La ética del gueto rothbardiana es la ética de un gueto urbano medieval. No es más ni menos que eso Los residentes de un “estado dentro de un estado” pueden conducir intercambios como si fueran actores estatales al respaldarse y apalancarse sobre intercambios y transacciones de alta confianza intra-grupos, toda vez que usan intercambios y transacciones de baja confianza ex-grupo (fuera del grupo). Sin embargo, en cualquier estado, cada uno de nosotros no puede actuar como un “estado” al aplicar la baja confianza con unos y relaciones de alta confianza con otros porque el resultado neto es una sociedad de baja confianza con altísimos incentivos para robar para la gran mayoría. En tales ambientes, la demanda que hay para la existencia del estado y que este intervenga como ente que resuelva disputas entre miembros de la sociedad como sustituto permanece alta, ya que la baja confianza es el uso de la astucia y el engaño para obtener descuentos y primas en las que una de las partes involucradas en el intercambio/transacción no toleraría de forma voluntaria. Dicho de otra forma, la ética de la baja confianza es parasitaria, e impone altos costos de transacción sobre la población. A lo que voy con esto es lo absurdo de usar un modelo de un estado dentro de un estado para abogar por una sociedad en la que el estado no existe. En esa óptica, todo la tesis Rothbardiana es ridículamente ilógica. La aristocracia suprime todas las formas en las que se puede hacer trampa de modo tal que la demanda para la existencia del estado sea baja porque los costos de las transacciones y los conflictos que puedan surgir de estas son minimizados toda vez que la velocidad en la que la producción se da y el intercambio que ésta genera es alto.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Trump Negotiates From The Presumption Of Ignorance And Presumption Of The Opponent’s Malfeasance. He Manufactures Opportunity To
(I know, because I do the same thing) Kim wants legitimacy before his people. Trump wants an excuse to take severe action. The military can use that action to counter china. There are hundreds of issues at play here. I have been in the business of negotiating business deals for most of my life – usually M&A in the low range. And trump’s method of negotiation is very transparent to me. You just let everyone play their hand, and say anything that encourages people to take further exposure, then wait for opportunity to make use of that information, while suggesting that you’ll accept possibilities different from your central objective. This makes it extremely hard for the opposition to rally and counter you, and ensures you have the maximum information at your disposal. This works when many people are fighting for your business, money, or approval. And it means you do not have to pay them off or make a lot of puts in order to get the best deal. Moreover by giving them hope, and then drawing it out or letting them fail, they are weakened with their constituencies. Most presidents and politicians do this under pretense. He just does it openly. Because the worst that happens is he gets to leave the white house which is a bit like slumming for him. Meanwhile his base is more dedicated than any president in modern history. He governs as does a king rather than the postmodern priesthood that’s been common since Johnson. And I am still not sure it’s a bad thing. -
Trump Negotiates From The Presumption Of Ignorance And Presumption Of The Opponent’s Malfeasance. He Manufactures Opportunity To
(I know, because I do the same thing) Kim wants legitimacy before his people. Trump wants an excuse to take severe action. The military can use that action to counter china. There are hundreds of issues at play here. I have been in the business of negotiating business deals for most of my life – usually M&A in the low range. And trump’s method of negotiation is very transparent to me. You just let everyone play their hand, and say anything that encourages people to take further exposure, then wait for opportunity to make use of that information, while suggesting that you’ll accept possibilities different from your central objective. This makes it extremely hard for the opposition to rally and counter you, and ensures you have the maximum information at your disposal. This works when many people are fighting for your business, money, or approval. And it means you do not have to pay them off or make a lot of puts in order to get the best deal. Moreover by giving them hope, and then drawing it out or letting them fail, they are weakened with their constituencies. Most presidents and politicians do this under pretense. He just does it openly. Because the worst that happens is he gets to leave the white house which is a bit like slumming for him. Meanwhile his base is more dedicated than any president in modern history. He governs as does a king rather than the postmodern priesthood that’s been common since Johnson. And I am still not sure it’s a bad thing. -
“Really, when you think about it, movie theaters are basically concession stands
—“Really, when you think about it, movie theaters are basically concession stands that rely on movies to bring people in the door.”— -
“Really, when you think about it, movie theaters are basically concession stands
—“Really, when you think about it, movie theaters are basically concession stands that rely on movies to bring people in the door.”— -
I love watching the movie business fail into producing nothing but spectacle for
I love watching the movie business fail into producing nothing but spectacle for children and teens. -
I love watching the movie business fail into producing nothing but spectacle for
I love watching the movie business fail into producing nothing but spectacle for children and teens. -
The united states is not ONE democracy, but a COLLECTION OF STATES all of whom a
The united states is not ONE democracy, but a COLLECTION OF STATES all of whom agree to operate democratically and resolve conflicts in commerce and war via the federal government, similarly to how the Church formed a weak government over the various states of Europe. The states, regions, and ‘nine’ super-regions, are genetically(yes), demographically, culturally, and legally different. They are also of vastly different sizes, just as the states of europe(germanic), and eastern europe(slavic) are different sizes. And while each state gains proportional representation in the house, equal representation in the senate, it is the majority of the STATES that determine the presidency – not one’s vote. This was designed so that big (immigrant) states could not virtually enslave the smaller and more homogenous states. When you vote, you vote for your state, not for the country, because you are just as much an enemy as a friend of people in other parts of the country. And this is how it was set. If there is any question whatsoever of as SINGLE democracy, then we do not live in separate states each satisfying the want and needs of the groups that inhabit them, then we are a tyrannical empire that oppresses those states. The underlying problem is why we joined vastly different civilizations in 1789 did not separate after the war of 1812 when the north wanted to secede, did not separate in 1865, when the south wanted to secede, and do not separate today when it appears that at least five, but ast many as ten different nations, consisting of subsets of our states, want to seceded. The only problem heretofore has been external military pressure. Without the european aggression of the pre-war period, or the opportunity to ‘steal’ the western 3/4 of the continent after the Louisiana Purchase, or defend ourselves from postwar communism, (and it looks like communism’s follow-on: islamism is coming to an end) then there is no reason to remain united whatsoever, when the consequence is constant internecine warfare slowly turning into open civil war. Our government is an empire that has outlived its usefulness as holding the world system of finance and trade together after the collapse of european colonialism. It’s time to return to the norm of western civilization: small states that cater to the wants and needs of their people – not to the will of the majority who, by all measures, will always be those least able, least productive, least knowledgeable, and demonstrably least moral. -
The united states is not ONE democracy, but a COLLECTION OF STATES all of whom a
The united states is not ONE democracy, but a COLLECTION OF STATES all of whom agree to operate democratically and resolve conflicts in commerce and war via the federal government, similarly to how the Church formed a weak government over the various states of Europe. The states, regions, and ‘nine’ super-regions, are genetically(yes), demographically, culturally, and legally different. They are also of vastly different sizes, just as the states of europe(germanic), and eastern europe(slavic) are different sizes. And while each state gains proportional representation in the house, equal representation in the senate, it is the majority of the STATES that determine the presidency – not one’s vote. This was designed so that big (immigrant) states could not virtually enslave the smaller and more homogenous states. When you vote, you vote for your state, not for the country, because you are just as much an enemy as a friend of people in other parts of the country. And this is how it was set. If there is any question whatsoever of as SINGLE democracy, then we do not live in separate states each satisfying the want and needs of the groups that inhabit them, then we are a tyrannical empire that oppresses those states. The underlying problem is why we joined vastly different civilizations in 1789 did not separate after the war of 1812 when the north wanted to secede, did not separate in 1865, when the south wanted to secede, and do not separate today when it appears that at least five, but ast many as ten different nations, consisting of subsets of our states, want to seceded. The only problem heretofore has been external military pressure. Without the european aggression of the pre-war period, or the opportunity to ‘steal’ the western 3/4 of the continent after the Louisiana Purchase, or defend ourselves from postwar communism, (and it looks like communism’s follow-on: islamism is coming to an end) then there is no reason to remain united whatsoever, when the consequence is constant internecine warfare slowly turning into open civil war. Our government is an empire that has outlived its usefulness as holding the world system of finance and trade together after the collapse of european colonialism. It’s time to return to the norm of western civilization: small states that cater to the wants and needs of their people – not to the will of the majority who, by all measures, will always be those least able, least productive, least knowledgeable, and demonstrably least moral. -
How Did President Trump Choke North Korea’s Economy That Forced A Meeting Between Him And Kim Jong Un To Denuclearize?
Kim wants legitimacy before his people. Trump wants an excuse to take severe action. The military can use that action to strategically counter china. There are hundreds of issues at play here, and the strategic future changes dramatically both ways.
I have been in the business of negotiating business deals for most of my life – usually M&A in the low range. And trump’s method of negotiation is very transparent to me. You just let everyone play their hand, and say anything that encourages people to take further exposure, then wait for opportunity to make use of that information, while suggesting that you’ll accept possibilities different from your central objective.
This makes it extremely hard for the opposition to rally and counter you, and ensures you have the maximum information at your disposal. This works when many people are fighting for your business, money, or approval. And it means you do not have to pay them off or make a lot of puts in order to get the best deal. Moreover by giving them hope, and then drawing it out or letting them fail, they are weakened with their constituencies.
Most presidents and politicians do this under pretense. He just does it openly. Because the worst that happens is he gets to leave the white house which is a bit like slumming for him.
Meanwhile his base is more dedicated than any president in recent history.
He governs as does a king rather than the postmodern priesthood that’s been common since Johnson. And I am still not sure it’s a bad thing.
https://www.quora.com/How-did-President-Trump-choke-North-Koreas-economy-that-forced-a-meeting-between-him-and-Kim-Jong-Un-to-denuclearize