Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Hayek was asked to leave “a statement for the future generations.” His response is brilliant: “Modern civilization which enables us to maintain 4 billion people was made possible by the institution of private property. It is only thanks to this institution that we achieved an extensive order far exceeding... show more

Voices of Liberty

34,921 subscribers

449,687 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Bildung Nachrichten & Politik

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

33 Kommentare

Profilbild von mistersplice ⚡️ .0615 clu₿

mistersplice ⚡️ .0615 clu₿vor 9 Monaten

he also gave us this bit of wisdom

Profilbild von John Paul Harmon

John Paul Harmonvor 9 Monaten

"When you ignore reality, reality doesn't ignore you." Socialism always fails, because a society built on greed and envy rather than virtue and hard work doesn't have a chance.

Profilbild von Jasper Saberi

Jasper Saberivor 9 Monaten

Reminds me of a quote from Edmund Burke: “A law against property is a law against industry.”

Profilbild von Tommy

Tommyvor 9 Monaten

Property taxes are the opposite of private property — end property taxes.

Profilbild von L

Lvor 9 Monaten

We have failed so badly with our education system to the extent that this is no longer common understanding or in agreement

Profilbild von Greg Snow ❄

Greg Snow ❄vor 9 Monaten

“If you destroy that moral basis, which consists in the recognition of private property, we will destroy the sources which nourish present-day mankind, and create a catastrophe of starvation beyond anything mankind has yet experienced.” -F.A. Hayek

Profilbild von Petre Solheim

Petre Solheimvor 9 Monaten

Another simplistic ‘tragedy of the commons’ fairy tale story. Why did elites in the USA spend so much money promoting the simple-minded theories of Hayek and Friedman? Because they could see these theories would allow them to accumulate unlimited wealth and power, that’s all.

Profilbild von 𝕆𝕝𝕚𝕧𝕖𝕣 𝔹𝕖𝕚𝕘𝕖

𝕆𝕝𝕚𝕧𝕖𝕣 𝔹𝕖𝕚𝕘𝕖vor 9 Monaten

@profjasonpotts Here I thought it was made possible by Haber-Bosch.

Profilbild von Peter Schmidt (The 92ers)

Peter Schmidt (The 92ers)vor 9 Monaten

Wilhelm Ropke on the prerequisites that markets require; markets are unable to spontaneously generate them...

Profilbild von TX_Stetson

TX_Stetsonvor 9 Monaten

@naval The real problem with Humanity is this- We have Stone-Age Emotions, medieval Institutions, and Godlike technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall. - Edward Wilson

Profilbild von UniServEnt

UniServEntvor 9 Monaten

Brilliant by half. Private property is brilliant. Extending it to the elimination of the public good, eclipses that brilliance with the current fog of crony capitalism and nihilistic self interest.

Profilbild von austhralis

austhralisvor 9 Monaten

The World Economic Forum and how to make global fascism look nice to new generations...

Profilbild von Bronxilla

Bronxillavor 9 Monaten

Private property is foundational to a free society.

Profilbild von Doron Avital

Doron Avitalvor 9 Monaten

However true this is, the institution of private property is foundational to the history of civilization and to material progress. But no concept applies without limits—the point at which it undermines its own justification. Slavery? Ideas and truth? IP—when it loses balance? Ownership of the Pythagorean theorem? Not to belittle acknowledgment of origin, but ownership that demands rent?! The concept of the private is semantically entangled with the public. The private exercise of vast resources by individuals therefore demands responsibility before the public—no less than what we demand from public officeholders. Case in point: Elon Musk and DOGE.

Profilbild von Kim Hyun

Kim Hyunvor 9 Monaten

Friedrich Hayek left a practical warning, not an ideology. Property isn’t perfection—it’s the operating system that feeds billions. 하이에크의 말은 이념이 아니라 운영 매뉴얼이다. 사유재산은 완벽해서가 아니라, 수십억을 먹여 살리는 시스템이기 때문이다.

Profilbild von QuinnjinWilliams

QuinnjinWilliamsvor 9 Monaten

OMG Hayek was an idiot boiled the entire history of human of civilisations down to private property ... unbelievable. What a meaningless, reductionist, load of BS.

Profilbild von Eka Lestienne🌷

Eka Lestienne🌷vor 9 Monaten

@naval What kind of starvation? Like literal starvation, without food?

Profilbild von Paul Wales

Paul Walesvor 9 Monaten

This is utter nonsense, private ownership of land is a huge and crippling disability on any society. Socially owned and co-operative models are far more efficient.

Profilbild von Based Guitar 🎸

Based Guitar 🎸vor 9 Monaten

Every right stems from a personal right.

Profilbild von Philip Spomer 🦬

Philip Spomer 🦬vor 9 Monaten

The extreme environmentalists may wish for exactly this.

Profilbild von #MMT #MoralMoneyTime #liftism 1st #liftist

#MMT #MoralMoneyTime #liftism 1st #liftistvor 9 Monaten

Even to the end of his life, Hayek still failed to differ personal and private property. Apparently, he failed even to learn that such categories can exist. Even after a century, neither do his followers.

Profilbild von david perez

david perezvor 9 Monaten

I wish I could walk younger people thru the significance of this and differing systems

Profilbild von robertus

robertusvor 9 Monaten

the private property → coordination → prosperity link is almost invisible because it works. catastrophes are always visible, efficiency is felt as just how things are

Profilbild von Matt

Mattvor 9 Monaten

"thou shalt not steal" Started it all

Profilbild von Henry Holloway

Henry Hollowayvor 9 Monaten

The capitalist system - especially from western nations - fully supports the 8.3 billion people on this planet. Remove that system and billions will die. Billions. With greater deaths in poorer African countries. Just another reason why importing people from socialist countries is morally and ethically wrong.

Profilbild von Things Hidden

Things Hiddenvor 9 Monaten

What is meant by *private property* here—everything owned by a few plutocrats, like BlackRock? ‘Owning’ homes that can be ‘repossessed’ by usurers? - not *lenders* since no money is *borrowed*. “Free markets” only serve to concentrate wealth, just like ‘socialism’:

Profilbild von victoria smith

victoria smithvor 9 Monaten

Hayek was one of the brilliant minds in human history. ❤️

Profilbild von Ligia Rus Card 🇺🇸🗽

Ligia Rus Card 🇺🇸🗽vor 9 Monaten

“No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties or his possessions when an excess of power prevails.” James Madison

Profilbild von sesir

sesirvor 9 Monaten

Humans exist for 300.000 years. Animals for 540 million years. Almost 2000 times longer, without private property.

Profilbild von Econgrad

Econgradvor 9 Monaten

Modern civilization = Western civilisation and both are oxymorons. Or, as Gandhi said, "Western civilisation? That would be nice "

Profilbild von AleAR

AleARvor 9 Monaten

Modern civilization, which enables us to maintain 8 billion people (not 4 billion anymore), was made possible by the discovery of oil fields in the 1870s and the ingenuity of our minds, which discovered ways to harness vast amounts of energy and apply it imaginatively to produce a myriad of goods that satisfy our needs. Modern institutions and private property provided the social structure that allowed a few to capture the product of the many.

Profilbild von Elubrafixer

Elubrafixervor 9 Monaten

Willfully ignorant people don’t care They want what they want and don’t really care what it may bring about They have been so utterly brain washed that it does not matter if they are met with logic or reason or facts or history It doesn’t matter They want what they want 🤨

Profilbild von pablo

pablovor 9 Monaten

Hopefully all the plant inbreeding for hybridizing sterile stock doesn’t escape the lab…

Ähnliche Videos

IN DEFENCE OF THE INSTITUTION OF MLA My thanks to party colleagues who made today’s protest a success. We will do what it takes to ensure that the institution of MLA is not disempowered or humiliated. Losing with grace is perhaps the best indicator of how dignified is the party or the person that has lost. We are yet to see that dignity or grace. If anything almost on a daily basis attempts are made to negate the people’s verdict. This is another version of 1987 rigging. This is the administrative version of stealing an election.

IN DEFENCE OF THE INSTITUTION OF MLA My thanks to party colleagues who made today’s protest a success. We will do what it takes to ensure that the institution of MLA is not disempowered or humiliated. Losing with grace is perhaps the best indicator of how dignified is the party or the person that has lost. We are yet to see that dignity or grace. If anything almost on a daily basis attempts are made to negate the people’s verdict. This is another version of 1987 rigging. This is the administrative version of stealing an election.

Sajad Lone

10,979 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran: Leader of the Revolution: It should be noted that in any case, we will demand compensation from the enemy. If he refuses, we will seize as much of his property as we deem necessary, and if this is not possible, we will destroy the property to the same extent.

Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran: Leader of the Revolution: It should be noted that in any case, we will demand compensation from the enemy. If he refuses, we will seize as much of his property as we deem necessary, and if this is not possible, we will destroy the property to the same extent.

Sprinter Press

12,504 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

“World leaders have spent hours, real hours, talking to Putin trying to avert this modern-day catastrophe. But Putin chose disaster. He is alone. And now everyone understands what we understand. Putin is a disaster. This is the answer. Putin is aggression. And he does not want anything else for himself and his people. His formula was death. How to talk to him, explain to me? How to talk to him? Throughout its long history, mankind has not yet known anyone who could come to an agreement with death. The one who brought death. The one who took the path of genocide. The one who wants to destroy us. The one who wants to destroy Europe, which we appreciate. He must ask for mercy, and then there will be our answer, a tribunal," Zelenskyi said in a speech in Germany.

