LovePrevails

wow harsh dude she's going to choose an imaginary entity over you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ9vKV28NOs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiE6Uwd-8wA

the defining component of the market is not competition but choice between suppliers of services you could just as well say choosing which friend's house to visit on a friday night is win-lose principle it's just propaganda from the left

Hey I'm also in Edinburgh, if you want to link up facebook me, m name is Antony Sammeroff

this channel has many interviews with parenting experts, including one with tefan: www.youtube.com/theprogressiveparent

you can't talk someone into fancying you while you're trying to do it most of the time you're talking them out of it more often than not

I echo the philosophy - who needs it articlew it's an excellent advert for philosophy

it's aimed at liberals and part of a larger work

Hey I could use some critique of this article I am working on, both as an extract and part of a larger work, if you could help by drawing my attention to areas that could easily be improved or suggest more arguments that should necessarily be covered then please fire away your advice What is the moral basis of democracy? In day to day life democracy is not the basis of anything. I do not want the majority to decide what shirt it is acceptable for me to wear, what food I should eat, what friends I should have or what hobbies I should partake in. I don’t want the majority to decide what job I should choose, and neither does anyone else. Only in a totalitarian dictatorship do we find these personal habits dictated by force and coercion. Yet there are some parameters in our society for which activities are considered socially acceptable in each of these respects nonetheless. The majority does not decide what shirt it is acceptable or me to wear, that much is true, and yet in some places it would be ill advised for me to wear nothing. I can choose what and where I eat, but if I did decide to eat a baby I would likely run into trouble. You can choose your friends, but if you prefer to keeping the company of Nazis you may find yourself rather isolated in other circles. Your hobby is your choice, but if you make kicking people’s dog your my new favourite pastime you will not be a popular person. While the government does not decide my profession, I can only get a job that someone is willing to employ me for, or sell a service that someone else is willing to buy. Thus we have established that social boundaries can be derived from the aggregate of the social interactions within a culture based on consensus, without anyone electing political representatives or taking any votes. However, this is not a case against democracy, but simply an illustration of the fact that our day to day decisions are not subject to democratic whim and yet are sufficiently regulated towards the consideration of others in most cases. Democracy is Two Wolves and a Sheep Voting Over What is for Dinner The case against democracy can be illustrated as such. Supposing a mutual friend of ours rented an apartment together with us, and it was decided that we ought to run the apartment as a democracy. It would be perfectly acceptable under this system of governance that we should vote and our mutual (likely former) friend need clean up the kitchen every night, and even do all of the other household chores. The two of us being in the majority, whatever we should decree necessary for the third party to do would be morally legitimated under the system of democracy. What is more, if our flatmate refused to cooperate with our decrees then we could declare that we live in a democracy, thus she is breaking the law and therefore should be incarcerated. The point is well illustrated by the tasteless joke “9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape.” That is, in fact, democracy in action. There are other problems with democracy though. The first is rational ignorance, which is to say that because everyone only has one vote and one vote does not hold much sway in a nation of many voters it is not rational for every voter to become well informed on the issues they are voting on. We hand over the power to an electorate which had a mandatory education, but no training in logic, critical thinking, politics, state-craft, political philosophy or economics. Most are woefully under-qualified to vote. Each party provides a package deal. That is to say, when we go shopping we can buy a table without buying chairs, the specificity of what you can get depends on demand – few people buy all the components of a refrigerator and it would be more expensive. In democracy you get a choice between few platforms that cover too many issues and are probably too similar on too many of them (some may believe in stricter or less strict sentences for victimless crimes, but none will consider ending prohibition, some may believe in more or less taxation but none will fundamentally challenge the moral validity of taxation as an institution.) When you have certain sectors of society who benefit from government programs (such as you and I did in our hypothetical apartment scenario) they have a great incentive to campaign to keep those benefits. Democracy is bribocracy. The government is for whoever pays for it – and most of who pays for it are rich people who own corporations and can use preferential regulations, corporate welfare, international banking, tax dodges, and other special privileges calculated by shrewd accountants and savvy lawyers which the lay person or small business could never afford. But they are not the only ones. Politicians will offer civil servants lucrative pension in lieu of pay rises, because pay rises would have to be paid immediately from the public purse, and felt instantly by the tax payer who might rebel. If the costs of these special privileges can be passed on to future administrations – it becomes someone else’s problem. Should any politician try to take these special privileges away a scandal would instantly ensue – public strikes would mobilise – people would express outrage, even if these measures were deemed necessary for the health of the economy. Like it or not, these benefits are bribes for votes – if one party’s policy was to remove them the civil servants would certainly vote for a different party. The more you can pass the buck onto future generations in the form of national debt, money printing, or fixing interest rates, the less people will complain of tax increases. Bribocracy in action. Constitutional Government or Checks and Balances Some argue constitutionalism as a solution. Having laws that state that individuals have inalienable rights hitch no other law should be able to circumvent, but when has this worked? The United States is supposedly a constitutional republic, which consistently ignores its constitution. The constitution itself is only a piece of paper and cannot protect anyone from anything, and those who are expected to enforce a constitution will always be those with the least incentive to do so. Either those who are in power are called to regulate themselves (and why should George Bush put himself on trial for warcrimes?) or else any person who would likely benefit from cooperating with those in power would be expected to keep them balanced and in check.

