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

F. A. Hayek Quotes

32,870 subscribers

449,360 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Bildung Nachrichten & Politik

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

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

10,855 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

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 5 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 🐂🀄️

102,075 Aufrufe • vor 2 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.

the lich

310,032 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag

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

179,801 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

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 7 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 9 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

272,458 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

375,424 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨⚡️ 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 🇷🇺

1,969,224 Aufrufe • vor 7 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 8 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 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 5 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

115,160 Aufrufe • vor 3 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 7 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

23,776 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

David Friedberg warns that Mamdani and fellow socialists frame their assaults on private property as moral justice against “evil” landlords and the wealthy. This is one of the best breakdowns on Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists I've seen. Must watch! Friedberg: “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 has a right—to take your private property’ ultimately leads to this tyrannical form. And it starts out as being anarchic because, remember, anarchy is a temporary state—it’s always between one state and another. All anarchies end up in tyranny. Groups of people fighting each other. They’re all stealing **** from each other. Everyone just goes and takes and gets what they want, and eventually people coalesce. They form groups, and those groups become the more powerful groups. And the powerful groups end up winning. And they become the tyranny over the mass. And that is why all anarchies eventually evolve into tyranny. So anarchy and tyranny are one and 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 to your private property—whether you are a landlord or whether you are a wealthy person that we’ve deemed to have too much wealth. We now have the rights 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 and you are bad for the following reason. You have committed violence against the people; in your building you have taken too much wealth. And none of us have wealth. We have a right to go and take your wealth from you.’ It has always started from this point of view that you are bad. 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 are the transitioning 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 the point of John Quincy Adams’s 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 warns that Mamdani and fellow socialists frame their assaults on private property as moral justice against “evil” landlords and the wealthy. This is one of the best breakdowns on Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists I've seen. Must watch! Friedberg: “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 has a right—to take your private property’ ultimately leads to this tyrannical form. And it starts out as being anarchic because, remember, anarchy is a temporary state—it’s always between one state and another. All anarchies end up in tyranny. Groups of people fighting each other. They’re all stealing **** from each other. Everyone just goes and takes and gets what they want, and eventually people coalesce. They form groups, and those groups become the more powerful groups. And the powerful groups end up winning. And they become the tyranny over the mass. And that is why all anarchies eventually evolve into tyranny. So anarchy and tyranny are one and 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 to your private property—whether you are a landlord or whether you are a wealthy person that we’ve deemed to have too much wealth. We now have the rights 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 and you are bad for the following reason. You have committed violence against the people; in your building you have taken too much wealth. And none of us have wealth. We have a right to go and take your wealth from you.’ It has always started from this point of view that you are bad. 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 are the transitioning 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 the point of John Quincy Adams’s 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.”

American Debunk

15,403 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen