Vaccines are not injected directly into the bloodstream. They are commonly injected into a muscle (intramuscular injection).
Ah yeah good point. Still more direct than going through your digestive tract. Idk if thimerosal is dangerous. 10% effective isn't a good enough risk/reward tho so I pass on flu shots
Flu vaccine shots make sense if you belong to certain at-risk groups (elderly, pregnant,and others) where a flu disease poses a greater risk than for regular healthy adults.
I'm a centrist on the issue. I think the FDA and CDC gots their hands elbow deep in the cookie jar. It's similar to trusting blockstream to write benevolent Bitcoin code.
calling it a "religion" just shows, how little you actually read/heard/talked about it with people. It's clearly not "Oh yeah, I got it, but there is more to it". It's petty dismissal.
If it's not a religion why do you react this way to me calling it that? "Taxation is theft" is (dogmatically shallow) tribal signaling just like "believe women" or "God is good".
but hey dude... whatever.. I don't give a shit anymore. I try not to answer any moronic statement made on the internet, it waste my time and energy. have fun talking shit
i cannot answer you, without being a blind zealot? ok. lets not talk. people calling libertarian philosophy and its <logical> conclusions "a religion" 100% DID NOT UNDERSTAND IT.
"taxation is theft" comes from a logical thoughtprocess. If I have to tell this to you, and explain the process, it means that all those hours spend understanding rothbard were wasted.
If you can't explain it it means you actually don't understand it. OR it's not actually cogent, you just think it is because you sank so much time(and lost so many friends?) over it.
I know the thought process because I've processed it with thought. I think it's flawed reasoning. If that offends you it's cuz I'm blaspheming your religion. If not you wouldn't be.
So if I dropped you naked in the middle of a forrest a thousand miles from any civilization - you wouldn't be able to clothe yourself, let alone make a gun. Learn to be more thankful!
Let's say you live in a rapist's house, and that rapist was excused to rape you because that's just how things go. Now, imagine you were in the middle of a forest. Be grateful!
I'm extremely grateful that I eat better than any king could 200 years ago every day, I'm safe, I can move around freely, I can access information freely, I get a day off once a week..
I am too :) And things could be so much better with consistency applied morality, too :) In fact, our collective existence depends on it. We will go extinct otherwise.
Pareto principle guarantees that a tiny percentage of the population will end up "owning" most of the land in a free-for-all anarchist society. Maybe ancaps think it'll be them?
lol I thought it was in the desert. I'm saying introduce actual scarcity so people have to start deciding between altruism and personal survival. You'll get a few "criminals", then...
Obviously if you put people in a situation where they have no food or water they are going to start fighting. Law enforcement or anarchy doesn’t matter. Survival can become savage.
Not necessarily starvation level famine, just enough scarcity that there are winners and losers in food production which means inequality. You'll have a government in no time.
“free for all anarchist society” wasn’t a term I used. Sorry I kinda jumped in on your conversation with someone else because when I read that I immediately thought burning man
Watch Princess Mononoke, pretty much that. No different than straight up feudalism. If you amass any wealth there'll be raiding parties of samurai at your door every damn day.
The statement "taxation is theft" is like a child complaining that it's not fair he has to do chores to get an allowance. As the parent I'd say 'don't let the door hit you in the ass!'
The kid wants the benifits of living in the household he was born in without any obligations. You want the benifits of the society you were born into with none of the trade-offs.
Being born into a society that organizes using theft validates that theft? Is the taxation repealed when child matures? Aren't families communistic? Is everyone a perpetual child?
It's a limited analogy. You know that demanding perfect solutions is a socialist tactic? Gotta say I'm disappointed. I thought I'd learn from you but it seems you're just an NPC.
Anarchism becomes feudalism because of the Pareto principle. A small amount of people will own most/all of the land. A monopoly on land ownership is feudalism by definition.
Haven't convinced me of anything other than that you blindly, dogmatically, definitionally believe to the idea that a tax is necessarily a violent violation of your property rights.
I don't expect to convince you of anything in one conversation. I don't understand how you're concluding that I'm dogmatic about taxation. Could you explain that?
One big problem with "taxation is theft" is that you assume entitlement of all society's structure that you benefit from every damn day. Not saying it's perfect or even very efficient.
How does "taxation is theft" assume entitlement of all society's structure? If you have your money stolen from you, but they buy you something, that makes their theft ok?
The roads, sewers, electricity, infrastructure to keep it all running etc. etc. - all stuff you used to make that money *in the first place*. Could you have made that money w/o it?
I just watched Princess Mononoke - great film for thinking about this stuff. One takeaway- force multipliers(like guns) require specialization. You don't get steel without society.
So like trains - what needs to exist societally to turn iron ore into a functioning train system? How much cheaper is it to transport goods via rail than carrying it on foot to market?
That's why pay tribute to Caesar - YOU USED HIS SYSTEM OF COMMERCE TO MAKE THAT MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE <---- Make your money outside that system, then you can say taxation is theft.
Why do you think that stealing money (taxation) is how things are built in a sustainable fashion, supposing that this is what you think? Not taxation =/= free.
Some taxes are theft for sure, that's an inevitability of having any centralized power structure. That doesn't mean the alternative is going to be any more efficient.
What is the alternative? Not having money stolen? Efficient = doing something in the least wasteful manner? https://www.dictionary.com/browse/efficient Isn't voluntary more efficient?
You have no evidence that privatized everything is more efficient. Hong Kong was a great example of good balance between public and private. Sorry but cities need utilities and police.
You mean that cities need utilities and defense? I'm not against that. I'm only against systematically involuntary interactions, which the police are based upon, per funded with taxes.
Could you link me to what you're talking about in regard to Hong Kong? Do you think I'm against cities having utilities? I advocate for utilities being funded voluntarily.
I think you'll hit a point where there's too many takers and the people actually paying will start feeling like they're being taken for a ride. You know, like socialism.
This is what I don't get about the ancap belief system. Does a completely unregulated market suddenly turn people into altruists who just let you use their infrastructure for free??
What do you mean by "unregulated market"? The market, when free (no gov interference), is regulated by customers. Do shitty stuff, go bankrupt, or be unable to buy stuff. Deadly.
I myself? In general, no, I have not witnessed a free market where there is no government interference. I find that question curious. Does an answer of "no" imply impossibility? Why?
This is how ancap is essentially the same as socialism, just with the words replaced. They hate "capitalists" you hate "governments" 😩😩😩😩 ITS THE SAME FREAKING PEOPLE😑
With the way people talk about capitalists and what they mean, you're quite right. Capitalists, in common colloquial, means corporatists. Welcome to our current Orwellian reality :)
This is exactly how ancap belief is like socialism - "true free market has never been tried!" lol. Have you not considered that the biggest winners in the market BECOME the government?
Yes. My lack of witnessing a "true free market" means one has never existed? I answered your question directly; did you not turn it into a generalization about all human societies?
Murder, democide, genocide, and so forth, is my guess. Also, you're being very condescending and I don't like that. But hey - you already know how you're going to dismiss me, right?
You're not actually coming up with any cogent arguments. You're dismissing yourself. Try thinking ahead? Question: which came first, the murder & genocide, or the government?
Simple logical deduction. You say the government is bad because they do *X*. SO - to eliminate *X* simply eliminate the government! But *X* obviously exists in spite of government.
Not a dodge, that book is famous because it's TRUE. The last ancap I tried to reason with stormed off in a triggered fit too. Just like a socialist. All emotion, zero logic.
It's absolutely a generalization about human societies. Like I said earlier, we're talking about human nature here. Ancaps don't understand basic human nature, just like socialists.
Republican democracy is the only defense against whales. What do you think the 1st and 2nd amendment are for? Shakespeare and hunting? NO - they're for when a whale gets in to office!
Historically you get people who win big in some revolution(e.g. The industrial revolution etc.) in crypto we call them "whales". They're the real monopoly on force.
That's very vague. I'm not even sure what you're saying. But hey, you know stuff better than I do. Shan't I just blindly take your word on it? You're quite the authority, huh?
No, I don't, though I do believe in the spirit of the christmas holiday, and am quite appreciative to see the opposite effects from corporatism. It shows the possibilities to me.
Huh. Friedman thinks there's a proper role of gov. Unsurprisingly, that "freedom" is slowly eroding with inevitably more and increasing gov involvement: systematically involuntary.
You're either ruled by an elected government or by a mafia. One you have some semblance of choice, the other you have no choice but to submit or join. Perpetual power vacuum is a myth.
"Perpetual power vacuum is a myth." ""when someone has lost control of something and no one has replaced them."" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_vacuum Could you expound on that?
Just to clarify here, you want no enforcement whatsoever. No regulation, no government, no police, no judges, no mayors or city councils, etc etc.. Is this correct?
