I saw someone with a "Jesus saves!" T-shirt. I thought I should make my own shirt on the subject. "Jesus saves, but real gods make offsite backups!"
I liked this post, via Hacker News. Tesla Motors is a new car manufacturing business. Tesla Motors objects to the auto industry bailout, because it's a subsidy for their "too big to fail" competitors, while Tesla Motors is struggling to start a competing business.
Due to State distortion of the market, it isn't viable to start or run a business that isn't "too big to fail".
Mark Cuban has been under investigation by the SEC for insider trading. A CEO was trying to raise money, and called Mark Cuban to pitch the secondary offering. Mark Cuban got mad, because the secondary offering would dilute the shares he already owned. He had "non-public information" but sold anyway. Technically, this makes him guilty of insider trading.
It's probably in Mark Cuban's best interests to settle for a small fine, rather than risk a trial and going to jail. Even if acquitted in a trial, Mark Cuban doesn't recover the time and legal fees.
Mark Cuban pointed out a problem in the way State prosecutors are rated. They're rated based on "successful prosecutions" and not "fairness achieved".
I had another panic attack. They're very educational. Hopefully, this was my last one, but that's what I say every time.
I'm going to try to catch up on answering my comments.
DixieFlatline has left a new comment on your post "Walter Block, a Pro-State Libertarian":
What happened to my comment?
No stomach for criticism?
I'd found a new job and didn't have time to publish all the comments at once. You really should work on your whining.
DixieFlatline has left a new comment on your post "Walter Block, a Pro-State Libertarian":
FSK, you're so far out of line, and out to lunch on this, it's not funny. You should try reading Block's book "Defending the Undefendable" which has more agoristic thought in it than you have on this entire blog.
I only read one bit by Walter Block, which was his lousy criticism of Kevin Carson, via Wikipedia. That was enough.
And then you should check out his videos on the MisesMedia YouTube channel.
Just because you have a Mises channel doesn't mean you aren't a pro-State troll.
Or you can continue to throw a tantrum on your blog and rant that you won't read anything, you won't do any research. Instead, you will make arbitrary judgments based on false premises.
Well you should know to ALWAYS check your premises.
You wouldn't be offended if my writing didn't have an element of truth you're in denial of. Almost *ALL* mainstream "libertarians" or "anarchists" are really pro-State trolls.
If you think my blog sucks, then how pathetic does that make you for reading it?
I read one bit by Walter Block and that was enough. If you can find me a place where he calls for people to boycott the Federal Reserve and income tax, then I'll reconsider.
Until then, he's firmly in the "pro-State troll" category. He has some good bits, but overall he's a troll.
Besides, anybody who works at a University, even if they receive no direct State grants themselves, is a beneficiary of State violence. For example, student loan programs subsidize tuition.
Sell House Fast has left a new comment on your post "Reader Mail #67":
The Times Online has reported a strange phenomenon last week. Apparently many property sellers are starting to ask for far higher prices than normal to sell their house - because buyers are expecting deeper discounts. Here in the UK, pries are already down 14% and are expected to drop by another 10-15% by the end of 2009.
That's just another "trick to compensate for a non-free market". People expect houses to be overpriced by 10%, so sellers raise their price by another 10%.
In a true free market, prices are stable. The housing crunch is entirely due to the Compound Interest Paradox.
Matt has left a new comment on your post "The Incompleteness Theorem":
Hey FSK.
I'm interested in "finitism", which doesn't allow the axiom of infinity. There is a question about whether or not the incompleteness theorem holds for this set of axioms.
That's just plain stupid. You're saying there's a limit to how high you can count?
Let's count: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, end. We've counted everything.
If you don't allow arbitrarily large sets, then the universe is a Deterministic Finite Automata, where everything is decidable.
For instance, does the halting problem exist for Turing machines with finite memory?
That is a DFA and halts or cycles definitively. With only finitely many possible states, you must eventually repeat a state or halt.
Finite memory computers are still useful. They are the basis for "regular expressions", a very useful tool. However, not everything can be modeled by a regular expression. Similarly, if you assume there's a limit to how high you can count, there are some things you can't do.
Technically, my PC is a DFA, because I only have 4GB ram and approximately 1TB hard drive space. In practice, I treat it as a Turing machine, because I can buy additional memory as needed, and most programs I use don't require my full 4GB memory.
I've done plenty with cardinalities of "infinite sets", and I understand how the math works, but at the core I think if you want to talk about a set, then you'd better have a terminating algorithm that yields it. Otherwise, what are you talking about?
My friend told me that he did his masters thesis on infinite-dimensional spaces.. is that useful?
It depends. That sounds like functional analysis rather than Turing Machines, which is a logic or computer science topic.
You have to allow infinite sets, because otherwise you can't model all possible things. If you assert that the universe is finite, then why bother with anything?
I don't believe the universe is a DFA. It's a Turing machine with arbitrarily large state.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Who's the Richest Man in the World?":
Ok here it is HENRY KISSINGER!!!!
People like Henry Kissinger and Karl Rove are pawns just like everyone else you hear publicly mentioned.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Compound Interest Paradox Revisited - Free Mar...":
I do not believe any Austrian theory of economics supports the use of government in money(or any thing for that matter. Murray Rothbard hated government with a passion). That is my only complaint about this article. Otherwise, you do an excellent job explaining a free market banking system
I guess I was slightly confused on that point. Most Austrian Economists don't go all the way and say "Who needs a government at all anyway?"
I thought Austrian Economists say that the State should regulate banking towards what would exist in a free market, which would be practically equivalent to no State regulation of banking.
As long as the State collects taxes, a Gresham's Law effect causes whatever the State accepts as payment in taxes to be overvalued as money.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Walter Block, a Pro-State Libertarian":
I wonder FSK, do you read stuff from the mises institute. I know FOR A FACT that they do not take any government grants. They have been offered money by the government, but they refused because of their own personal philosophy.
I read some bits from Mises, but I've lost interest. Their money comes from somewhere.
Most Libertarians have good intentions. They wouldn't be effective pro-State trolls otherwise. In practice, Libertarians merely distract people from more important issues. As freedomain said, "If you evaluate the Libertarian movement as a for-profit business whose goal is to reduce the size of government, then the Libertarian movement is a disaster. It's pointless to waste additional resources in a business model that's a proven failure." Contrast this with agorism, where you can start small and scale up as you succeed. If you have a working agorist trading group with 10-20 people, you can say "See! Agorism works!"
Personally, Walter Block is not one of the greatest speakers about economics. I saw him in a debate about minimum wage..and his way of words was not convincing. He had good information, he just didn't speak it well enough.
That's sort of my point. If you present a weak criticism of the State, then that can appear to be an endorsement of the State. In this way, anarchists who make a weak criticism of the State are really pro-State trolling.
The only Walter Block piece I read in detail was his lousy criticism of Kevin Carson. That was enough.
If you want me to respect Walter Block as a non-troll, show me where he repeatedly calls for people to boycott the Federal Reserve and income tax. Otherwise, he's part of the problem and not part of the solution.
My attitude is almost like that of President Bush. "Either you're with me, or you're against me!" Unless you're advocating people start working as agorists, you're part of the problem and not part of the solution.
I'm not 100% opposed to voting. I'm just saying it's a nearly complete waste of time. Voting neither aids nor opposes the State. I'm much more offended by people who pay taxes than people who vote, because the profits of taxation are used to hurt other people, including me. If a true libertarian/anarchist candidate were on the ballott and had a plausible chance of winning, I'd probably vote for him.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Concession Speech":
of course I agree. So there is a reason for the stupid ritual...which is to continue the scam.
Given the context of a corrupt system, the ritual makes sense. In a fair system, why should the loser always be required to publicly endorse the winner? Why didn't Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004 spend 4 years complaining about the illegitimacy about the election? The reason is that both Republicans and Democrats are on the same team.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Concession Speech":
If I was in a close election I would get up and say.
Yes I concede that I lost this election by 300 thousand votes out of more than 100 million. By virtue of our system that favors the uneducated who live in large cities over those who work all day long only to see massive ammounts of thier earnings taken away, I have lost. For those of you who supported me I ask that you do not capitulate. The values and principles I ran on are the true values I believe in, the values you believe in. Just becuase the other guy won does not mean that we need to accpet his judgement as the correct judgement. If that were the case you would have voted for him instead. You chose to support me and in doing so proved that this country is greatly divided over the direction it must go in.
This means that we do not know which direction we want to go. That means that our government has failed us by not governing in a clear direction. We have moved to the center in order to attract people who see no direction, and in so doing hold no consequence of action. If you do not know how to make a decision you should hold no right to cancel out those who do.
I am sorry that I failed nearly half the voters in this country. I failed because I wasn't as good as the other guy at making promisies I couldn't keep. See I care more about the promises I can keep. In the honesty of government. That is why I cannot endorse the victory of a candidate whose values are so far from my own and I urge you to reject him as your president. Just as the other side has done before. You have four years to increase your numbers. To make sure that your ideals are upheld. For this is a country where individual ideals should be held higher than the singular ideals of my opponent. For I want to give you back your power over your destiny and I thank you for your support. I only wish I would have done a better job of supporting your ideals, then perhaps I would be standing here in victory.