“World leaders have spent hours, real hours, talking to Putin trying to avert this modern-day catastrophe. But Putin chose disaster. He is alone. And now everyone understands what we understand. Putin is a disaster. This is the answer. Putin is aggression. And he does not want anything else for himself and his people. His formula was death. How to talk to him, explain to me? How to talk to him? Throughout its long history, mankind has not yet known anyone who could come to an agreement with death. The one who brought death. The one who took the path of genocide. The one who wants to destroy us. The one who wants to destroy Europe, which we appreciate. He must ask for mercy, and then there will be our answer, a tribunal," Zelenskyi said in a speech in Germany.

NOELREPORTS 🇪🇺 🇺🇦

558,340 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

Erik Voorhees explaining the importance of preserving AI as an institution not controlled by government "I would start by just conveying that important institutions of civilization shouldn't be under the control of any group of people" "when i started getting into the AI space, I realized that we have this additional new institution, which is machine intelligence, and this is becoming very quickly as important as money or as mathematics" "and if it is served to the world by a few tech companies who do whatever the government tells them to do, then that's a big problem and I see that would lead to a very dystopian kind of future" "the whole reason we started Venice was to create an antidote to that, to basically allow anyone access to unrestricted machine intelligence"

Erik Voorhees explaining the importance of preserving AI as an institution not controlled by government "I would start by just conveying that important institutions of civilization shouldn't be under the control of any group of people" "when i started getting into the AI space, I realized that we have this additional new institution, which is machine intelligence, and this is becoming very quickly as important as money or as mathematics" "and if it is served to the world by a few tech companies who do whatever the government tells them to do, then that's a big problem and I see that would lead to a very dystopian kind of future" "the whole reason we started Venice was to create an antidote to that, to basically allow anyone access to unrestricted machine intelligence"

Ansem 🐂🀄️

103,947 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

A Nobel Prize-winning economist was seated in front of a television set from 1977 and was asked to argue for the idea that anyone should be allowed to own anything. Almost no one watches it. Friedrich Hayek is appearing on Firing Line three years after winning the Nobel Prize to defend the idea of private property against a live panel. There's no editing and no commercial break just four men in suits, one camera, and one hour of argument recorded on tape. Look at the stage at which he goes from property to knowledge. The argument is not that owners are entitled to it, but that no one can have sufficient information without it. People debate property online, and he did so on live television.

A Nobel Prize-winning economist was seated in front of a television set from 1977 and was asked to argue for the idea that anyone should be allowed to own anything. Almost no one watches it. Friedrich Hayek is appearing on Firing Line three years after winning the Nobel Prize to defend the idea of private property against a live panel. There's no editing and no commercial break just four men in suits, one camera, and one hour of argument recorded on tape. Look at the stage at which he goes from property to knowledge. The argument is not that owners are entitled to it, but that no one can have sufficient information without it. People debate property online, and he did so on live television.

kompot

345,335 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Kenneth Clarke, "The only country in Europe which has always rejected the Council of Europe and refused to accept the jurisdiction of the ECHR is Belarus, which is a cruel dictatorship. Russia has been expeleld" "Can you give an assurance that the government will not reject membership of the Council of Europe, or rejecting the jurisdiction of the ECHR, which is the most important international institution" David Cameron, "We don't have any plans to act in the way that he says"

Kenneth Clarke, "The only country in Europe which has always rejected the Council of Europe and refused to accept the jurisdiction of the ECHR is Belarus, which is a cruel dictatorship. Russia has been expeleld" "Can you give an assurance that the government will not reject membership of the Council of Europe, or rejecting the jurisdiction of the ECHR, which is the most important international institution" David Cameron, "We don't have any plans to act in the way that he says"

Farrukh

914,023 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

David Friedberg: The Socialists Are Coming for Your Private Property Rights At a recent hearing held by NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a speaker equated evictions with violence. david friedberg says this demonization of landlords and the good/evil moralistic framing are signals that socialists are trying to erode private property rights in America. “In 1787, John Quincy Adams had a comment, ‘The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.’ Private property rights are the foundations of liberty in America. Because if you think about where everyone that came to America was coming from, there were these tyrannical governments where some overlord or some cabal could decide at any point to take the things that you have. You had no private property rights as an individual. And it was that stasis that drove so many to come to the United States and say, ‘We want a place where individuals, one person, can say, I own something, and no one can take it from me.’ This idea that you can then claim acts of violence, that you can then claim circumstances of extraordinary extravagant wealth, and say to that individual, ‘I now have a right, the government now has a right to take your private property,’ ultimately leads to this tyrannical form. And it starts out as being anarchic, and remember, anarchy is a temporary state. It's always in between one state and another. All anarchies end up in tyranny, so anarchy and tyranny are one in the same. And fundamentally, what's going on with these socialist principles is that, ‘We are taking your private property, and you no longer have rights on your private property. We now will have the right to come in and take your property and control it and take it from you.’ And it always starts with this framing of moralistic intent. ‘We are good, you are bad for the following reasons. You have committed violence against the people that live in your building.’ So the first framing is that the private property owner is evil, and that the private property owner has committed an act of injustice against those who don't have the private property. And that is the justification for taking away their private property rights. And it is the beginning of this transition towards a tyrannical system, which will ultimately be what I call this kind of Great American Politburo or whatever socialist framework gets set up by the cabal of the socialists and what they're trying to put together. So all of these little acts, while seeming ridiculous, and insane, and inappropriate, in aggregate are the same thing: They're a transition away from private property rights, which is the foundation of the United States of America. That's why I think we should all be so shocked. And to John Quincy Adams' point, we need to vehemently defend those rights. As soon as those rights start to slip away, even in the tiniest way, it is a cascading effect, and everything will become tyrannical, and it will be very ugly in the United States of America.”

David Friedberg: The Socialists Are Coming for Your Private Property Rights At a recent hearing held by NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a speaker equated evictions with violence. david friedberg says this demonization of landlords and the good/evil moralistic framing are signals that socialists are trying to erode private property rights in America. “In 1787, John Quincy Adams had a comment, ‘The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.’ Private property rights are the foundations of liberty in America. Because if you think about where everyone that came to America was coming from, there were these tyrannical governments where some overlord or some cabal could decide at any point to take the things that you have. You had no private property rights as an individual. And it was that stasis that drove so many to come to the United States and say, ‘We want a place where individuals, one person, can say, I own something, and no one can take it from me.’ This idea that you can then claim acts of violence, that you can then claim circumstances of extraordinary extravagant wealth, and say to that individual, ‘I now have a right, the government now has a right to take your private property,’ ultimately leads to this tyrannical form. And it starts out as being anarchic, and remember, anarchy is a temporary state. It's always in between one state and another. All anarchies end up in tyranny, so anarchy and tyranny are one in the same. And fundamentally, what's going on with these socialist principles is that, ‘We are taking your private property, and you no longer have rights on your private property. We now will have the right to come in and take your property and control it and take it from you.’ And it always starts with this framing of moralistic intent. ‘We are good, you are bad for the following reasons. You have committed violence against the people that live in your building.’ So the first framing is that the private property owner is evil, and that the private property owner has committed an act of injustice against those who don't have the private property. And that is the justification for taking away their private property rights. And it is the beginning of this transition towards a tyrannical system, which will ultimately be what I call this kind of Great American Politburo or whatever socialist framework gets set up by the cabal of the socialists and what they're trying to put together. So all of these little acts, while seeming ridiculous, and insane, and inappropriate, in aggregate are the same thing: They're a transition away from private property rights, which is the foundation of the United States of America. That's why I think we should all be so shocked. And to John Quincy Adams' point, we need to vehemently defend those rights. As soon as those rights start to slip away, even in the tiniest way, it is a cascading effect, and everything will become tyrannical, and it will be very ugly in the United States of America.”

The All-In Podcast

181,613 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

The character of the British people is unique. It is that which has shaped our institutions. It is that which has made them so valuable. It is that which makes us stand up for liberty more fiercely than any other country in Europe. And we must never submit that character to any other nation. [...] Whatever happened to the British Lion—of whom Winston said it was a privilege to give the roar?

The character of the British people is unique. It is that which has shaped our institutions. It is that which has made them so valuable. It is that which makes us stand up for liberty more fiercely than any other country in Europe. And we must never submit that character to any other nation. [...] Whatever happened to the British Lion—of whom Winston said it was a privilege to give the roar?

Margaret Thatcher

23,382 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Lavrov: In Alaska, president Putin said that he is ready to cooperate on the basis of the concept and the framework that the envoy of President Trump brought to Moscow and which they continue to discuss in Alaska. President Putin repeated each and every element of the concept which was brought by Steven Witkoff and asked Steven Witkoff, who was present at the discussions in Anchorage, "Is that right? Is that right?" Everything was confirmed. And then president Putin said that we are ready to accept your concept. And that's how we believe we can move in specific terms on the basis of what you proposed. Then there was no direct response.

Lavrov: In Alaska, president Putin said that he is ready to cooperate on the basis of the concept and the framework that the envoy of President Trump brought to Moscow and which they continue to discuss in Alaska. President Putin repeated each and every element of the concept which was brought by Steven Witkoff and asked Steven Witkoff, who was present at the discussions in Anchorage, "Is that right? Is that right?" Everything was confirmed. And then president Putin said that we are ready to accept your concept. And that's how we believe we can move in specific terms on the basis of what you proposed. Then there was no direct response.

Anton Gerashchenko

91,148 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

#WATCH | Delhi: Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Amar Preet Singh says, "Operation Sindoor, as it was told by the Chief of Naval Staff, the character of war is changing. Every day, we are finding new technologies coming in. Operation Sindoor has given us a clear idea of where we are headed and what we need in future. So a lot of work needs to be done in realigning our own thought processes also, which is already going on...In future also, we will be able to deliver the goods as a nation and we will be able to achieve our objectives. AMCA- advanced medium combat aircraft has been cleared for even participation by private industry, which is a very big step, and that is the kind of confidence that the nation has in private industry today and I'm sure this is going to pave the way to bigger things coming in the future."

#WATCH | Delhi: Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Amar Preet Singh says, "Operation Sindoor, as it was told by the Chief of Naval Staff, the character of war is changing. Every day, we are finding new technologies coming in. Operation Sindoor has given us a clear idea of where we are headed and what we need in future. So a lot of work needs to be done in realigning our own thought processes also, which is already going on...In future also, we will be able to deliver the goods as a nation and we will be able to achieve our objectives. AMCA- advanced medium combat aircraft has been cleared for even participation by private industry, which is a very big step, and that is the kind of confidence that the nation has in private industry today and I'm sure this is going to pave the way to bigger things coming in the future."

ANI

272,509 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

What Elon Musk says here is wrong. The limiting factor for an economy to turn labor into goods is the strength of the promise known as private property. By offering a credible promise that the fruits of their labor will not be stolen, strong private property incentivizes people to be productive. Printing money steals the fruits of peoples’ labor, thereby weakening the promise of private property. As private property is weakened through money printing, people are more incentivized to steal rather than produce. After all, if the promise of legal ownership is being broken, then why work at all when you can instead get in on the take (through bailouts, subsidies, welfare, etc)? When the promise of private property is strong, capital is accumulated rather than consumed, thereby intensifying productivity. #Bitcoin is money that is extremely difficult to steal and impossible to print. Therefore, Bitcoin is the perfection of private property and an intensification of the productive output of people worldwide.

What Elon Musk says here is wrong. The limiting factor for an economy to turn labor into goods is the strength of the promise known as private property. By offering a credible promise that the fruits of their labor will not be stolen, strong private property incentivizes people to be productive. Printing money steals the fruits of peoples’ labor, thereby weakening the promise of private property. As private property is weakened through money printing, people are more incentivized to steal rather than produce. After all, if the promise of legal ownership is being broken, then why work at all when you can instead get in on the take (through bailouts, subsidies, welfare, etc)? When the promise of private property is strong, capital is accumulated rather than consumed, thereby intensifying productivity. #Bitcoin is money that is extremely difficult to steal and impossible to print. Therefore, Bitcoin is the perfection of private property and an intensification of the productive output of people worldwide.

Robert ₿reedlove

46,055 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Boom! "If we had built Northern Gateway, if we built Keystone and we built Energy east, we'd have 2.5 million barrels more per day of production, which is $55 billion a year worth of GDP value, which is worth $17 billion to my government alone and about an equal amount to the federal government. This is not just an ideological argument." "It's not just a minor disagreement." "Oil is by far the most valuable export for Canada." "Any of the projects that you have that you will see on the ultimate list, I will tell you that a bitumen pipeline will be by far the greatest benefit to all of Canada." "There's $9 trillion worth of value in discoverable and achievable reserves right now." "And so why would you leave that in the ground?" Danielle Smith

Boom! "If we had built Northern Gateway, if we built Keystone and we built Energy east, we'd have 2.5 million barrels more per day of production, which is $55 billion a year worth of GDP value, which is worth $17 billion to my government alone and about an equal amount to the federal government. This is not just an ideological argument." "It's not just a minor disagreement." "Oil is by far the most valuable export for Canada." "Any of the projects that you have that you will see on the ultimate list, I will tell you that a bitumen pipeline will be by far the greatest benefit to all of Canada." "There's $9 trillion worth of value in discoverable and achievable reserves right now." "And so why would you leave that in the ground?" Danielle Smith

cbcwatcher

375,460 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Leavitt: "We have Operation Economic Outcast to destroy their economy. No negotiations are happening right now. And this will continue until the president feels that maybe they come to the table in a meaningful way. We have not seen that yet ... the US is essentially controlling the Strait of Hormuz, which remains open thanks to President Trump and the US military"

Leavitt: "We have Operation Economic Outcast to destroy their economy. No negotiations are happening right now. And this will continue until the president feels that maybe they come to the table in a meaningful way. We have not seen that yet ... the US is essentially controlling the Strait of Hormuz, which remains open thanks to President Trump and the US military"

Aaron Rupar

195,253 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚨⚡️ President Vladimir Putin: "If someone decides to destroy Russia, then we have the legal right to respond. Yes, it will be a global catastrophe for the mankind. But, as a citizen of Russia, I want to ask: Why do we NEED such a world, if Russia is not in it?"

🚨⚡️ President Vladimir Putin: "If someone decides to destroy Russia, then we have the legal right to respond. Yes, it will be a global catastrophe for the mankind. But, as a citizen of Russia, I want to ask: Why do we NEED such a world, if Russia is not in it?"

RussiaNews 🇷🇺

1,969,566 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Massie: This administration tells us that by escalating toward war, we would predictably create countless refugees. At the same time this administration has moved to end TPS for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans and deports them back to the very regime it condemns. So which is it? Are we prepared to receive swarms of the Venezuelans who will become refugees and billions in American treasure that will be used to destroy and inevitably rebuild that nation? Do we want a miniature Afghanistan in the western hemisphere?

Massie: This administration tells us that by escalating toward war, we would predictably create countless refugees. At the same time this administration has moved to end TPS for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans and deports them back to the very regime it condemns. So which is it? Are we prepared to receive swarms of the Venezuelans who will become refugees and billions in American treasure that will be used to destroy and inevitably rebuild that nation? Do we want a miniature Afghanistan in the western hemisphere?

Acyn

86,017 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

I am not certain where this is at... A neighbor called on the guy next door for washing his car. The police came, with a printout of the law stating it is illegal to wash your car on public property. The issue is this is his driveway, which is private property. But the cop said it is in public viewing and he will site the guy if he continues to wash. At what point are we the people going to say enough? Police are to protect and serve, yet the laws that they have to enforce are fckn absurd sometimes. This is a definite overstep, in terms of being a law... 🤬😓

I am not certain where this is at... A neighbor called on the guy next door for washing his car. The police came, with a printout of the law stating it is illegal to wash your car on public property. The issue is this is his driveway, which is private property. But the cop said it is in public viewing and he will site the guy if he continues to wash. At what point are we the people going to say enough? Police are to protect and serve, yet the laws that they have to enforce are fckn absurd sometimes. This is a definite overstep, in terms of being a law... 🤬😓

Rick D

69,706 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Karl Popper on How We Gain Knowledge: ––Karl Popper: "People think, usually, that we acquire knowledge by opening our eyes and our ears and let the sensations stream into us, and they believe then that we record this like a camera. In my opinion, if we wish to get knowledge, we have to have a problem. It has to be knowledge of something. We have to find out something. We don't have to wait for information to stream into us, but we have to be inquisitive if we want to get knowledge. If we were passive, we would gain a confused mass of sensations or something like that, which we would hardly be able to understand and to convert into what one may call knowledge. Quite apart from that, perception is not really, in my opinion, the main source of our knowledge. The role of perception is to inform us about a momentary situation in our environment. But we couldn't really interpret our perceptions without knowing much more about our environment, namely, we know whether we are in a house or whether we are in a glacier. So we have two kinds of knowledge: this wider knowledge of a frame in which we orientate ourselves, and the momentary perception which gives us information about the situation at that particular moment. And it is only this situation in which we can use our perception. So we have theoretical knowledge and, if you like, the momentary practical challenge to our theoretical knowledge. And here comes perception in."

Karl Popper on How We Gain Knowledge: ––Karl Popper: "People think, usually, that we acquire knowledge by opening our eyes and our ears and let the sensations stream into us, and they believe then that we record this like a camera. In my opinion, if we wish to get knowledge, we have to have a problem. It has to be knowledge of something. We have to find out something. We don't have to wait for information to stream into us, but we have to be inquisitive if we want to get knowledge. If we were passive, we would gain a confused mass of sensations or something like that, which we would hardly be able to understand and to convert into what one may call knowledge. Quite apart from that, perception is not really, in my opinion, the main source of our knowledge. The role of perception is to inform us about a momentary situation in our environment. But we couldn't really interpret our perceptions without knowing much more about our environment, namely, we know whether we are in a house or whether we are in a glacier. So we have two kinds of knowledge: this wider knowledge of a frame in which we orientate ourselves, and the momentary perception which gives us information about the situation at that particular moment. And it is only this situation in which we can use our perception. So we have theoretical knowledge and, if you like, the momentary practical challenge to our theoretical knowledge. And here comes perception in."