only recently did they start taxing tips in Scotland where I live I lament!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4SZP76-wg

interview by Robbyn Peters Bennett of stopspanking.org

http://youtu.be/-THHTczXBRA?t=10m37s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo9m_zgAY30 made by Powerful Primates

I'm waiting to see if it makes people well or sick

Stefan posted as his facebook status update now so it's official

Justin Beiber has the Beliebers Potterheads for Harry Potter fans Star Trek has the Trekkies Megadeth have their droogs Slipknot called their fans "the maggots" for chrissakes fans of Glee call themselves Gleeks (everyone else calls them C&%ts.) I think freedomain radio fans should have their own awesome nickname I propose Freedomainiacs.

Aristotle believed that women had less teeth then men. the distinction is not just about intrinsic and extrinsic motivation it's about INTERNAL and EXTERNAL motivation So if I need to earn some extra cash I could sure take on some extra hours, and that is an extrinsic motivationI'm not doing it because I love working but it's still an internal motivation that is very much different from my wife saying if you don't work more we won't be able to go on holiday so I'll tell you what, you take on the extra hours and I'll sweeten the deal by giving you the best bj you've ever had in your life ;)

I noticed a lot of people of FDR calls want to improve their social skills and relationships. Here are 10 very reliable tips for improving the quality of your relationships with other people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xItTCWLnRHQ

I like Chomsky but god him spewing some ignorant shit on economics with certainty irritates me https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBQU8aaW90o&list=PL5c3HmsA3vJL-4au1EjcIYC4NaqT5ZIss

Statist: Your facebook posts make it look like you just think government is the only bad thing and everything else is just rainbows and roses, but now that I've spoken to you I see what you advocate is a sophisticated system of check and balances - but why not take that system of checks and balances and call it a left-wing government? Antony: No - I don't want it to be a government because with government there is no opt-out. If I don't like Starbucks I can go to Costa, if I don't like costa I can go to the local place down the road... Statist: Not if Starbucks is the only coffee available. Antony: Well government is the only coffee available amigo.

ah yeah it's really hurtful when friends get their first serious romantic relationship and forget everyone else and they find a lot of trouble when things go awry because htey have no friends left to support them some friends tried to repair this after the fact but I always found the damage had been done we had grown apart in the intervening time and didn't have that much in common any more even if we tried to rekindle the friendship it's just so not me my girlfriend and I both have mutual friends and we also enjoy being with each-others friends I think in relationships people should be like two trees whose branches and roots touch and they give one another shelter from the wind, but also give each other space enough to grow and be individuals

he is definitely a liberal I think he supports the Scandinavian models of Social Democracy like many liberals in academia. I can forgive him for that because he does such important research.