doesn't exist anywhere in the world. If you want to convince people that we have all been doing it wrong for all this time, it's up to you to demonstrate why.

While I agree his philosophy is yet to be proven in reality, the problem itself is very real - some people are endlessly taking advantage of their politically based economic power, always have. Also doubt there's an exception to it being a set mechanism anywhere on the planet.

 

[vigras rojara]

With great power...

Comes

Great Invisibility

 

[Brian_G]

With great power...

Comes

Great Invisibility

View attachment 1893814

Nice try, Vigras, but the humour.... just isn't there. Better luck next time

 

[Cray]

While I agree his philosophy is yet to be proven in reality, the problem itself is very real - some people are endlessly taking advantage of their politically based economic power, always have. Also doubt there's an exception to it being a set mechanism anywhere on the planet.

Oh I agree, abuse by politicians is a huge problem (insider trading from US congressman being one major example). I just think that a free for all with not regulations on what businesses can do without consequence is a much worse system.

 

[vigras rojara]

Nice try, Vigras, but the humour.... just isn't there. Better luck next time

Ah, I'm sorry you didn't like it, Brian...

 

[Brian_G]

Oh I agree, abuse by politicians is a huge problem (insider trading from US congressman being one major example). I just think that a free for all with not regulations on what businesses can do without consequence is a much worse system.

Yep, that's the certain flaw. Why an overseeing, for-the-people type governance will always be needed, and why a tax base is essential, along with so many other parallel needs.

What's needed is definitive action in creating air tight checks and balances, or getting as close to that as possible. And yes, much watering down of the far too bloated existing political systems, so LIbertarianism has a part to play as well.


Maybe RoWC (Republic of Western Cape) will tackle that effectively enough over time, more chance there than most places IMO given the nature of the people who run CIM.

But this is also over-discussed IMO, we need to focus more on getting there first. When Phil is ready to continue ;- )

 

[Grant]

How do you see that, Lex?

I could agree their influence is present, and their new overstretch with censorship may well be playing a bit of a part, but little more. This forum does allow a lot of leeway with our choice of topics and response, best I've seen.

The "censorship" is related to commercial interests. The forum is free to use, and thus relies on advertising as the source of revenue.

The content hosted on media outlets dictates the type, or profile of advertiser.
The demographics of the users / members plays a big role in an advertiser reaching its target market.

So no, govt does not have batallions of staff monitoring media outlets day and night.
They may however intervene if complaints are made - complaints around issues that contravene prevailing legislation.

 

[lexity]

How do you see that, Lex?

I could agree their influence is present, and their new overstretch with censorship may well be playing a bit of a part, but little more. This forum does allow a lot of leeway with our choice of topics and response, best I've seen.

The question is one of: Is there any uninvited 3rd party interference, backed by the threat of violence, in standards setting?

It's not a question of: "Is the sector totalitarian, right now?"

Because if there is even a bit, then you cannot call it a 'private' business.

And it should be common knowledge, that the State has never been shrunk in scope. It only ever expands. The only time it shrinks is an optical illusion. This happens when it expands to a far greater extent in one large overreaching power grab e.g. Convid, and then retracts..... but never to its former scope.

If there is an example of a State who's scope of control/power, over individuals, has ever been shrunk, then it's news to me.

If there is just some of this involuntary interaction, backed by the threat of violence, in a sector, it taints the all confidence in who is the most competent. Because to know this, you need zero interference.

And if your sector is interfered with, in this way, and you prefer to celebrate the freedom it grants you out of mercy, or having pity on you, with only permission being required from a monopolized accreditation provider, well.... what can I say? You may just be about to be stared into by the abyss. if you haven't been already.

It is extremely costly and damaging to a society for the right to freedom of association to be denied.

We've been groomed not to question where we might be now, were it not for our capacity to spot the most competent, in markets, having been knee-capped by that monopoly accreditation provider's persistent existence.

 

[lexity]

Oh I agree, abuse by politicians is a huge problem (insider trading from US congressman being one major example). I just think that a free for all with not regulations on what businesses can do without consequence is a much worse system.

Here's the same old Strawman being put up again.

Just because there is no monopoly provider of accreditation does not mean there would be none(a 'free-for-all') in a free market.

The 'free' in free market, suggests free from coerced interaction in markets. It doesn't mean that individuals would suddenly be free to commit aggression.

Where tf do you get this crap from?

How many times, are you go to revert to this Commie slop? Have you no shame?



#learning-at-the-rate-of-evolutionary-biology
#self-immposed-limitations

 

[Brian_G]

The question is one of: Is there any uninvited 3rd party interference, backed by the threat of violence, in standards setting?

It's base human nature Lex, to take advantage of opportunistic circumstances, and too many are still at that base level. Learn to live with it, no society is or can be pure enough on this planet in this period of time to move entirely and permanently past that... in fact, I doubt even just 2 people living together (with that base nature) often can.

 

[lexity]

It's base human nature Lex, to take advantage of opportunistic circumstances, and too many are still at that base level. Learn to live with it, no society is or can be pure enough on this planet in this period of time to move entirely and permanently past that... in fact, I doubt even just 2 people living together (with that base nature) often can.

Is it 'base human nature' to commit aggressive acts? Or to allow them to go unchecked by withdrawing support from the perpetrator?

Isn't that just dodging personal responsibility?

You're sounding a lot like the hyper-materialist, now, Brian_G. Are you really at the mercy of your genes and of statistics? Have you no power of choice over the direction you take, in life?

Is your destiny other-determined, by nature? Or because you choose to relinquish responsibility for being self-determined?

Driver driving down the road suddenly has an epiphany that nothing is really within his control,and let's go of the steering wheel, puts the car in neutral, and lifts his feet off the pedals. Because the universe is in control, and there is nothing we can do that will really make much difference.