What do you mean by "no enforcement whatsoever"? I'm in favor of enforcement by the customer, for instance. I'm not in favor of enforcement by a monopoly on force that steals to exist.
It's not a monopoly on force if it's given to them via fair and free elections. The alternative is being ruled by a mafia. I believe the neither realm you desire can not exist.
It's not a monopoly on force if the money taken from me without my consent is given via elections? How is that free or fair? How is the other alternative being ruled by a mafia?
I can't tell if you're a troll or just completely delusional. There's plenty of countries you can move to that have anarchy. Try Somalia! Great weather I hear.
The power vacuum that exists temporarily after an established authority is suddenly taken out. Maybe Somalia is a theocratic dictatorship now? Hard to tell at any given moment I guess.
Sounds like these little towns instantly established governments! Great argument for why you need one! Protects you from the tyranny of an unelected foreign super state. Perfect.
How do you differentiate between someone who is writing for just emotional reaction (troll) vs someone who believes what they think (according to you, delusional, here)?
"You have no evidence that privatized everything is more efficient." We just start the discussion and you head in with that I have no evidence? Jumping the gun much?
It's not a question of sustainability(good job busting out the socialist rhetoric btw), it's that you've able to amass wealth partially due to society existing before you.
The idea of sustainability is socialist rhetoric? How? Socialism is unsustainable. How does amassing wealth based on previously-existant society validate theft?
Illustrate to me how the money you pay to a local, elected authority to build and maintain roads and sewers, pay police and fire fighters etc. is theft? If you don't like it, move!
Well we can start with the big one https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org The taxes these ppl advocate for absolutely are theft. All in the name of The Greater Good aka "sustainability"
I need to be able to trade widgets for potatoes or socks, even if the farmer or seamstress don't need widgets. Money is the greatest force multiplier cuz it allows specialization.
Money is that which is "fungible, portable, durable, and divisible", as Mike Maloney has said, which is why he advises buying gold. I think BCH is better.
Ok I'll race you. Go buy a banana with BCH, I'll buy one with Japanese Yen - Winner is using the superior money(at least in the short term). I'll go when you say go.
Gold isn't portable or divisible. Dollars aren't especially durable and are becoming less fungible. I think portability and divisibility is more important. You can always convert out.
You need ppl in a society to specialize into certain professions or you'll never have enough scale to produce steel - but that doesn't happen without a functioning money system.
gun vs. sword = women can defend home asphalt vs. dirt road = shipping is faster and cheaper trains vs. dirt road = same telephone vs. carrier pigeon(?) = you get the point
Also I'll make the case that "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's" is a vastly superior statement to "Taxation is theft". If you don't want to pay taxes, you shouldn't be using dollars.
That's fine. How is other people's money Caesars? According to that logic, Caesar stole lots of money and needed to return it. I don't WANT to use dollars. It's required. I prefer BCH.
I'll explain why having a government is a necessary trade off if you want to have civilization. It's not a simple thing because we're discussing human nature. Ancap's view is flawed.
I've been mulling over what angle I'm going to take all day and now I gotta sleep. I'll leave you with some random thoughts and see if anyone can answer without using tired maxims.
"taxation is theft" comes from a logical thoughtprocess. If I have to tell this to you, and explain the process, it means that all those hours spend understanding rothbard were wasted.
I've talked for countless hours with various people about it, online and off. I try to read Rothbard but it's all just the same buzz phrases repeated over and over.
It's a big problem with the federal bureaucracy in general. There's no consequence for corruption. How many died early because they trusted the idiotic USDA Food Guide Pyramid??
Not sure. The Meses ppl would say that British common law would handle it. Right now drug companies have very few consequences for hurting someone with a vaccine.
I've heard of a problem with babies getting a high fever that causes brain damage and stunted immune system. Could be FUD but I don't see the motive. Imo the're mostly just pointless.
More han likely FUD. I dont get the motive, but there is FUD against vaccines. They really are the most effective, and cheapest way to fight the spread of many diseases.
If you want to sell something, get really good at technical analysis and assessing sentiment, release PR when the trend reverses, then claim your product's influence was the reason.
I'm not sure that's been qualified either. The trends match but it might've just been good timing on the part of the marketers. I think news affecting markets is largely a myth.
Well why is that? If you negligently harm someone that should be a criminal offense. If there're laws that prevent you from being prosecuted, then *that* is the issue, not the concept.
Yup, that's the problem with limited liability corporations. Plausible deniability/guilt distributed over layers of bureaucracy. It's definitely one of the toughest problems we face.