You'd never be a candidate for a major party, so it's irrelevant. In order to be on a major party's election ticket and be endorsed by the mainstream media, you need to spend years/decades proving you're thoroughly brainwashed as a pro-State troll.
Mike Gogulski has left a new comment on your post "The Concession Speech":
McCain's speech was ridiculous. He sounded far more compelling as a big fat failure than he did as a contender.
I think McCain was set up to lose and Obama set up to win from the very beginning, perhaps as early as mid-2007.
Obama is an excellent "fake change" candidate. If necessary, another big "fake change" candidate can occur in 8-12 years with the first woman President.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "The Concession Speech":
When the government's boot is on your throat,whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence
In the USA, the "left" and "right" are nearly identical. Both parties don't question the income tax, the Federal Reserve, and extensive State regulation of most industries.
I prefer to consider myself "up-libertarian" than "left-libertarian".
fritz has left a new comment on your post "The Compound Interest Paradox":
Ever since I first read this post it was hard for me to wrap my mind around it,,so I read it again,,waited a week,,read it again,,waited a month than read it 3 times,,watched some u tube vids,,than wow,,it became clear,,you know what I really want to do is make a board game,,like monoply ,,where the compound interest paradox can be played out,
one person would be the fed reserve,,one person would be a small banker who barrows from the fed,,the other 2 people would be hard core business peeps like trump and bill gates ,,than with rules like real life,,see who wins,,would you charge me a royalty to make such a game?????
I'm serious here bro,,,,,,,,,,,,,keep on posten,,I like the way you think,,Peace
The Compound Interest Paradox is very hard! It's a key component of the evil enslavement Matrix.
Sound money is a tool for freedom and prosperity. Evil money is a tool for economic enslavement.
I don't claim intellectual property over my ideas. Go ahead and make a game based on my blog if you feel like it. You probably don't need explicit permission from me anyway. Intellectual property is not a valid form of property. Even if you wrote an economic game, I couldn't prove you stole my ideas. In the game industry, it's common for games to copy features. For example, nobody has copyrighted/patented the ability to make a RTS (real-time-strategy) game. Id did not patent the ability to make a FPS (first-person-shooter) game, although they did patent some features of their engine.
I've considered making an economic simulation game. I should buy some webhosting and start my own site. I'm having a hard time getting my parents to approve the $10/month expense for hosting.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "Is Pro Se Defense a Good Idea?":
FSK,,if you go down some day,I will contact my peeps,and we will bring you food and water,a generator and a why Fi system so you can carry on your message....please try your best to continue bringing your prospective to the people...I understand that your understanding of the present situation is reveling,and the basic in tune ment of these present circumstances is right in line with that which is true,,,keep your powder dry,,and remember the cause,,fritz,,peace!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
By the time you're victim of a State raid it's too late. Research what happened in the case of Ed and Elaine Brown. Some of their supporters wound up going to jail for more severe prison terms than they did.
Similarly, once you're in the mental ward, you have to take the damaging drugs. Once you're released, you can stop taking them and manage the withdrawal.
The goal is to avoid being the victim of State violence in the first place.
I intend to attempt practical agorism at some point. If I do that, I will necessarily be violating the State law that says "individuals do not own their own labor". In the present, merely writing about theoretical agorism is not a crime in the USA (yet). By the time the bad guys declare it illegal to even write about agorism, it will be too late for them to stop it.
my last comment,,look up ,apples of gold in pictures of silver,,its a special statement,the one I think you write about everyday,,statements of truth which are strong and expose other understandings,,,,,night,,
That appears to be a quote from the Bible. I consider Christianity to be mostly a slave religion. Christianity's anti-State beliefs are not hyped, and its pro-State beliefs are hyped. "Give Caesar what belongs to Caesar!" and "If you accept abuse now, you will be rewarded after you die!" are entirely pro-State trolling.
One of my favorite Jesus stories is when he kicked the bankers out of the temple. He was killed shortly aftewards. The message is "Don't **** with the bankers!"
My article on the Remnant was popular, although I didn't consider quoting the Bible to be the main point.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Social Security Ponzi Scam":
social security is influenced almost entirely by demographics (as is more economics and business). It is true that it can be taken away at any time. it is true that at present each year that passes put more burden on each tax payer. it is true this has been know about for decades (while researching a similar topic i found a reference to the issues we now face crisply mooted in 1952... nb we knew about asbestos in 1904... old books are a wealth of knowledge for the future).
Sometimes, I wonder if 20th century science is one big fnord, and we'd be better off discarding almost everything. Allegedly, Zero Point Energy technology is based on 19th centruy physics.
however, the prescription of hard assets (gold etc) is unlikely to work for this case as you would like. social security is a product of current labour, storing wealth of that level in asset pools creates huge distortions. its a relative concept. hard assets dont help... as they can be depleted when you least want them to be... whilst this does give you some 'discipline' it also would lead to social collapse from hunger and riots as the sop cheques would end... you cant fight demographics on this scale.All forms of taxation are theft, including those for Social Security and welfare.
if the public knew... they do know. my mother knows. she understands that she has some form of 'right' (but not one she can protect) and the money comes from me as a tax payer. however, she is not feeling too bad for me as she sees lots of big shiny offices and such like, which werent about in her day. fact that i dont own them is a nagging point. the wealth 'delusion' is the key to the problem. power has shifted to capital owners from workers (as global workforce has grown faster than economy, so capital wins), but people feel rich, even though that is a product of debt (as we are now finding out... but we have short memories as we have learnt this lesson many times before).
The problem isn't just protecting current retirees. It's also necessary to make sure that current workers keep contributing towards the ponzi scam.
boomers want the good life. as a group the top section of them control the assets, the bottom section live in horrible poverty and lonely social abandonment. As a group they were taught to vote. They understand the 'scam' but they vote, and they'll be dammed if they're giving it up.I predict complete collapse within 20 years. The rate of looting and pillaging must necessarily increase over time. This makes the economic benefits of agorism too great to ignore.
a fair number of people have read Christopher Buckley's Boomsday - not a bad overview of the problem, and its a fun novel to boot.
in large and complex countries where social cohesion and intergenerational support has collapsed only the smoke and mirrors and tax keep them running... but they wont collapse... why?... because the demographics are still favourable. There is a period of pain comming up, but this is likely to be patched over... just intime to be picked up by the 2Bn teenagers on the planet... yep... the biggest thing you should be worried about in your life times is not boomers... its a global explosion of kids... but not in the West... all that will happen is a power transfer to other countries... and the world moves on. the state will persist as the interests of those it supports and their demographics favour it on balance.
there are other places in the world where this is not so. but for most western countries it is (with the exception of the spill over from Russia/eastern block collapse into western europe etc). now, that is a candidate for state destabilisation - demographics, black markets, little respect for law, fragmented or no national allegiance... and a reason to move westwards.
The problem in 3rd world countries is not too little government. The problem is a government even more corrupt than that in the USA. Such corruption is indirectly and directly encouraged by the USA itself.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Social Security Ponzi Scam":
You didn't even touch on medicare or welfare. Welfare is even a bigger ponzi scheme than Social Security.
Welfare is straight wealth transfer and not a Ponzi scam.
Taxpayers pay nearly the same ammount in regular tax dollars to fund welfare as they do for Social Security.
More money is spent on salaries for State bureaucrats enforcing welfare, than for benefits for participants.
The State has done a very good job stealing money. they have perfected the art of it. So much so that people do not want to protest by not filing a tax return because they will lose the ability to get a tax refund.
The government overtaxes you every year on purpose in order for you to file a return to get a refund for money that never should have been taken in the first place. The only way to ensure that the correct money is taken out of a corporate check is to lie about your witholdings. You actually have to claim 4 dependants as a single person to net a tax refund of zero.
That is the reason you should practice agorism. This way, you generate wealth that is not automatically reported to the State for taxation.
The want and desire to resist taxation is there. The ability to resist is what was taken away. FDR did a very good job at implementing a true dictatorship. He established a central bank that issues its own money and a taxation system that would forever enslave the majority of citizens to the IRS. He even implemented a progressive tax that punishes workers with the promise that they will get paid back in the future if they reach a certain age.FDR did a great job of destroying the free market in the USA. While FDR was president:
FDR was a great dictator. More successful than Stalin and longer lasting. He gave us the USSA and we never looked back.
- The gold standard was defaulted on.
- The welfare State was established.
- Extensive regulation and consolidation of most industries occurred.
- Mandatory withholding of income taxes and automatic reporting of income to the State started.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Social Security Ponzi Scam":
There is a solution:
Start a web-page where young people can sign-up for their resolve to vote only for a candidate that promises a solid plan to make social security voluntary, as it was initially.
Signed would indicate that they promise to vote only on a solid plan, with promised dates of actions, one that which is approved by majority voting on that site.
They also indicate that they will do whatever possible to propagate this idea to others they know.
Once say a million persons sign-up, this will be a chunk of votes no candidate would like to miss, since today elections are close calls.
