Victor-Storm

So let me just understand; you wouldn't accept any argument against what someone percieves as capitalism unless they are giving their work away for free? That wouldn't really change the arguments one way or the other, as far as I can see. I don't think Piketty would ever say that capital should not exist, or that we should not buy or sell things, that's beside the point. Here's something I'm a bit confused about. In what way is a nation a fictitious entity? I mean, I'm from Denmark, and I would certainly say that there is such a thing as Danish culture and history. There are borders, and there is a government. I know that we as anarchist would like there not to be nations, but we can't ignore that they exist as the world stands today. For example, the whole discussion on immigrations, in which FDR members tend to argue against mass immigration, rests on the idea that there are nations with different cultures, and that people from various countries come into other countries and change them. Do you mean that nations don't exist because the borders are man made, and the government is just a word describing a group of people with power, and that the country/nation is nowhere to be found in physical space? Well, in that sense, do families exist? Do companies? Do soccer teams? Or is it because the participation of citizens in a nation is coerced? Then, did slavery exist, or was that just a fictitious entity that it doesn't make sense to talk about? Besides, the point was not about nations, but that we now seem to be living in a world where it is more profitable to own capital than to work and produce it.

Hi! I have been wanting to read the book 'Capital in the 21. Century' by the French economist Thomas Pikkety for a while, and have finally started. The book has been receiving massive attention everywhere and is supposed to challenge the purely 'capitalist' way of thinking about economics, as it shows that wealth inequality has been rising steadily for many years all over the world, and that the rate of return on owning capital is now greater than the economic growth of nations. I haven't read the whole book yet, but I was just wondering if FDR has commented on it anywhere in a video or in here? I remember when I first heard about it, I thought it would only be a matter of time until there would be a video out on the book, but there doesn't seem to be anything. Maybe I have just missed it, but it would be of interest to me to listen to an analysis of it here.

I took a simple test on the home page of Mensa Sweden (https://www.mensa.se/_/bli-medlem/provtest) a while ago, that gave me a score of 126.

Very good points! It's true that we rarely hear about when privat guns save lives.. And of course the moral argument is enough.

I understand that it is not guns themselves that kill, and that you can kill in other ways. But it makes it harder to argue against gun control if there are examples of places where it does work. Even the article you link to concludes, after going through murder rates in Australia, the UK and USA: "So do police carrying guns make for a safer country? No, not according to these figures. Do restrictions on private gun ownership make for a safer country? Yes, it looks pretty conclusive to me." It seems that, even when you account for overall murders as opposed to only gun murders, USA still has a much larger murder rate than Australia, England (and probably any other western country). I find it hard to reject that it could have something to do with the very high gun ownership in USA..

Hi. I saw this article online, which describes that since Australia passed strict gun laws after a mass shooting in 1996, they have had virtually no more tragedies of that sort. The way they present it, the gun regulation has been extremely effective and made mass shootings "a thing of the past". I noticed, that they talk about homicides by firearm, and not murders per se, but I was still wondering if anyone had a good counter argument to this? I like to think that freedom is better than control, morally and practically, so I hope there is a good explanation for this! http://mic.com/articles/123049/19-years-after-passing-strict-gun-control-laws-here-s-what-happened-in-australia?utm_source=policymicFB&utm_medium=main&utm_campaign=social#.pWkbj9PoF

This looks great, I think illustrating the facts like this is an excellent way to communicate them to people!