AR's recipe for a good American

[ravells]

Miko, my friend,

We are destined to agree to disagree. But know this: not all of the forces which regulate human behaviour can be reduced to an economic theory.

Damn...why do I sound like 'Bones' talking to 'Spock' about this subject?

Ravs

[ravells]

guess i don't need to answer the socialist on that question.....

next?

lazs

Well?

Ravs

[lasersailor184]

Ravells --> If you go into business, you want to provide something that only **YOU** will provide.  It's good business.

Take italian cars.  Something breaks on it.  You take it to a mechanic.

What are the chances that the mechanic has the exact part you need?  What are the chances that the part you need is even in this country?


No one's getting their panties in a twist over this.  Plus it goes on everywhere.

[ravells]

laser... the delict is not supplying something that only you provide  (that's good business). The delict is squashing someone who happens to provide something better by running them out of business because you have the muscle to give away for free what they are providing with something they already need.

Ravs

oh ... and people are getting their panties in a twist about it:  In case you missed it, here's what I posted earlier:

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill that allows the U.S. government to bring antitrust lawsuits against OPEC. Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) said, U.S. consumers suffer from "unreasonably high and erratic pricing" and the U.S. must go after the source of the problem. Presently, antitrust laws exclude OPEC. But, if the "No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act" (NOPEC) becomes law, it will enable the U.S government to take antitrust action against foreign states engaging in anti-competitive conduct with regard to oil and other petroleum products. The bill also gives U.S. federal district courts jurisdiction over such cases.

Ravs

[-MZ-]

Originally posted by Dago
The discussion has moved to the nature of the opinions stated, not who did or didn't say it.
 

I think the discussion should remain about idiots posting falsely attributed conservo-spam.

[Duedel]

Originally posted by Rude
.....remember, as long as you live, you'll still just be a whiney socialist wishing he had the wherewithall to affect change in our country.

Kinda pitiful.

Yep, better as to be a pissed off redneck. Ups sorry your just just tired. Did i scared u too?

[lazs2]

rav..  I believe miko answered you well enough..

As for the rest...  While I would agree that the government should form and keep an army for our protection....It would seem that most of you believe that only the government can build a road and that all the welfare and burocracy of the rest of the government is because well..... we need roads to drive on and.... only burocrats can build roads.

As for MT on race relations... he is of the "get even" "paybacks are a *****" school of thought...  no prejudice or injustice against the white devils is too great because.... well... it is payback and once the whites are punished enough... everyone will get along... he sees no reason on earth that whites would resent special treatment given to a single race over all others.  

Racist  groups everywhere feel that MT has the right idea.    I am sure nazis and AB groups would love for more resentment to continue until there is a meaningful backlash.   The next riot will involve gunfire...  And... white folks are better shots than black folks.

fast food?   emergency food.   you take your chances.

lazs

[miko2d]

ravells: Miko, my friend,
 We are destined to agree to disagree. But know this: not all of the forces which regulate human behaviour can be reduced to an economic theory.

 
 Most disagreements can be cleared by strict definition of terms. That is one of them.

 The so called "economic theory" is just a subset of a more general theory of the operation of the human mined that is called praxeology.
 The economics is a part praxeology that deals specifically with market exchange. Often economics is used as a synonym for praxeology but it is not appropriate in all cases. To strictly differentiate the meanings, the term catallactics was introduced to refer to the theory of exchange and not praxeology in general.

 Economics is based on praxeology and operates based on the previously derived theoremes of praxeology.
 All the forces that regulate human behaviour can be and are reduced to praxeological theory. In fact there is only one force that regulates human behavior and very few basic axioms describing it - the rest is derived through deductive (not indictive) reasoning.

 Once you are done with Hayek, I can advise you a primer book on the above if you are interested or even the full treatise (also available on line for free).

 miko

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by lazs2

As for MT on race relations... he is of the "get even" "paybacks are a *****" school of thought...  no prejudice or injustice against the white devils is too great because.... well... it is payback and once the whites are punished enough... everyone will get along... he sees no reason on earth that whites would resent special treatment given to a single race over all others.  

Racist  groups everywhere feel that MT has the right idea.    I am sure nazis and AB groups would love for more resentment to continue until there is a meaningful backlash.   The next riot will involve gunfire...  And... white folks are better shots than black folks.

fast food?   emergency food.   you take your chances.

lazs

Funny... not true, but funny.

[lazs2]

which part do you not agree with?

lazs

[midnight Target]

As for MT on race relations... he is of the "get even" "paybacks are a *****" school of thought... no prejudice or injustice against the white devils is too great because.... well... it is payback and once the whites are punished enough... everyone will get along... he sees no reason on earth that whites would resent special treatment given to a single race over all others.

That part.

[ravells]

Hi Lasz,

You said:

just curious... what things do you liberals feel are unfair or wrong about the "manifesto"?

It is pretty general but the basics are simply common sense and a reaffermation of human rights.

lazs

You can read my response to this in post No: 518 on this thread. Miko and I were discussing the issue of monopolies which arose out of one small aspect of one of the points to the manifesto. Miko, in fact did not deal with my post on the subject generally, as we were then immersed in the monopoly issue.

I think you once said that I made things 'too complicated' or words to that effect. This manifesto points out all the dangers of looking at matters too simplisticly. And if MT is correct about immigrants getting 'handouts', at least one of the points made is factually incorrect.

Far from being 'common sense' and an 'affirmation of human rights' much of the manifesto is badly argued dogma.

Ravs

[lazs2]

so you feel that all form of discrimination is wrong no matter if it is against whites or blacks?

lazs

[mietla]

Originally posted by midnight Target
That part.

I'm reluctant to join a gangbang, but reading all your previous posts implies that Lazs' observation is right on the money. Maybe a bit too strongly worded, but correct.


You do think that AA is not only justified but that it is necessary.

[Capt. Pork]

Originally posted by -MZ-
I think the discussion should remain about idiots posting falsely attributed conservo-spam.

Pretty thought provoking stuff there, MZ.

So tell me, which character do you play on the show?