Of course the candidate can lie. If he does, he will not receive their vote on reelection.
Once made voluntary, majority will opt-out, meaning those who have a long way to pay. This will severely cripple and eventually bankrupt the system. Communism isn't sustainable on a voluntary basis.
You've got to throw your weight around, not just sit quiet. If this is a success, what better story there would be to tell your children, then the one where you refused and made it known.
I've already said that electoral methods of reform are pointless. You're free to try this yourself if you think it's a good idea.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "The Social Security Ponzi Scam":
I never understood why people went for social security in the first place,,If the government took money from me during my working days,Invested it and used it for there own good,than paid me back what I put in with interest later,,almost like forced retirement savings with interest,,that would be fair. but taking from me by force, to pay some old person because they were so unwise to realize to save for their own future just baffles me,,
I guess I just don't understand why people supported the cause at its conception and didn't channel social security towards a get out later what you put in now situation
I'm sure it was all smoke and mirrors at the time,and just another way the powers to be could steel money from all the working minions ............
It was an illusion. All it takes is media hype and corrupt politicians to implement Social Security. Plus, employers pay half the tax, providing the illusion that the tax is half as big as it actually is.
Whenever you say "How did bad law X get passed?", the answer is a corrupt political system. Reform is impossible. It must be completely discarded.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Social Security Ponzi Scam":
As an aside in basic economics... workers get paid the minimum that is required to encourage them to work (set against other issues like job enjoyment etc). This transaction is carried out in money, which both parties know will be taxed at source and them in transit etc. the rate for jobs is set at the level accounting for tax, making the interesting number most of the time the net figure.
The problem is that the rules of the economic system favor employers over workers. In a true free market, this would not be a problem. Workers would always be paid nearly the fair value of their labor. If not, they could easily start their own businesses. In the present, State restrictions of the market make this practically impossible.
Even if you say "FSK, start your own business then!", I'm facing the same State restrictions of the market that prevented someone else with a clue from starting a business and hiring me. I'm focusing on starting agorist-related businesses.
this is not true when taxes are raised, in which case the workers bargin gets worse (until he can get a pay rise or new job).Taxation is theft. Once you understand this basic concept, you see the corruption of the current economic and political system.
It is also true that wages are for the person, and not their family, so in the example above the single person and the one with four kids get the same wage, but on has bigger outgoings. As the latter is a bigger economic contributor (more things to buy, raising workers) its not to much of a leap to give him a small break on the 'at source, today' tax, in deferment to the 'indirect and later' taxes. I havent even thought about the calculation, but i suspect that single guy paying full tax is better off in hard cash net terms than parent guy with four kids and a full exemption.
Tax has many flaws, and creates many distortions, and in some areas is hard to justify at all. however, the issue is complex and ranges beyond tax into wider social issues.
i hate tax.
however, to remove it you need to think how to fix the issues that exist when its gone... they tend to be the mood and temper of people, and thats a hard nut to crack.The only plausible solution I've seen is agorism. I haven't seen any other resistance strategy with a nonzero chance of success.
In Sweeden your tax and earnings are public record - you can just look up your neighbour in a book. They are happier and have a better standard of living than US, UK etc. That of course is not the full picture, but it gives a nice base against which to argue.
Thomas Blair has left a new comment on your post "The Social Security Ponzi Scam":
Anon 6:15p,
Welfare isn't a Ponzi scheme. It's morally wrong, but it's not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme works wherein today's taxpayers pay for today's recipients with the implication that they'll be paid when they age and require old-age pensions, at which point those pensions will be provided by then-current taxpayers. Welfare is a straight wealth redistribution scheme that takes place today and does not depend on changing demographics. Welfare also follows more directly the rich-to-poor distribution than does Social Security, given that SS taxes are capped at ~$104k. With SS, the rich don't get back what they put in, but they get more than the poor in rough proportion with what they paid.
Welfare and SS are both immoral, to be sure, but they aren't mechanically equivalent.
Right. Welfare is straight wealth transfer, while Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.
Also, define "rich". A doctor or lawyer earning $300k-$500k per year may seem like a net loser to taxation, but he benefits greatly from State licensing requirements and restrictions of the market. Most "rich" people are the beneficiary of State restrictions of the market. The value of these State subsidies exceeds the taxes they pay.
Taxes hurt productive small business owners much more than they hurt people whose income derives directly or indirectly from State violence.
Thomas Blair has left a new comment on your post "The Economy of Scale Fallacy":
How can this be proven? It's all conjecture. There are hundreds of thousands of small businesses that aren't large enough to lobby for favors, but manage to survive (and occasionally, thrive) without "grow or die". They follow the stupid regulations and manage to make it work (this is not to say they wouldn't be much wealthier if they didn't have to follow regulations).
It's my intuition. The only way to prove it would be to start an experiment working as an agorist.
A small business owner can be 10x more productive than workers at larger corporations. He can pay a taxation/regulatory burden of 80% and still have a profitable business, and be better off than working at a large corporation.
"There are some successful small businesses" does not justify the handicap that small business owners face. A typical small business owner is usually a workaholic. He has to work long hours to overcome the handicap the economic system places on him.
David Z has left a new comment on your post "The Economy of Scale Fallacy":
I wrote about the fiction of "economies of scale" a few months back... Economies of Scale, the Faustian Bargain.
I probably read that. "Economy of scale" is an important false concept in pro-State troll Keynesian economics.
In a true free market, you'd have many small competing businesses. None would be "too big to fail". In a true free market, the bankruptcy of your competitor doesn't threaten your own business.
The only way to prove "economy of scale as generally understood is false" is to conduct an experiment. There are some industries, such as chip manufacturing and software, where there are legitimate economies of scale and real fixed overheads. These industries have already attracted a large number of intelligent workers, because their efforts are efficiently used there. Even though Intel/Microsoft have a State-endorsed monopoly, if they stop improving their product, then they will lose their market position. Intel could lose market share to AMD or other competitors, and Microsoft could lose market share to Mac or Linux.
As an agorist, I would focus on the low-hanging fruit in low-capital-intensive industries. I'm willing to settle for a 2x-3x productivity boost when I start working as an agorist. It'll grow exponentially, once a critical mass of people are working as agorists.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Economy of Scale Fallacy":
Large corporations are almost always infested with middle-management suckups and other employees who don't really do anything to advance the bottom line.
Right. In my most recent job, there were several middle management types leeching off my productivity, they were getting paid more than me, and I was doing all the real work. They even developed the attitude "FSK is easily replaceable" after I was fraudulently accused of sexual harassment, but I think they were surprised. They were lucky to hire me for the pathetic salary they were offering.
I really should start my own business. I should self-host and put up an adwords widget to see how much income I can get.
So any economies of scale the company might achieve as a result of its size are pissed away by non-productive HR rules, union featherbedding, or cronyism amongst the managers.
There is no true economy of scale, and all these parasites are leeching the productivity of the real workers.
In a true free market, business that rid themselves of parasites would have a huge advantage. In the present, State restriction of the market creates an artificial demand for the "work" performed by parasites.
But their ability to lobby the government for favors protects them from suffering any of the consequences of these inefficiencies.
That's the whole point. The State distorts the market so much that large inefficient corporations become the dominant means of production. A corporation effectively is State ownership of the means of production.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "The Binary Logic Scam":
The next time I get my pay check,I should go down to the police station and file a charge of theft,I could show them how much was stolen from me,and who stole it.I'm sure they could show me the law that says theft is a crime,I'm not sure they could show me the law that justifies tax as not a theft.
I wonder what would happen if I would show up with a straight face,claiming to be the victim of a theft,with proof of my assailant,demanding the police to take action on my behalf.
Most likely I would get on some list somewhere as a trouble maker,the police would laugh,and the (Gestapo or waffen-SS)would kick down my door someday when they got more powerfull..
You'd probably just get laughed out of there, arrested, or involuntarily hospitalized with a "mental illness".
Actually, a lot of people who have tried to expose specific State corruption have been labeled with a mental illness and involuntarily hospitalized. An "insane" person does not get the due process afforded to regular criminals.
Technically, you agreed to tax withholding from your paycheck when you signed your W-4 form. Of course, no corporate employer would pay you if you didn't sign a W-4 form.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Binary Logic Scam":
When a bunch of psychatrists define someone as 'mentally ill' what logic are they using? They could all be wrong, their evidence could be flawed, but a powerful set of beliefs which exist in society (Science is good, Scientists know, all truths proclaimed by scientists are axiomatic and so on), they get to do what they please, lock people up and earn a good living, status and authority.
From my point of view, I consider the opposite of official truth to be proven. I assign a truth value of over 0.9999 to "The 'chemical imbalance' theory of mental illness is nonsense."
Of course, psychiatrists make a good living from their homicide/genocide. They have successfully lobbied the State to legitimize their murder.
Once I realized "The 'chemical imbalance' theory of mental illness is nonsense." and "It's pointless to lobby the State to correct this problem.", then my only conclusion was "The State must be eliminated."
If you're a member of the "psychiatry survivor movement" or you've been a victim of the psychiatry/death industry, then the only solution is to become an agorist and eliminate the State completely. Otherwise, the taxes you pay subsidize the death industry!
fritz has left a new comment on your post "The Binary Logic Scam":
I like this bayesian reasoning technique,,I never knew there was such a thing.Its a balancing act between truth value and uncertainty estimate.Its like a logical way to calculate the gray factor.
In the gray factor there is no black or white.everything is just another shade of gray.you mainly have to figure out if something leans towards that which is true of false,and how much,add your black or white and that's your shade.
Or maybe another way to say it is that the universe we live in is not a world of absolutes,but a configuration of perceptions.
The universe itself is absolute, but our perceptions are limited.
As long as you never assign a truth value of 0.0 or 1.0 to any statement, you can gradually refine your beliefs with new information.
Most people believe "Taxation is not theft!", definitely. They never even considered the possibility. I consider "Taxation is theft!" to have a truth value over 0.9999, which is enough for me to treat it as nearly absolutely true. Since I realized "Taxation is theft!" is nearly true, I have not seen any convincing evidence for "Taxation is not theft!".
fritz has left a new comment on your post "Ford and GM Creative Accounting":
I know that GM and ford love and hate each other.they support each other through competition,are heavily unionized ,and there stocks are publicly traded.
Both companies are American icons.I would bet my bottom dollar that either company has the ability to produce a truly economical,reliable,modern car that the average person could afford.something like "the peoples car" .A car you could fix yourself and would be of high quality..
Now would be the time to do it.It almost seems like they are drugged,blind folded, and fighting with one hand tied behind there back.
The problem is State restriction of the market. It's practically impossible for a handful of people to start a car manufacturing business, due to all the regulations you must pass in order for your car to get approved as legal to drive.
Even though Ford and GM are incredibly inefficient, they are shielded from competition by the State.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "South Park Election News":
i have been reading your blog for about a year but have never posted anything. i was going to ask if you had seen this. it was actually one of the first things i thought while watching the episode. i particularly enjoyed when they referred to themselves as "the world's greatest thieves club". i believe matt stone and trey parker are Big-L Libertarians.
I consider Libertarians to be one of the worst types of pro-State trolls. They distract people from full anarchism/agorism. They hold out the false hope "The current system can somehow be magically reformed by voting!", despite decades/centuries of evidence to the contrary.
South Park is definitely worth watching. It's an excellent documentary. In many episodes, if you replace "Eric Cartman" with "The evil power of the State", then the episode makes a lot more sense.
In the episode where Eric Cartman fakes tourette's syndrome, that made me think I should attempt a standup comedy routine based on my blog. It would be a way to reach a wider audience.
Is life on Earth just an alien reality TV show, as the documentary South Park indicated? Who would you like to nominate for the "Biggest Douche in the Universe!" award? Humans have an impressive winning streak going.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Amero Subterfuge":
Why don't we all just move to a better country that seems to understand the correct role and balance of government. No government is perfect, but there seem to be a lot more intelligent and unobtrusive ones than the US.
Maybe then government will start to realize that providing people with smoke and mirrors is not an acceptable solution.
Thankfully we have the age of readily available unbiased information on our hands, if we are lucky and plan accordingly we may, just may, make it out of this without killing each other.
The problem is that, due to corrupt international treaties, there is no "better country" to move to.
Further, this is my home and I'm not moving. Why should I be forced to move to find freedom? That worked in the 19th century when there was mostly unclaimed land (although Native Americans would disagree). That doesn't work now.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "South Park Election News":
I believe that this election is the beginning of the Global Socialist, or Globalist, endgame. All the pieces are being put into place.
Barack Obama's rise to power needed help from the influential few, the inner circle. His rise parallels the rise of almost every dictator that has taken power. In fact I believe Barack Obama to be a brutal dictator in the making. Every piece is there. He mirrors Stalin in nearly every aspect.
Obama is charismatic and hides his true extremist beliefs behind a guise of moderation. He talks as though he is working for the people when in truth he is really working for the elite globalists who paid for his ascent.
- The dictator manual -
When an economic crisis hits, whether made by true events or artificially generated by a few powerful entities, like the current crisis, the time is ripe for the rise of a dictator.
Step one is to control the media. The media has never been so behind a candidate. They have elevated Obama to mythic status. Even when he does wrong they will not report on it.
Control of the media is 50+ years old. There's nothing new here. In fact, the Internet is somewhat breaking the mainstream media monopoly.
Step two take power. Accomplished last Tuesday. Obama was guaranteed the presidency with the creation of an economic crisis and near universal backing of the media. His agents also had free reign to create hundreds of thousands of free votes out of thin air to make sure he won the electoral college.If you own any State-sanctioned investment, you don't really own it. You don't get full allodial title to any investment, other than physical gold or silver in your possession.
Step three - silence your critics. With the total takeover of the government by social progressives the "Fairness Doctrine" is a virtual lock to pass. The only vocal opposition to Obama in the media will be silenced.
Step four - remove uncirculated wealth. This is normally done through the creation of a new currency. Obama has an easy task because 30 years of progressive politics has already removed much of the uncirculated wealth held by the american public.
Step five - create a private army to enforce your ideals and laws. Obama has already said he is going to do this. He has over 30 million paid off peons who will carry out any wish. He also has the Farakan and the nation of islam to do his bidding.
This is still old news. State police have been essentially a private army for a long time now.
Step six - secure your reign. With the ability to place any justice on the supreme court with almost guaranteed approval, Obama can place justices that will repeal the 22nd amendment allowing Obama to run for as many terms as he can win. With a 30 million strong voting block in his corner that will double over the next ten years, Obama has a lock on the presidency.
------------------------------
Obama will very quickly prove that he is a dictator. There will be nothing we can do to stop him. He is the first step in the globalist endgame.
The next step is outright government control of all business. This is happening now. Nearly all major US corporations can not exist without the government bailout. The Federal Reserve is in effect going to own everything.
You're 70 years too late. This already happened during the first Great Depression. The current economic crisis is as bad as the Great Depression (or worse), if you account for inflation properly.
Next will be the establishment of world bank control. This is being discussed at the next meeting between nations. What will be discussed is the creation of a global currency based on the dollar and a new gold standard. This will in effect dissolve all country borders. The wold bank will be put in charge with local governors/dicators in charge of provinces.
This has already been in place for decades, due to the IMF and WTO.
The proof is the price of gold. Everything should have pointed to gold skyrocketing in value. That has not happened. Why? well because real price fluctuations only happen when the few big players get involved. They are putting their money into paper currency, not hard assets. They are allowing the masses to transfer their paper money into hard assets for a future goal.
The price of gold should start going up again, as there is inflation to bail out the bankers and other insiders. For example, Ford and GM's bailout is coming via deficit spending and inflation.
Soon the creation of a global currency and global reserve will be followed by a massive confiscation of hard assets. Anyone holding gold will be forced to turn it over for new global bills. That is why gold is declining in value and many nations have been dumping their stockpiles of gold. In a few years they will grab it all back and profit immensely in the process.
They already tried that in 1933. There's no reason to confiscate gold again, because there's no official correlation between money and gold anymore. It's effectively illegal to use gold as money or operate a gold warehouse receipt bank.
I'd be much more concerned about a gun confiscation than a gold confiscation. However, a certain number of policemen must always be allowed to have guns, if only to keep everyone else in line.
The final moves are being played. The endgame is now.Yes, this is the endgame. However, the total authoritarian State has *ALREADY* been established decades ago. The end position is the complete collapse of the State, and not the disaster you predict. The disaster scenario you describe has *ALREADY HAPPENED* a long time ago.
Lithium Carbonate Side Effects has left a new comment on your post "Reader Mail #33":
My name is Jason Gorman and I am 45 years old. My wife was taking 1200mg of Lithium Carbonate daily prescribed by the doctor for over two years. During this time no lab work was ever ordered. It built up in her system over a period of time. She was taken to the ER where she almost died. Her pulse was down to 31 and her blood pressure as low as 43 over 17. She under went kidney dialysis continuously for over 30 hours in ICU. She spent a total of 5 days in the hospital. I strongly recommend against taking Lithium. At least have periodic Lab Work done. Also if you do take this medication look up the side effects on the internet.
My wife has experienced some of these side effects-
Dizziness, Vomiting, Diarrhea, Confusion, Tremors, Muscle Weakness, Loss of Bladder Control, Inability to talk
I hope this information will be useful to others,
Jason Gorman
I agree with what you write. I only took lithium for 2 months, and hopefully I wasn't permanently damaged.
My position is clear. The "chemical imbalance" theory of mental illness is complete bull****.
However, dealing with "mental illness" without drugs is very hard. Over time, your body naturally corrects itself from your pro-State brainwashing, but the healing is very traumatic.
Further, once you take damaging drugs, the withdrawal symptoms are those of a new mental illness.
It may be too late to save your wife. You should advise her to stop taking lithium and anti-psychotic and anti-depressant drugs, although she may be too addicted to manage the withdrawal. Your wife's doctors/murderers will object if you try to do this.