Karl Popper Quotes

115,377 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Senator Chris Murhpy on Iran's nuclear program: The president has also said over and over again that a goal of the war is to permanently deny Iran the ability to have nuclear weapons. But in our closed-door briefings, we learned that this is not actually a goal of the war plan. It is not a goal of the war to destroy Iran’s nuclear program — which is not surprising, because you cannot destroy Iran’s nuclear program from the air. You cannot destroy knowledge. You cannot hunt down with missiles every Iranian scientist who knows how to build a nuclear reactor. And much of the material is buried so far underground that it is immune to an air campaign. But then why is the president and the Department of Defense telling the American people that the point of the war is to destroy Iran’s nuclear program?

Senator Chris Murhpy on Iran's nuclear program: The president has also said over and over again that a goal of the war is to permanently deny Iran the ability to have nuclear weapons. But in our closed-door briefings, we learned that this is not actually a goal of the war plan. It is not a goal of the war to destroy Iran’s nuclear program — which is not surprising, because you cannot destroy Iran’s nuclear program from the air. You cannot destroy knowledge. You cannot hunt down with missiles every Iranian scientist who knows how to build a nuclear reactor. And much of the material is buried so far underground that it is immune to an air campaign. But then why is the president and the Department of Defense telling the American people that the point of the war is to destroy Iran’s nuclear program?

Clash Report

31,792 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

SHOULD GOVERNMENT BE ALLOWED TO TAKE PRIVATE PROPERTY? “People are waking up to the fact that the asset seizure tax is an elimination of private property rights, that fundamentally what you're saying [is] that private property now becomes public property. Because as soon as you give the government the right to collect your post-tax assets through a legislative vote, you are basically saying that you no longer have private property — because at any point in the future the government can vote to say I'm going to take your private property — which is different than an income tax. [An income tax] is when you earn something that you didn't have before, and they take a percentage of your earnings (of your income). The statement now is after you've made your income (it's now your private property) — they can come and take it. And so that is a distinction that has never existed in the United States. And I will make the retort right now to property tax, because people always say to me: ‘what about property tax?’ A property tax is a service fee on a particular, specific asset. The money that is collected provides services for that asset to make it more valuable. So you get roads, infrastructure, policing, fire, schools… All the stuff that comes with property tax makes that property [more valuable]. And you have the option at any point you want to sell that property and stop paying that property tax. You have the option at any point to downgrade your property and get a cheaper property and pay [a lower tax]. And here's the other important point about property tax: it’s uniform. Uniform means that everyone pays the same percentage, the same property tax rate in a county. This asset seizure tax that's being proposed is a demographic tax — meaning that the state or the legislature defines a specific group of individuals (in this case, they're saying anyone with a net worth over a billion dollars) and then they can go and take assets from only that group. That is nonuniform taxation. It means that for the first time we're saying based on the demographics of a person meaning whatever you want to use to define that person (in this case their wealth) — you are going to be treated differently. And that is different than an income tax, because remember when you have graduated income tax rates (and you say high earners get taxed more) — what you're taxing is the earnings, not the individual. You're not looking through to the individual to determine whether or not they're wealthy. All you're doing is looking at the independent earnings amount that's coming in. And so a uniformity clause is supposed to protect people from being demographically discriminated against. And you may roll your hand and be like: ‘Oh, who cares about the billionaires? Eat the rich. That's great.’ But fundamentally, you're giving the government, the legislature, the ability to in the future take any demographic definition they want and go in and take any percentage they want of after-tax property from you. That is why this is so troubling.” david friedberg The All-In Podcast

