Hunter Biden should be in prison for acting recklessly with a firearm. He violated the NAP. Under the influence of narcotics while having the power to take a life.

#ItsHappening

Another politician getting their ppl out of trouble. This is another chapter in this class war. The political class win all the time, every time. Do not bother entertaining the sex, race, or gender war. They mean nothing as of right now

The idea that an economy needs a central bank is largely false. The early financial secretaries of Hong Kong refused to implement a central bank in Hong Kong since they did not wish for the government to intervene in the economy, in fact it was not until 1993 that Hong Kong established the Hong Kong Monetary Authority.

Long before Ron Paul and the end the Fed movement Hong Kong embraced non interventionist monetary policy and full free markets.

From 1960, when Hong Kong put in policies where it removed the last remanents of bureaucracy, tariffs, and taxes, to 1997 the city had grown 180 times in terms of GDP and 65 times in terms of GDP per capita.

All of this was largely done without a central bank and monetary intervention.

As many of you might have heard, Cuba is currently facing an economic collapse. The leftists as usual are blaming the US, because apparently a single country not trading with Cuba rather than their own flawed economic system i.e. communism, is to blame.

Let's not forget leftists for years extolled Cuba, and admonished free markets. Now that millions of Cubans are fleeing,these leftists are no where to be seen...Bernie Sanders that dirty commie lolol.

Similarly many EU countries are witnessing their economy more or less, stagnate into oblivion and their solution seems to be - not enough taxes and regulation (implicit central planning).

The whole thing is surreal. These people are so envious they rather destroy themselves than see someone well-off and if that means their country turns fascist, so be it.

Hello I'm NotooInteresting ( http://www.youtube.com/@NotooInteresting ), I don't know much at all about the philosophy and thought behind anarcho capitalism and I'm interested in interviewing someone knowledgeable about it and I'd be happy to plug in whatever content and links my interviewee has as well, thank you.

Marriage used to have a libertarian purpose.

Preventing paternity fraud.

If I live thousands of years ago I would get married.

Now it makes it paternity fraud lucrative.

Why would any men make deals where they are responsible for someone else's children? Absurd.

So unfair. My children according to paternity tests,of course I pay for it. Someone else's children? Why would I?

I made this clear before we have children to ensure women don't even try.

But here is the thing.

Most of these absurd terms are not explicitly agreed before marriage

It's hidden deep inside marital laws. And somehow many people absurdly say that you are responsible if you take this absurd deals.

Also there seems to be one marital laws. Like marriag must be monogamous and for life bla bla bla.... Why not several different marriages people can choose from?

Contract mareiage with provision of money in case children show up treated like normal business contract seems fine.

Too many people do not think that being a responsible father means having great genes and money and being a responsible parent starts picking mates with great genes.

Of course, that's eugenic and voters don't like that.

https://x.com/GarbageHuman24/status/1862507871520661607?t=pJ2o5STb4wFt6w5iou41YQ&s=34

The below post envisions a scenario of the End Times and the Antichrist based on historical trends and psychological incentives toward ever-increasing centralization and control. The framework offered is within Jung's conception of the Antichrist as laid out in his Answer to Job.

https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/on-the-end-times-and-the-antichrist

Anarcho capitalism except that the government that provides a military and courts. A constitution that upholds the NAP. All government ran courts will apply the NAP. Than there will be Anarcho Capitalism for everything else.

Is DEI pure free market phenomenon or is it enforced by government.

My understanding is that DEI is racism. And like all racism it will be destroyed by market mechanism.

Discriminate against black or white,against men or women, and another company that hire based on merit will beat the fuck out of them in competition.

The exception is if the company itself Carter to racist consumers. But that's just small issue.

The only way DEI can survive market mechanism is if government get in the way. For example, Biden Commiela administration would sue companies for failing to discriminate against Asians and Whites through their disparate impact doctrines.

Trump didn't I think in his first term and I don't think he will because as billionaire Trump has common sense.

In absence of government infested racism then there is no need to hate DEI so much. The market will take care of it and racists will have their games destroyed like Concords.

Looks like opportunity for Elon (may more descendants be upon him) to get even richer again.

what the fuck is anarcho about capitalism? these to things are contradictory.

anarchists whant to remove higherarky, capitalism is a higherarkical economic systems?

Had an argument about free markets at futurology.

Messages in between were removed and they blocked me.

I'm concerned about society and how less they know about economy.

I actually didn’t think he would go this far but wow. Some more context in case you aren’t aware: https://x.com/shawnryanshow/status/1858955333533921459?s=46

Why do some people choose ethical systems that justify the use of violence? With so many approaches to ethics available, it’s annoying that some align with frameworks where violence is considered an acceptable means to achieve certain goals. Is it because they view violence as the only effective way to bring about change or because history shows it works? Perhaps they see their cause as so morally urgent that it justifies the harm caused. Could it also stem from a sense of survival or the need to protect their group at any cost?

At the same time, violence often creates more problems than it solves, leading to long-term instability and harm. Why, then, do people continue to embrace systems that condone it? Is it due to a lack of viable alternatives, or do they believe the ends outweigh the consequences? What drives some individuals to accept violence as a solution, while others prioritize non-violent methods? I’m curious to hear your perspectives.