I wouldn't go so far as to say you eliminate the cycle completely, as the markets had issues prior to the Fed too, but the Fed certainly makes them much more frequent and much worse when they hit.
I mean really, is it any surprise that no more then 10 years after repealing the laws put in place as a result of the great depression that we had an economic meltdown so bad that many called it 'the great recession'?
Mere correlation, and not even a very consistent one. We've had plenty of economic meltdowns between the great depression and now. If you want to see the true cause, look less at the supposed "de-regulation" (Bush hired 90,000 net more regulators during his 8 years in office, and signed Sarbanes-Oxley in 2002), and more at our monetary policy.
The only way economic value (aka, making money) appears to occur isn't by recording great music that everyone wants, but rather in whoring out your time and your image.
In other words, "How can I still be a pretentious artist who pretends to not care about material things and still make shit-tons of cash?"
If you don't belief in selling yourself and your music for cash, then don't, but don't cry when you're broke. That's just obnoxious.
Speak for yourself. You don't have a property right to your reputation, so you don't have the right to use force to prevent someone from saying things about you that you don't like, true or not.
I would hope most libertarians would recognize that.
Copying is not stealing. The work and time I invest into my projects does not give me a property claim on your computer or your MP3 player. Just because I'd like people to pay me for my investment does not mean I'm entitled to it, nor does it mean that someone who chooses not to pay me is immoral.
If you're going to take the route of "copyright is valid because it was arrived at through the democratic (i.e. not unilateral) process", then you undercut your own argument, because we've decided as a culture that copyright infringement is not stealing. That's why there are separate laws for it.
You're attempting to justify your bad definition of "stealing" by substituting a bad definition of "taken".
Someone else in the world wants to tell me how I could reorganize the bits on my hard drive such that, when interpreted and played through my speakers, a certain sound is produced.
There might not be another route. And if not, that still doesn't justify using the court system for something that is not a violation of anyone's rights.
I'm willing to bet that if Romney's campaign had put out a hit piece, you wouldn't be here defending Romney with statement like "But it wasn't Romney, it was his campaign manager!"
We either assume that the man in charge is responsible for those under him, or we don't. We don't get to have it both ways depending on how it suits our narrative.
Pointing out that the Ron Paul campaign made a hypocritical mistake is not "slinging mud". People who make mistakes should be called out on them, regardless of whether or not you agree with everything else they do.
Why would he have to clear his name? The video creators pretended to be Ron Paul supporters. That's not defamation, that's not a trademark violation, and in the broader, libertarian sense, that's not a violation of anyone's rights.
What you do is tell the truth: you didn't create the video and all signs point towards the Huntsman campaign.
Seriously. I think Ron Paul is pretty much the last hope for this country, but apparently if you even hint that he might have a made a mistake a some point, the crazies will pour out of the wood work.
On the post: Wyden Tries To Get Anti-ACTA/TPP Amendments Included In JOBS Act Vote
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Wyden Tries To Get Anti-ACTA/TPP Amendments Included In JOBS Act Vote
Re:
On the post: DailyDirt: Grabbing A Burger
Re:
Refuted.
Refuted.
Refuted.
Refuted.
On the post: No, Saying Musicians Must 'Add Value' Does Not Mean Music Has No Value
Re:
If you don't belief in selling yourself and your music for cash, then don't, but don't cry when you're broke. That's just obnoxious.
On the post: Since The RIAA & MPAA Say That A Copy Is Just As Valuable As The Original, Send Them A Copy Of Money
Re:
I'm pretty sure that taking pictures of dollar bills is not illegal, unless you can prove otherwise. I won't hold my breath.
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re:
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: BS
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re:
I would hope most libertarians would recognize that.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: guess what mikey?
Copying is not stealing. The work and time I invest into my projects does not give me a property claim on your computer or your MP3 player. Just because I'd like people to pay me for my investment does not mean I'm entitled to it, nor does it mean that someone who chooses not to pay me is immoral.
Grow up.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: Re: It is still theft...
Not stealing. Good to see you've come around.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: Re: Re: It can be.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It can be.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: Re: It can be.
Someone else in the world wants to tell me how I could reorganize the bits on my hard drive such that, when interpreted and played through my speakers, a certain sound is produced.
What was "taken"?
On the post: Brazilian Performance Rights Group Claims Collecting From Bloggers Was Simply An 'Operational Error' After Google Pushes Back
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
OH! OH! NO TRUE SCOTSMAN! ;)
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: Re: Odd Ron Paul behavior
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: niiiice....
We either assume that the man in charge is responsible for those under him, or we don't. We don't get to have it both ways depending on how it suits our narrative.
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: What TD is missing
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: Paul is right
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: Re: Re:
What you do is tell the truth: you didn't create the video and all signs point towards the Huntsman campaign.
On the post: Sorry Ron Paul, You Don't Get To Abuse Trademark Law To Unveil Anonymous Internet Users
Re: Re: Irony
Very disappointing.
Next >>