SHOULD GOVERNMENT BE ALLOWED TO TAKE PRIVATE PROPERTY? “People are waking up to the fact that the asset seizure tax is an elimination of private property rights, that fundamentally what you're saying [is] that private property now becomes public property. Because as soon as you give the government the right to collect your post-tax assets through a legislative vote, you are basically saying that you no longer have private property — because at any point in the future the government can vote to say I'm going to take your private property — which is different than an income tax. [An income tax] is when you earn something that you didn't have before, and they take a percentage of your earnings (of your income). The statement now is after you've made your income (it's now your private property) — they can come and take it. And so that is a distinction that has never existed in the United States. And I will make the retort right now to property tax, because people always say to me: ‘what about property tax?’ A property tax is a service fee on a particular, specific asset. The money that is collected provides services for that asset to make it more valuable. So you get roads, infrastructure, policing, fire, schools… All the stuff that comes with property tax makes that property [more valuable]. And you have the option at any point you want to sell that property and stop paying that property tax. You have the option at any point to downgrade your property and get a cheaper property and pay [a lower tax]. And here's the other important point about property tax: it’s uniform. Uniform means that everyone pays the same percentage, the same property tax rate in a county. This asset seizure tax that's being proposed is a demographic tax — meaning that the state or the legislature defines a specific group of individuals (in this case, they're saying anyone with a net worth over a billion dollars) and then they can go and take assets from only that group. That is nonuniform taxation. It means that for the first time we're saying based on the demographics of a person meaning whatever you want to use to define that person (in this case their wealth) — you are going to be treated differently. And that is different than an income tax, because remember when you have graduated income tax rates (and you say high earners get taxed more) — what you're taxing is the earnings, not the individual. You're not looking through to the individual to determine whether or not they're wealthy. All you're doing is looking at the independent earnings amount that's coming in. And so a uniformity clause is supposed to protect people from being demographically discriminated against. And you may roll your hand and be like: ‘Oh, who cares about the billionaires? Eat the rich. That's great.’ But fundamentally, you're giving the government, the legislature, the ability to in the future take any demographic definition they want and go in and take any percentage they want of after-tax property from you. That is why this is so troubling.” david friedberg The All-In Podcast

Ron Pragides 

258,567 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

$.Logan on our latest piece in Human Progress about what unifies the enemies of civilization: What unifies all of the enemies of civilization is that they all slow down the growth of knowledge. Now, you ask, how can we take advantage of this fact, namely that all of the enemies of civilization share in common this feature that they curb the growth of knowledge? This fact tells us that we can, if we so choose and if we make the right decisions, outpace them in the growth of knowledge. So, one strategy to defeat the enemies of civilization is basically to outpace them in this great war of memes and growing wealth and knowledge, such that eventually, the memes that comprise the enemies of civilization, as well as the wealth that the enemies of civilization control, is an ever smaller fraction of the total meme pool and wealth that civilization has to offer. So, this is what success would look like if we think about outpacing them. But there's also the strategy of replacing the memes that comprise the enemies of civilization with better ideas. This is just a fancy way of saying we could also persuade people. So that would be a kind of inside-out approach, rather than the out-pacing, which is kind of from the outside in. And of course, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can continue to build and outpace the enemies of civilization while persuading people that the relevant ideas that curb the growth of knowledge are mistaken. And by the way, just to make the conversation a little less abstract, the enemies of civilization that we wrote about in our piece, which is an excerpt of the script we wrote for your upcoming documentary, those enemies are socialism, environmentalism, scientism, relativism, dogmatism, and doomerism. And I don't think I ever told you this, Arjun, but what I like about the list we came up with is that understanding the inner workings of each of these enemies of civilization, that is to say, understanding the how and why of how each enemy of civilization curbs the growth of knowledge, gives unique insights into the nature of progress and epistemology. This clip was recorded and made using Airchat.$

.Logan on our latest piece in Human Progress about what unifies the enemies of civilization: What unifies all of the enemies of civilization is that they all slow down the growth of knowledge. Now, you ask, how can we take advantage of this fact, namely that all of the enemies of civilization share in common this feature that they curb the growth of knowledge? This fact tells us that we can, if we so choose and if we make the right decisions, outpace them in the growth of knowledge. So, one strategy to defeat the enemies of civilization is basically to outpace them in this great war of memes and growing wealth and knowledge, such that eventually, the memes that comprise the enemies of civilization, as well as the wealth that the enemies of civilization control, is an ever smaller fraction of the total meme pool and wealth that civilization has to offer. So, this is what success would look like if we think about outpacing them. But there's also the strategy of replacing the memes that comprise the enemies of civilization with better ideas. This is just a fancy way of saying we could also persuade people. So that would be a kind of inside-out approach, rather than the out-pacing, which is kind of from the outside in. And of course, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can continue to build and outpace the enemies of civilization while persuading people that the relevant ideas that curb the growth of knowledge are mistaken. And by the way, just to make the conversation a little less abstract, the enemies of civilization that we wrote about in our piece, which is an excerpt of the script we wrote for your upcoming documentary, those enemies are socialism, environmentalism, scientism, relativism, dogmatism, and doomerism. And I don't think I ever told you this, Arjun, but what I like about the list we came up with is that understanding the inner workings of each of these enemies of civilization, that is to say, understanding the how and why of how each enemy of civilization curbs the growth of knowledge, gives unique insights into the nature of progress and epistemology. This clip was recorded and made using Airchat.

Arjun Khemani

23,835 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren