Throughout history "democracy" has always been viewed as one of the worst forms of government. It is the tyranny of the majority. If 51% vote to have you killed, that's "freedom" because "it's the will of the people".
I prefer consensual relationships based on individual self-ownership derived property rights.
The so called "solutions" provided in the article are all based on State force/coercion.
You want prosperity? Allow individuals to voluntarily exchange without intervening with aggression (i.e. "taxation" [theft], "regulation",...etc).
Many of the comments in this thread are quite disturbing. Questioning property rights? All rights are property rights. Property rights are an extension of self-ownership. Hence why "taxation" is theft (as through "taxation" the people calling themselves "government" stake a claim of the fruits of your labor and your labor is an extension of your time and your actions).
Complex social issues cannot be solved through violence/coercion. In the long run it only makes it worse.
Two core principles to bring prosperity:
1. Respect for property rights as a logical extension of self-ownership.
2. Adherence to the non-aggression principle (the initiation of force is immoral, self defense is valid)
That's it. 1. Don't steal. 2. Don't hit.
You learned it as a child.
Please stop advocating the use of force against me.
"Until men learn that of all human symbols, Robin Hood is the most immoral and the most contemptible, there will be no justice on earth and no way for mankind to survive."
~ Ragnar Danneskjold - Atlas Shrugged ~
It is only a "Zero Sum" game when force/coercion is employed (i.e. the State granting temporary monopolies called "patents" backed by force/coercion).
However, if individuals engage in voluntary exchange then said individuals are able to produce more than if they worked alone. In economics this is called "comparitive advantage" and it is how wealth (and more jobs) are created.
For further explanation of this, I highly recommend reading the short book "Not a Zero-Sum Game: The Paradox of Exchange" by Manuel F. Ayau which can be downloaded and read for free [HERE].
Re: "Regulating the internet" is not what they are trying to do.
...and "free speech" is just an logical extension of "property rights" (which are a logical extension of self-ownership).
All "rights" are property rights.
The core solution: Respect for property rights as an extension of self-ownership, and the "non-aggression principle" (the initation of force is immoral while self-defense is valid).
For more on these ideas I highly recommend two works by Murray N. Rothbard - "For A New Liberty" and "The Ethics of Liberty" [both of which can be downloaded for free over at mises.org]
The power to regulate is the power to grant favors.
"Regulation" is just a euphemism for individuals calling themselves "government" using force/coercion to keep individuas from voluntarily interacting & exchanging with other individuals.
The more freedom and voluntary exchange that occurs, the more prosperous a society becomes.
The "solution" that the ITU boss is proposing would result in the exact opposite of his claims.
It is tantamount to a gangster coming to your place of business and claiming that you need his "help" to keep your business "safe" & accessible to all, all for a fee of say, $5,000 a month. If you choose not to pay for the gangster's "help", the gangers will destroy your business and beat you to a pulp.
The true answer is consensual relationships and voluntary exchange, with respect for property rights as a logical extension of self-ownership.
The idea that a precise mathematical model can predict human action is an illusion.
This is because there are no constants in human action other than the fact that, as Ludwig von Mises stated in his human action axiom:
Human action is the purposeful employment of means to achieve ends in accord with the actor's values. The existence of action is axiomatic; the very attempt to deny it will result in its affirmation.
No individual can know everything every person on earth is thinking and what they value at any time; nor can one predict what an individual's future knowledge and how said knowledge will effect what they value at such point in time.
For more on sound economic theory, I highly recommend "Economic Science and the Austrian Method" by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (available for free over at mises.org).
This is a beautiful example of the voluntary market finding solutions to the coercion/force of the State.
As for people claiming "there are studies that show red light cameras reduce people running red lights", there are also studies that show they increase car accidents.
There has also been a creeping trend of governments reducing the length of time the light is yellow in order to boost revenue from the red light camera tickets.
The red light camera's set up horrible incentives that just build upon more State force/coercion.