Don't bother suing over your wife's murder. The doctors who murdered your wife are protected by sovereign immunity. They followed "generally accepted practices" and the State protects them from liability.
DixieFlatline has left a new comment on your post "Do China's Central Bankers Read My Blog?":
Maybe they have been spying on your abacus. :)Maybe. Theoretically, there could be secret keystroke logging software installed on my PC.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "Do China's Central Bankers Read My Blog?":
I would like to start off by saying I think we are screwed.
I think agorism is a viable solution.
I have this great desire to look for the good,see the best in situations,believe in the idea that everything happens for a reason,and that reason is for the greater good.
Whenever someone starts talking about the "greater good", they're usually pro-State trolling. In a true free market, it's possible to be selfish and help others at the same time.
That's why I like agorism. You're selfish and you help people and you hurt the bad guys at the same time! Greed is only evil when it is combined with the ability to use violence to impose your will on others, directly or indirectly. A hedge fund manager does not directly use violence himself, but he is the beneficiary of the State violence that prevents people from boycotting the Federal Reserve.
But at the same time I have this feeling,deep inside. That there is a tidal wave forming off the coast. One that will crash into us with such furry that no one could be ready for such an event.The collapse is coming, but agorism is a viable strategy for surviving the collapse.
Not a tidal wave of water,but one of suffering and poverty.A severe crisis is a disaster for those who use the State to loot and pillage. It is an opportunity for those with the ability to actually build and create things.
It is said that when America sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold.
America is not healthy,the rest of the world is becoming more Ill by the minute.
we are living in the time of the great change.I would love to be just living on my comfortable couch,but I'm not,But at the same time I wouldn't give my position in history for any other event.
The future is undecided,seems bleak,but men with minds know that we control our own destiny. I know this to be true. If given another place in time,I would chose no other than now. I came here for today and will never back away.I do both. I don't just say "The State sucks!" I'm also pointing out a viable resistance strategy.
After reading my writings you must understand that I am more into philosophy than analysis.
But I would like to praise FSK at this point for leading people towards another understanding.One that uses current facts,with a twist,and possible paradox of understanding.
As a blogger, I'm not going to break a news story faster than anyone else. Instead, I provide analysis not available elsewhere.
just remember that everything you read isn't true.facts can be interpreted in many ways.your truth is your own.And keep to your convictions.
Just like apples of gold in pictures of silver. perception is reality,and perspective will always alter your perception.
Perception is relative, but there is a single absolute version of reality. Determining reality exactly is difficult, but I do the best I can.
Thomas Blair has left a new comment on your post "Ford and GM Creative Accounting":
Fritz,
I doubt we'll see a "people's car" from GM or Ford. They have a vested interest in planned obsolescence - they need us to keep buying their shitty cars to stay in business. It wasn't always this way. One specific piece of equipment I'm familiar with - the double reciprocating compressor - lasts as long as it's properly maintained. The design is such that the double reciprocating action compresses air on the down- and up-strokes, relieving stresses on the moving parts. Not surprisingly, the only double recips you see anymore are ones that were built 50 years ago and have been properly maintained. I wonder how the business climate and manufacturing incentives have changed over the years to encourage this throw-away-and-buy-a-new-one mentality rather than build a solid piece of properly engineered equipment and have it last for years and years.
The profit model for most industries now is "planned obsolescence". Design a car that will only last 5 years, forcing the customer to buy a new one. Due to State restriction of the market, there's no reason to build a quality car. It isn't possible for a handful of workers to get together and start a new car manufacturing business, due to State restrictions of the market.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "Ford and GM Creative Accounting":
Thomas blair,Why should the CEO of a large corporation care about the "average guy"?
Thanks for the feed back.I understand that there are many tech"s competing for the money.there are oil revinues ,standard business practices,and the industry to be considered.
But why the hell isn't anyone thinking of the regular guy who just wants to just buy a car,drive around,and go to work.
Henry ford wanted 2 things,personal power,(To be known as a great business man) and most of all, to give the average man the power to liberate his of her self.
with this day and age,our technology,I wonder why the powers to be can't step back into the past. Do whats good for people,and that would be good for the company. People buy shares of the company, and have a say.
That is wrong. A small individual shareholder has essentially zero say in how a corporation is run. As long as very loose "fiduciary responsibility" requirements are met, insiders may do as they please.
I'm just perplexed as to why no one is acting on our behalf. I almost think those large companies don't exist to help people. that they only exist to help them selves.
Duh! The primary goal of a CEO is to loot and pillage, and not to provide a useful product or service.
They may not be consciously aware of the scam, and believe their own lies. Still, they spend lots of money lobbying the State for favors.
I would rather believe that Gm or Ford would love to help people more than keeping the insiders financed ..That's why they're begging Congress for a bailout. Just so they can keep on building cars nobody wants to buy?
Why don't I qualify for a $1 billion bailout? I'd settle for $5M. I'm available cheap!
I know,,slap your self and wake up..I think I'm begining to understand whats going on........................................................
You really should pay more attention. Most insiders are interested in lining their pockets, and not providing a useful product or service. It is a natural consequence of a corrupt system. The system is so corrupt that can you even blame the people who exploit it for their own personal benefit? They're just following the example set by everyone around them.
I'm going to respond to the comments on "good web hosting" separately. The host I'm considering wasn't mentioned by anyone at all. I was considering lamphost.net as my #1 choice before making that post. I'll have to go through all the suggestions.
The hardest part is getting my parents to approve the $10/month expense. Maybe I should try a Google adwords widget here and see if I can clear $10/month. I might be close. I'm willing to risk $10/month, and put up a Google adwords widget to try and recoup the cost.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "The "Sarah Palin Sucks" Fnord":
Good job fsk!! Seeing through the current affairs that seem to involve us.but really exclude us. I have this idea that we are already slaves in the world.face it,you don't have to control a government to control a country.All you have to do is control the money.And you don't have to control many governments to control the world.All you have to do is control the money.
Control of the monetary system and taxation system goes a long way toward enslaving everyone. That's a famous quote "Let me control the issue of a nation's money, and I care not who makes its laws (because I can control the lawmakers with my monetary power)."
Just like we are all working for and living with money.The large banks will in slave us all.And the big illusion is that we are free.What better way to in slave a people is for them to think they are free.
With the Compound Interest Paradox, everyone is effectively slaves of the bankers.
I hope you are right,and the great might of this propped up government will collapse under its own wight. And in my life time.And a new Agorist society can spring up from the ashes.
I predict that the agorist revolution will start soon, and finish within approximately 20 years. Agorists will be so productive, that their wealth will grow exponentially once they get started. At some point, I should put my freedom where my mouth is, and start working as a practical agorist. For now, "promote agorism" is the most effective use of my time.
It just seems like the people are under a trance.Just like I once was.Unable to think for them selves,and fallowing the prompts of their leaders that they think were appointed by them.
It's very traumatic to break out of your trance. Hopefully, if I explain things to you, that's less traumatic than figuring it out on your own the hard way.
As long as there are creature comforts,food,housing,(maybe some toys).I don't think people will take another tact.
I've also been looking for higher-order comforts, such as a job that isn't a waste of time. As the economic collapse occurs, basic comforts and necessities will be harder and harder to satisfy.
Like you once said.All that is needed to start a revolution is the remnant.A small percentage of people who really understand the deal.Let us hope there is enough of them to move all of us in a new direction..
You only need a handful of people, as few as 5-10, to get an agorist trading group started near where you live.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Is a Gold Short Squeeze Coming?":
As an alternative to GLD, what do you think of the Central Fund of Canada (CEF)?
All State-sanctioned gold investments are worth nothing when the final collapse occurs. At that time, only physical metal in your possession is worth anything.
I consider GLD or CEF or any other State-sanctioned gold investment to be equally risky. In a SHTF scenario, you won't be able to redeem your shares for physical gold. Besides, how do you know that the fund operator isn't secretly lending out their gold for short sales? GLD openly lends out its gold for short selling, which could lead to a disaster if the price of gold sharply rises and there's a default.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Is a Gold Short Squeeze Coming?":
-The reason for PM stocks not going up is this: Calculate the worth of your mine stock after the nationalization of that mine. So, facing collapse, one expects revolutions and nationalizations from a commie government. This isn't a favorable forecast to buy paper ownership!
I didn't mention PM stocks in that post. The problem with a gold mining stock is the same as owning shares of any other corporation. You don't get full allodial title. You can't prevent the CEO from paying himself and his friends a huge salary and bonus/options/equity. You can't prevent the CEO from short selling future production as a hedge, which means the gold mining corporation could be SOL in rapid inflation. The corporation will have already short sold its future production, but its expenses are rising. There could be margin calls against the short hedge if the price of gold rises. Short selling gold as a hedge defeats the purpose of buying a gold mining stock as a proxy for ownership of physical gold.
-December Futures Gold price would be equal to a January futures price, ONLY assuming that real inflation is accounted for. Therefore, within a fraudulent system that is using fiat paper for money, far away price is expected to be higher than a closer one.
Absent deflation in money, which isn't possible under fiat system, backwardation then signals a vanishing trust in the system, as you correctly noticed.
With fiat money, the January future should equal the December future plus one month of interest. Really, it should be one month of inflation, but the central bank credit monopoly keeps real interest rates negative.
In a free market, consider the futures price of silver, quoted in gold. In that case, I would expect the price of silver quoted in gold to be mostly stable over time. There would be fluctuations, but the price should be mostly flat. In the present, most market volatility is actually volatility of the fiat money. The current deflationary recession/depression is entirely due to the Compound Interest Paradox and a contraction of the money supply.
In a free market, consider the future price of gold, quoted in current gold. If the free market interest rate is 4%, then a 1 year gold future that pays out 104 ounces of gold can be bought for 100 ounces of gold now. In a pure gold standard, the gold futures market and the high-credit-rating bond market are the same.
I haven't checked my Google Analytics statistics in awhile, while I was sick. I was mostly sending posts I had previously queued up, because I was too sick/stressed out to write. Now, I'm nearly fully recovered. My readership decreased somew
I found this thread on reddit, in reference to my post on False Opposites. According to Google Analytics, that thread might have been on the front page of reddit for awhile, but I didn't check while the thread was active. There were some interesting bits.
The moderator of the anarchist subforum on reddit says "FSK is not a real anarchist!" The moderator is someone who believes "Property is theft!" There is nothing wrong with private property, because it's a valid way to store the fruit of your labor, provided you don't own more property than you can manage efficiently. In the present, due to property taxes, all property is owned by the State. A more accurate statement than "Property is theft!" is "In the present, almost all property is stolen property! It is practically impossible to determine the proper owner in almost all circumstances. If I were judge in a free market court, I would rule that the current occupants of all property are the legitimate owners." For example, the workers who pick tomatoes are the rightful owners of the tomato field and not the corporation that received a State subsidy of its land purchase. If the land was confiscated from a small farmer during a State-induced boom/bust cycle, then it probably isn't practical to locate and compensate that farmer.
Some other interesting comments were:
"FSK is a left-wing fruitcake!" (due to his statement "Taxation is theft!")
"FSK is a right-wing fruitcake!" (due to his support of a gold standard and sound money)
This illustrates the problem with the left-right distinction. Some pro-freedom positions are classified as "left", and some pro-freedom positions are classified as "right". That's part of the evil fnord designed to hide the true issues.
If you want to insult me properly, call me an "up-wing fruitcake" or "forward-wing fruitcake".
There also was a comment that said "FSK makes some really weird posts. By the Strawman Fallacy, his blog has no useful content." I'm not going to practice self-censorship of my less-mainstream ideas. I expect my readers to use their intelligence and evaluate each idea independently. Even if you don't understand the Compound Interest Paradox, "Inflation is theft!" is sufficient argument against the current monetary system.
That thread also illustrates the problem with sites like Reddit or Digg. There were a few "FSK rocks" comments, but a lot of "FSK sucks" comments. If the overall opinion is determined by a strict majority vote, then minority interests are not served. There's no way to filter out the stupid comments and highlight the few intelligent ones, especially if your personal interests don't match that of the site overall. I plan to fix this flaw when I "roll my own" forum engine. (I really should buy some hosting and start working on that.)
There was also another interesting bit.
FSK is an agorist, not an anarcho-capitalist.Agorist and anarcho-capitalist are the same.
To clarify this, an agorist says "The State has no legitimacy, starting *NOW*! Do this, and the State will be eliminated. If agorists do a good job, the collapse of the State will be smooth." An agorist wants the State to grow so large that it collapses under its own inefficiency. An anarcho-capitalist says "The State sucks, but we really need it right now. Somehow, the State will gradually shrink and then disappear. We have no coherent plan for how this will happen. Perhaps voting will work?" I consider anarcho-capitalism to be a pro-State troll version of anarchy, and agorism to be the "one true" version of anarchism (or at least my favorite). I call myself "agorist" instead of "anarchist", because most people think an anarchist is someone who goes around blowing up buildings or assassinating people.
They also were talking about "Leading Internet anarchist thinkers", with the implication my blog is irrelevant. My readership is growing steadily, so I don't see how I can be charged with irrelevance. (Of course, my readership could grow faster or slower with a different approach than what I'm actually doing.)
I'm thinking that I shouldn't worry too much about posting anonymously anymore, although I still prefer to be called "FSK". Any employer who would discriminate against me based on my blog isn't worth working for. For now, I'm going to continue wasting time in a corporate wage slave job, but I really am looking towards starting my own business.
I should buy some hosting for $10/month and put up a Google adwords widget. I should at least break even.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "More Looting":
its an amusing thought that the bank would front-run its interest rate decisions for personal gain.
Not the bank, but the management and insiders.
its true that standards have been slipping but at the end of the day the BoE staff are pretty dam straight.
Are you 100% certain news of the cut was not leaked ahead of time? It would be an easy huge riskless profit. Not all insiders can resist the temptation. Even if 99/100 of the staff are honest, it only takes one dishonest person to steal a fortune.
In my experience, there's almost always a pathological parasite among the senior management at most large corporations. That should be particularly true for State agencies, that are completely decoupled from doing actual productive work.
however, the surprise cut does benefit banks as institutions, even if no insider knowledge leaked or was acted on. following the actions of the Chancellor as he demanded the banks pass on rate cuts was quite an amusing distraction for a few days (the banks knew they were never going to keep it, and the government knew, or should have done, that it would have to shake them down to get the rate passed on). both sides win here - banks look strong to shareholders, government looks strong standing up to banks.
there are a lot of people who benefit from insider knowledge (the uk FSA has a public paper and formula for it, and admits its a high number from its own data analysis), however, there is much bigger gains to be made with wielding power - look here and you will see more truth than chasing people who try and grab a few pennies for themselves.
Also, you would be amused to read about the UK retail king Philip Green - now theres a man who can borrow money!
That's my point. Insiders can borrow a lot of money cheaply. If an insider says "I need $1B at a 6% interest rate.", that's easy to arrange. If I want to borrow to start a business, that's not an option for me and most individuals. I have to raise venture capital, giving up ownership/control of my business, rely on slow organic growth, or borrow against my house via a mortgage.
The central bank credit monpoly steals the power to raise capital away from individuals and gives it to a handful of insiders. As an individual, you only have a successful small business if you're efficient enough to overcome this huge handicap.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Sunk Costs Fallacy":
You are finding the truth and realizing that it is painful. Poker players that are "pot-committed" continue to raise the stakes when they realize they are holding a losing hand. The Elitists controlling the State have adopted similar attitudes: WE DON'T CARE HOW MUCH WE OWE. WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW IS HOW MUCH MORE CAN WE OWE. Starting over is for revolutionaries who correctly perceive that it isn't working.
For this reason, I predict that the amount of looting and pillaging by the State will increase until the final collapse.
I have concluded that "Scrap the current system and start over!" is the only viable solution.
1 has left a new comment on your post "The "Rule of Law" Scam":
What is a, "victimless" crime in real life?
A "victimless" crime is a crime that does not directly injure someone else, but a handful of people arbitrarily decided to declare that activity a crime. Here are some examples of victimless crimes:
- operating a gold and silver warehouse receipt bank (consider E-Gold and the Liberty Dollar)
- possession and sale of marijuana and other drugs
- prostitution
- gambling without a State license
- income tax evasion
- practicing medicine without a State license
- operating a school or daycare center without a State license
I think the word, 'apparently' should've been used in front 'victimless crimes'...
I do know under present day conditions & laws in the U.S., no such thing exists...
Drug use is a vector for more felony crimes like armed theft...
That is only because those drugs is illegal, but in high demand anyway. If those drugs were legal, then prices would be lower, and addicts would not need to steal. Further, theft *IS* a crime. If the State does a poor job guarding against theft, then isn't that an argument against the State, and not against drugs?
Prostitution is a vector for the further transmission of STDs...
That is only true because prostitution is illegal, and people may not openly compare their STD history.
Gambling is a vector for even more family break ups...
If people are going to do something stupid, they will do so no matter what, whether gambling is legal or illegal.
It seems you are a fan of James Maynard's Why There is no Such Thing as a Victimless Crime...
Personally I too have no problem with the, 'clean room' approach of Maynard...
I too would also like to see a stronger support of the Ninth Amendment...
We as supposedly free citizens in this country do have the government we deserve...
We after all have voted in the clowns that make the laws...
Really? Show me where I voted to ratify the 16th Amendment, and voted to approve the Federal Reserve and income tax?
Your comment is nearly entirely pro-State trolling.
Mike Gogulski has left a new comment on your post "The "Rule of Law" Scam":
Part of the problem with "1"s take on crime is that, taken to its logical limit, it leads to madness.
Studies show 80% of rapists weren't breast-fed. Breastfeeding is now mandatory.
All homicidal maniacs can be shown to have breathed air at one point or another. Therefore, air-breathing is a clear and present danger that ought to invite legislation in order to mitigate its tendency to contribute to crime.
Etc.
Crimes are those actions which actually violate the rights of another person. Not "might, statistically, contribute to a tendency".
I agree that "1" was entirely pro-State trolling.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The "Rule of Law" Scam":
I agree. (referring to the comment by "1")
This commenter above is clearly a pro-state troll.
"Drug use is a vector for more felony crimes like armed theft..."
Really? And the fact that the prohibition made them expensive in the first place, and attracted gangs to the trade make no difference, TROLL?
"Prostitution is a vector for the further transmission of STDs..."
Right! You and your wife are so clean. The professional that would be as squeaky-clean as a dentist if you weren't after what you can't afford,TROLL.
"Gambling is a vector for even more family break ups..."
Who said this?
A government employee? He, who we had hired to clean public toilets now decided to teach US life lessons? It is the people's stupidity, and bad desires, not gambling. I have never spent more than a dollar on gambling. How come it doesn't affect me if gambling is the cause, TROLL?
Crawl back to your hole and read more of your favorite Keynes. Apparently, you can't even tell he was an idiot.
And who did gave you the right to decide what would be good for the rest of us in the first place?
Your own problems are easily resolved if you would stop using drugs, and spending your money on whores and gambling. Instead, pay more attention to your family.
It's nice to see people besides me are able to identify pro-State trolls. I try to be fair and publish all comments except for obvious spam.
It's better to publish stupid comments and ridicule them instead of censoring them. In a "neutral" forum, I would be drowned out by a majority of pro-State trolls. For this reason, I prefer to write in a forum where I have full editorial control.
Zargon has left a new comment on your post "The "Rule of Law" Scam":
"X is a vector for Y" reasoning doesn't cut it. If Y is a real crime, punish or demand restitution for Y, not X. If neither Y nor X are real crimes with non-consenting victims, then it makes even less sense to kidnap people for doing X.
We as supposedly free citizens in this country do have the government we deserve...
This is more interesting than it seemed at first glance. My initial reaction was "speak for yourself", because I don't (willingly) support it or vote for it.
That holds, but I also noticed that this oft-repeated statement or thought is always structured in such a way that the implicit alternative is a better government, if only we were better people. That the problem is with the slaves, rather than with the slavemasters.
I blame the corrupt system and not the slavemasters. Even if you had the magic power of the Death Note (fnord!) and could kill all the current slavemasters, then another group would merely replace them. You need to focus on eliminating the corrupt system, and not the current batch of criminals who exploit it for their own personal benefit. Of course, the current slavemasters will resist the creation of a true free market. If you're a good agorist, you should be able to win over the slavemasters, because playing defense is easier than playing offense. An agorist merely needs to protect his wealth, rather than passively turning over his income via taxes like a typical wage slave.
I agree with the sentiment "I never specifically authorized all the powers the State currently claims. Why should I be forced to pay for them via taxes?" Unless I have the right to withdraw my consent for the State, then I'm a slave. Moving is not a serious option, because nearly all governments have equally bad conditions, due to corrupt international treaties. For starting an agorist free market economy, my current location in the USA is as good as any other.
Mike Gogulski has left a new comment on your post "What's the True Cost of the State?":
Heady thoughts, FSK, but do check your operators. I suspect there's at least one place in your thoughts where a * ought really be replaced with a +, or a ^ with a *.
Either way, we're being fucked quite soundly.
I think I explained it well, but you get what I meant.
As usual, consider an example. Assume the State leeches 50% of the value of society. Every $1 not leeched by the State can be reinvested profitably to increase the size of the economy by $0.10 (10% return).
In the present, the State leeches all surplus capital. (Actually, the economy is shrinking.) So, you have an economy at a flat inflation-adjusted value, or decreasing.
Suppose you there were no State. Suppose the economy is worth $1T right now. Instead of the State leeching $0.5T, that is reinvested to grow the economy by $0.05T. If you apply compounding over a few decades, you'll see society as a whole is *MUCH* better off without the State. Under my assumptions, people would see an rapid exponential increase in their standard of living without the State.
This is the "seen vs. unseen" fallacy. The State leeches so much, that people can't imagine how productive society would be if people were truly free.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "What's the True Cost of the State?":
I agree with FSK, we are taxed 95% of our income or so (although FSK said 50% compounded).
I was being charitable when I said 50%. If you add up all the explicit and hidden costs, you'll see that your true taxation rate is much higher. The total of 95% is more accurate than 50%, but I didn't want to argue that point there, so I used "only" 50%.
If you were to calculate everything, not just income tax, you'd see this is true.
What taxes do you pay?
- The marginal Federal income tax is 40% for a typical middle class worker. I'm including the employer-paid portion of Social Security and Medicare taxes.
- Where I live in NYC, the marginal state income tax is nearly 10% for a typical middle class worker. We're already at 50%.
- Property taxes are another couple percent of your income per year. This tax is partially avoidable, because you don't have to buy the most expensive house/apartment you can afford. This brings the total to 52%. Due to property taxes, nobody has full allodial title to their land.
- State sales taxes are another 5%-10%, whenever you buy something. The average middle class person spends most of his income buying things, so this tax hits them the harders. This brings the total to 60%. (I'm rounding down, to be charitable.)
- There's the tax on gasoline. Even if you don't own a car, the cost of this tax is factored into the goods you buy in stores.
- There's the inflation tax, which steals 10%-20% of your savings each year. Even if you invest in stocks, they don't earn a positive inflation-adjusted return compared to gold. The only way to avoid the inflation tax is to invest in physical gold or silver, and take possession yourself. If you're a net debtor, such as someone who has a mortgage, you may benefit from this. However, if you're a debtor, you risk losing everything due to the Compound Interest Paradox during the next deflationary depression/recession.
- Without State licensing requirements for doctors, medical care would cost $50/month or less. Medical insurance actually costs $400/month or more, due to the State licensing monopoly and regulations. The difference is a tax. This adds another couple percent. Even if your employer pays for your health insurance, this merely comes out of the money available for salaries.
- Most industries are organized as a cartel/monopoly/oligopoly. This means you pay higher prices and receive a lower quality product, compared to a free market.
- Driver's licenses and other State paperwork/fees are a type of tax.
- It's hard for workers to start new businesses, due to State restriction of the market. This means that workers receive lower wages compared to a true free market.
- There's the cost of regulation compliance. Whenever a business must spend money to ensure compliance with a State regulation, the cost is passed on to customers as higher prices.
- Corporations cannot pay taxes, because they are abstract fictional entities. With a State-licensed monopoly/oligopoly, most corporations
(This bit deserves its own separate post.)
This is because amounts that were already taxed, are taxed again and again, for example consider buying a car on after tax income. You pay tax again! Now, service it, and you pay taxes again. Sell it, and you are taxed! Take this money and buy a stock, you are taxed again, even though these are the money that you have been taxed on long ago!
In the US economic system, all economic activity anywhere is subject to taxation. That is one of many reasons why the current system is completely corrupt.
Further, when you buy a stock, all of your return is usually merely compensation for inflation. If inflation over 2 years is 40% and you have a 35% capital gain (a 5% loss after true inflation), then you owe capital gains taxes on the 35% gain.
The explanation is that we really live in socialism, where property and income is illegal, but we are conditioned to think that we live in freedom.
What speaks louder to you, the promise or the actions? What good is there from "technically" owning your own property and income, if you DO NOT own it in reality?
It is a matrix, and we are fools.
I agree that the current economic and political system is one big lie. I think I've nearly completed the first step, which is achieving a higher level of awareness. At some point, I need to make the leap from theoretical freedom to actual practical freedom.
Thomas Blair has left a new comment on your post "What's the True Cost of the State?":
You might like the following:
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2008/10/blog-post.html
In it, he shows the effects of just four taxes (income/payroll, corporate, capital gains, and estate) impose an effective 93% marginal tax on earned income. And that's with static tax rates over 35 years with a very generous estimate of pre-tax corporate rate of return on investment. Of course, the number increases asymptotically, but imagine what kinds of models of wealth destruction you could derive just factoring in inflation! I'd estimate that with variable (always up!) tax rates and even a very modest estimate of inflation (say...10%), the marginal tax rate on the value of a dollar invested today in 35 years could be 97-99%+.
That's worth reading. I did my own calculation above. I estimate that a marginal income tax rate of 90%-95%+ is correct.
When you consider that I predict the State will completely collapse within 20 years, that means that all State-sanctioned investments will be worth nothing 20 years from now, for a complete 100% loss. The only investments that will survive the collapse are metal coins/money, physical possessions, a network of trustworthy trading partners, and perhaps some land. Once the State collapses, property taxes are eliminated and you can now get full allodial title to your land.
He also makes a point not emphasized enough elsewhere. Suppose you are offered a chance to work extra for an extra $10,000. In making your decision, you should consider you marginal tax rate and not your overall average taxation rate. Most people only analyze their average taxation rate, which is usually lower than your marginal rate, due to a progressive income taxation schedule.
Zargon has left a new comment on your post "Reader Mail #69":
100% stealth agorism isn't possible, for the same reason 100% anything isn't. That said, I still think stealth agorism is the way to go. If the state is willing the spend excessive resources, sure, they'll find you. I don't think they're going to spend those resources now. Closer to a TSHTF scenerio, they might, or the might simply continue to go after the easy targets to scare everyone else into line.