I say bravo to the individual that created another fantastic way to "break bad".
The issue is government intervention (i.e. force/coercion). All so called "regulations" disrupt the market/destroy incetives/pervert pricing/benefit the few that employ said force/coercion. The power to regulate is the power to grant favors.
All socializing healthcare via government regulation/force to provide so called "free" healthcare does (such as in Canada & the UK) is transfer the higher costs to extremely long wait times and forces even less personal choice in who you can do business with (in Canada it is illegal to see a doctor that is not your assigned Primary Care Provider).
If one wants a real solution, I highly recommend the four following steps advocated by economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe in his article "A Four-Step Healthcare Solution":
1. Eliminate all licensing requirements for medical schools, hospitals, pharmacies, and medical doctors and other health-care personnel. Their supply would almost instantly increase, prices would fall, and a greater variety of health-care services would appear on the market...
2. Eliminate all government restrictions on the production and sale of pharmaceutical products and medical devices. This means no more Food and Drug Administration, which presently hinders innovation and increases costs...
3. Deregulate the health-insurance industry. Private enterprise can offer insurance against events over whose outcome the insured possesses no control...
4. Eliminate all subsidies to the sick or unhealthy. Subsidies create more of whatever is being subsidized...
The problem is companies competing rather that using State force to get their way is something called "freedom" and unfortunately in today's Amerika, "freedom" is tantamount to "terrorism".
While Microsoft Windows 8 may have the ability to run various software packages (i.e. Word, Steam, Internet Explorer), the truth is it will not create a hot dog that I can then consume for dinner.
PC software is great and all, but just think about the various up and comers in the sausage industry.
Does anyone else not see the utter insanity of attempting to sue to government by way of the government monopoly known as the "Justice System"?
Until the use of State force/coercion is removed (i.e. "taxation"/theft) to allow a voluntary market of competing arbitration systems to thrive, the people calling themselves "government" that claim the "legal" use of force/coercion will continue to expand their power and destroy individual freedoms.
It's time to wake up. Show the world that you own your self. Do not associate with individuals that advocate the use of force against you.
This has occured due to another example of State regulation/force, this time against the mortgage industry. If an employee is found to have any past "crimes" of theft or deceit, the company can be fined up to hundreds of thousdands of dollars a day for each instance.
As usual, the use of force/coercion in an apparant attempt to solve a complex social issue results in much more harm than good.
The initiation of force is immoral, in all forms (force/coercion/theft/fraud) no matter what label is placed on the individual(s).
If one truly wants innovation in the economy, then advocate the removal of State intervention/force/coercion from the equation.
Want to help education? Abolish compulsory schooling and allow a voluntary market where individuals can choose without being forced to pay via property taxes (theft).
Want better healthcare? Abolish all State regulations in healthcare which pervert incentives and hurt the individual.
State intervention/force only makes matters worse in the long run. Just as if one has a toothache, heroin may work initially...but in the long run one becomes a junky & enters a downward spiral of destruction.
The power to regulate is the power to grant favors.
I'm not saying that a market free of State intervention/force/coercion is perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than the fascism we have today.
Consensual relationships...it's really that simple.
On the post: Democrats & Republicans Should Come Together To Support A Future Of Abundance
Re: Re: Re: Your aim is off.
Especially democracy.
Throughout history "democracy" has always been viewed as one of the worst forms of government. It is the tyranny of the majority. If 51% vote to have you killed, that's "freedom" because "it's the will of the people".
I prefer consensual relationships based on individual self-ownership derived property rights.
On the post: Democrats & Republicans Should Come Together To Support A Future Of Abundance
You want prosperity? Allow individuals to voluntarily exchange without intervening with aggression (i.e. "taxation" [theft], "regulation",...etc).
Many of the comments in this thread are quite disturbing. Questioning property rights? All rights are property rights. Property rights are an extension of self-ownership. Hence why "taxation" is theft (as through "taxation" the people calling themselves "government" stake a claim of the fruits of your labor and your labor is an extension of your time and your actions).
Complex social issues cannot be solved through violence/coercion. In the long run it only makes it worse.
Two core principles to bring prosperity:
1. Respect for property rights as a logical extension of self-ownership.
2. Adherence to the non-aggression principle (the initiation of force is immoral, self defense is valid)
That's it. 1. Don't steal. 2. Don't hit.
You learned it as a child.
Please stop advocating the use of force against me.
On the post: If You Read Just One Article About The Patent Mess, Make It This One
Re: Re:
~ Ragnar Danneskjold - Atlas Shrugged ~
On the post: If You Read Just One Article About The Patent Mess, Make It This One
Re: Zero Sum
However, if individuals engage in voluntary exchange then said individuals are able to produce more than if they worked alone. In economics this is called "comparitive advantage" and it is how wealth (and more jobs) are created.
For further explanation of this, I highly recommend reading the short book "Not a Zero-Sum Game: The Paradox of Exchange" by Manuel F. Ayau which can be downloaded and read for free [HERE].
On the post: ITU Boss Explains Why He Wants The UN To Start Regulating The Internet
Re: "Regulating the internet" is not what they are trying to do.
All "rights" are property rights.
The core solution: Respect for property rights as an extension of self-ownership, and the "non-aggression principle" (the initation of force is immoral while self-defense is valid).
For more on these ideas I highly recommend two works by Murray N. Rothbard - "For A New Liberty" and "The Ethics of Liberty" [both of which can be downloaded for free over at mises.org]
On the post: ITU Boss Explains Why He Wants The UN To Start Regulating The Internet
Leave the Internet Alone...
"Regulation" is just a euphemism for individuals calling themselves "government" using force/coercion to keep individuas from voluntarily interacting & exchanging with other individuals.
The more freedom and voluntary exchange that occurs, the more prosperous a society becomes.
The "solution" that the ITU boss is proposing would result in the exact opposite of his claims.
It is tantamount to a gangster coming to your place of business and claiming that you need his "help" to keep your business "safe" & accessible to all, all for a fee of say, $5,000 a month. If you choose not to pay for the gangster's "help", the gangers will destroy your business and beat you to a pulp.
The true answer is consensual relationships and voluntary exchange, with respect for property rights as a logical extension of self-ownership.
On the post: A Reminder: Lower Prices Can Make You More Money
Economic "Mathematical Models" Can't Work....
This is because there are no constants in human action other than the fact that, as Ludwig von Mises stated in his human action axiom:
Human action is the purposeful employment of means to achieve ends in accord with the actor's values. The existence of action is axiomatic; the very attempt to deny it will result in its affirmation.
No individual can know everything every person on earth is thinking and what they value at any time; nor can one predict what an individual's future knowledge and how said knowledge will effect what they value at such point in time.
For more on sound economic theory, I highly recommend "Economic Science and the Austrian Method" by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (available for free over at mises.org).
On the post: Sticking It To The (Camera) Man: Inventor Develops License Plate Frame That Defeats Red Light Cameras
Beautiful Example...
As for people claiming "there are studies that show red light cameras reduce people running red lights", there are also studies that show they increase car accidents.
There has also been a creeping trend of governments reducing the length of time the light is yellow in order to boost revenue from the red light camera tickets.
The red light camera's set up horrible incentives that just build upon more State force/coercion.
I say bravo to the individual that created another fantastic way to "break bad".
On the post: Italian Scientists Convicted Of Manslaughter, Sentenced To 6 Years In Jail, Over Earthquake They Failed To Predict Properly
Causality Be Damned!
On the post: Amazon Wipes Customer's Account, Locks All Ebooks, Says 'Find A New Retailer' When She Asks Why
Re: Re: "If you didn't take the hint [fill in latest corporate policy]"
The power to regulate is the power to grant favors.
On the post: Amanda Palmer Unleashes The Voice Of The People About Health Insurance Via Twitter
A Four-Step Healthcare Solution
All socializing healthcare via government regulation/force to provide so called "free" healthcare does (such as in Canada & the UK) is transfer the higher costs to extremely long wait times and forces even less personal choice in who you can do business with (in Canada it is illegal to see a doctor that is not your assigned Primary Care Provider).
If one wants a real solution, I highly recommend the four following steps advocated by economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe in his article "A Four-Step Healthcare Solution":
1. Eliminate all licensing requirements for medical schools, hospitals, pharmacies, and medical doctors and other health-care personnel. Their supply would almost instantly increase, prices would fall, and a greater variety of health-care services would appear on the market...
2. Eliminate all government restrictions on the production and sale of pharmaceutical products and medical devices. This means no more Food and Drug Administration, which presently hinders innovation and increases costs...
3. Deregulate the health-insurance industry. Private enterprise can offer insurance against events over whose outcome the insured possesses no control...
4. Eliminate all subsidies to the sick or unhealthy. Subsidies create more of whatever is being subsidized...
On the post: What's Wrong With Just Competing In The Market? Zillow Sues Trulia For Patent Infringement
The problem is...
On the post: Shockingly, Kickstarter Doesn't Work For Every Movie (Psst: Neither Does The Old System)
Microsoft's Windows 8 won't save hot dogs...
PC software is great and all, but just think about the various up and comers in the sausage industry.
Who is going to save my weenie?
On the post: Anyone Who Says Copyright Cannot Be Used For Censorship Has No Credibility
Copyright IS Censorship...
Without people calling themselves government claiming a monopoly on the use of force, there is no "copyright".
I prefer consensual relationships.
On the post: House Approves Bill To Spy On Americans By Misrepresenting Or Lying About What's In The Bill
How Do These People Get Elected?
On the post: Judge Disqualified From Case Because He's 'Facebook Friends' With The Prosecutor
Silly....
If this type of conflict of interest really mattered, we wouldn't allow the State to hold a monopoly on the so called "justice system".
I prefer consensual relationships (see "voluntaryism").
On the post: If You Can't Sue The Feds For Spying, Sue Them For Lying About Spying
Insanity...
Until the use of State force/coercion is removed (i.e. "taxation"/theft) to allow a voluntary market of competing arbitration systems to thrive, the people calling themselves "government" that claim the "legal" use of force/coercion will continue to expand their power and destroy individual freedoms.
It's time to wake up. Show the world that you own your self. Do not associate with individuals that advocate the use of force against you.
On the post: Big Banks Finally Punishing Employees For Fraud... Like The Call Center Guy Who Used A Fake Dime 50 Years Ago
Issue is the State Regulation...
As usual, the use of force/coercion in an apparant attempt to solve a complex social issue results in much more harm than good.
The initiation of force is immoral, in all forms (force/coercion/theft/fraud) no matter what label is placed on the individual(s).
On the post: Some Thoughts On An Innovation Agenda
Want innovation in the economy...?
Want to help education? Abolish compulsory schooling and allow a voluntary market where individuals can choose without being forced to pay via property taxes (theft).
Want better healthcare? Abolish all State regulations in healthcare which pervert incentives and hurt the individual.
State intervention/force only makes matters worse in the long run. Just as if one has a toothache, heroin may work initially...but in the long run one becomes a junky & enters a downward spiral of destruction.
The power to regulate is the power to grant favors.
I'm not saying that a market free of State intervention/force/coercion is perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than the fascism we have today.
Consensual relationships...it's really that simple.
On the post: Copyright Enforcement Bots Seek And Destroy Hugo Awards
"Copyright" = Censorship
You can't have "freedom of speech" and "copyright" as they are antithetical.
Idea's are not scarce and are therefore not a form of property.
We must stop this madness, otherwise, soon we'll need State licenses to speak.
Next >>