I'd think that gains in technology between now and TSHTF will work in favor of the agorists if and when that battle goes down.
I probably wouldn't be considered an "easy target" in a State crackdown on agorists. However, if I attempt blatant-in-public-agorism, then I become a high-value target (like Jack Kevorkian and his assisted suicide advocacy).
Some people will be needed in both roles. High-risk activities, such as free market health care, need to be very stealthy. Some blatant-in-public agorists are needed to raise awareness.
Even if you practice stealth agorism, there is still a risk of a crackdown by the State. This risk can and should be minimized, if you're careful.
Since I'm a good writer and public speaker, I think I'm more suitable to blatant-in-public agorism than stealth agorism. Some people must practice agorism in public to raise awareness.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Reader Mail #69":
Man, you really have time to read/write stuff :-) How much time did it take you to write this article?
I write the "Reader Mail" posts gradually bits at a time, saving drafts in Blogger.
At that time, I was unemployed. I am again unemployed, leaving more time for blogging.
I should to find a way to blog and promote agorism as a for-profit business.
I appreciate you put some efforts to comment my post. Yes, you are right, being reasonable helps you survive and step by step you can understand the negative effect. I did not say stop being reasonable, just not to go too far, because you always feel the pain communicating with the brainwashed people.
Why is it bad to feel pain? Pain is learning. I'm getting better at evaluating who's a pro-State troll and who's openminded. After a decent amount of practice, you can tell quickly.
I try to answer all non-spam comments. If I get too many comments, then I'll have to stop doing this. I'm about 1 month behind answering comments in "Reader Mail" posts.
Imagine you keep advancing in this truth-seeking process that you have undertook and after some time you have all the knowledge "how stuff works" :-) then what will happen ... probably to survive you need to join the bad guys :-)
I'm still planning on working for the bad guys as a corporate wage slave grunt programmer.
After careful analysis, I probably do need to start my own business, and even my own economic and political system, to get fair value for my highly skilled labor. If I start my own legal on-the-books business, I'm still under a huge handicap and my productivity is merely helping the bad guys.
Besides, how do you know that the Supreme Leader of Humanity doesn't actually want an agorist revolution to occur? The people you see in public as leaders are usually evil or clueless, but you don't know who's really pulling the strings.
The truth probably is that the existing political and economical system is the one that fits what is called human nature. Practically nothing has changed for the last 5K years. People are still the same - they love, hate, envy and most of all seek domination. The men with bad instincts are considerable part of any society. Things are only getting worse as technologies advance. Killing millions could be achieved with the click of a PC mouse.
I disagree with "government is a part of human nature". It isn't part of human nature. If necessary, I'll start my own species and let the inferior life forms die out. Regrettably, I am badly outnumbered at present.
The only way to answer "Can you have a stable society without a powerful central government?" is to perform an experiment. The Internet is an example of a stable society without a strong central government. The Internet is organized along mostly anarchistic principles.
I also have thought what would be a possible alternative to the current system, but having a clue about the world history of the last 2K years doesn't make me optimistic. May be if every single new-born is injected with anti-powerin or anti-fearin it can change somehow the future situation, but no one will undertake such a operation.
All you need to do is not pro-State brainwash your children, and help other people break their brainwashing. You can't deduce a "normal" human's mental state in a society where nearly everyone is nearly completely insane.
fritz has left a new comment on your post "Agorist Philosophy Overview":
All I can post today Is an Idea. Reader mail was great,And the ideals of Fsk are great.
At some point, I must put my ideas into practice. Otherwise, I'm a hypocrite. The biggest restraining factor is lack of trading partners, so I'm working on raising awareness. Also, my activities are restricted while living with my parents. They would be the first ones to turn me in to the State for tax evasion!
You shouldn't feel obligated to comment on nearly every post. Maybe you should just start your own blog. Use Blogger or WordPress for hosting. (If I were starting again, I might pick WordPress over Blogger, but Blogger is good. I'm planning to switch to self-hosted WordPress in the next few months.)
But some day if we all want this form of society, we are going to have to act. And act with one accord.If you want to start an agorist trading group, you only need 5-10 part-time trading partners to get started. You can grow from there. I don't know of anyone who has successfully started an agorist trading group. There are people who claim partial success, but refuse to publicly disclose their activity (for the obvious "I'm afraid of the State!" reason).
We have great ideas,A philosophy we can stand by,and tenants to fallow.
All I ask is "how the hell can we get this movement started????"
For this reason, I'm seriously considering blatant-in-public agorism, as a way to raise awareness, attract customers, and as a role model.
Compare agorism with State-sanctioned reform methods, where you need to convince a majority of the merits of your ideas, and even then reform is difficult. With a mainstream media monopoly, it's practically impossible to raise awareness for non-State-sanctioned ideas. For example, the mainstream media will never say "The 'chemical imbalance' theory of mental illness is nonsense."
The remnant can begin the work,and that's us, and the rest will someday assist us and become willing players in the new movement.
Sometimes, I wonder if the psychiatry/death industry is targeting members of the Remnant who start attaining higher levels of awareness.
That's one advantage of agorism. You can focus on helping the smartest 1% of the population, who are the true difference-makers anyway. In most corporations, a minority of people do most of the actual work. If they can work in a situation where others don't leech off them, their productivity will be dramatically raised.
For right now I think it best to get this understanding out there,in the world,like a seed planted.
That's what I'm doing. It's almost as if I'm seeding in a BitTorrent swarm. I benefit from ideas that other have that I've missed. I may have assembled enough bits and pieces of the message to be a full seed.
And when the time to act is certain, Than we will all know what to do. keep the ball rolling,and when we hit critical mass. Than the movement can take its place among the ideas of free people.
An agorist economy won't magically appear all of a sudden. It should be build up gradually. The number of people involved should double every 6-12 months, once things get started.
Similarly, the State won't collapse all at once. Superficially, the power of the State is increasing, because it's leeching a greater percentage of the economy. Actually, the power of the State is decreasing, because the total size of the economy is decreasing.
As an agorist, every other working agorist is helping me. By diverting resources away from the State, your productivity is helping the good guys instead of the bad guys.
Hold tight,when we feel the desire to take affect.There will be nothing to stop us,,,Peace!!!
At this point, I consider an agorist free market revolt to be an inevitability. There are a handful of other people who also believe that, and that the entire process will take only 20 years or less. There are too many factors pointing towards total economic collapse.
Agorism is the only reform method that doesn't involve billions of people dying in the process.
cRavias has left a new comment on your post "Is a Gold Short Squeeze Coming?":
Elsewhere in the news on Nov 20 2008: -
Where are you quoting exactly?
"...While many gold and silver stock investors have had enough and want out at any price, those buying in this selloff are picking up stocks of companies trading at less than ONE! times earnings or cash flow and as little as 30% of the cash companies have in the bank. I don’t know if there has ever been a time in history where a group of stocks has traded so cheaply while their operations have performed so strongly ..."
Owning a gold mining stock is not equivalent to owning physical gold and silver and taking possession. That's a common fallacy that many mining stock investors make.
Many mining companies hedge (short sell) future production, which means they could be screwed over if prices rise rapidly. High inflation in the next few years is practically guaranteed. However, any mining stock CEO who hedged this summer at the market peak is looking like a genius now.
I ask you, gentlemen, what is it that the market knows that we fail to realize? I see only two outcomes, in which the price for gold goes higher and higher but the benefits of owning shares of a gold mine diminish further and further.
Physical gold and shares of a gold mine are not equivalent.
1. Government declares central plan for economy (communism), and nationalizes gold mines so as to stop the windfall profits to greedy capitalists.
This was already done in 1933, when President Roosevelt defaulted on the dollar and declared gold ownership illegal. If you owned a gold mine in the USA and mined gold, your only option was to sell to the government at the "official" price of $35/ounce, although US citizens could not buy at that price. As a result, most gold mines closed until after 1975.
2. US is forced to accept new world reserve currency, which is tied to gold. US is confiscating it's citizens' gold and nationalizes its gold mines in an effort to stave-off revolts (keep imports flowing by any means necessary) and keep it's government rich and alive.
A return to an international gold standard is not realistic. The bad guys love being able to steal via inflation. A switch from the US dollar to Euro is more likely, but that's only a temporary fix, because the Euro is also an unbacked fiat paper, just like the US dollar.
I'm still behind on reader comments. I'm going to try to get to all of them! This is enough for one post. I'm answering them in (approximately) chronological order, and I'm current at early November.
Gmail's anti-spam filter isn't 100% reliable. If you try to contact me and fail, leave a comment, which I will always see when I log into Blogger.
I don't understand the legal wrangling over Illinois' soon-to-be-former governor's impeachment hearing. The details of what offenses are impeachable are not specified in Illinois' constitution. In that case, the legal ruling should be obvious. If enough there are enough "yes" votes to impeach and convict, then it's valid, no matter what the actual evidence. At this point, it's obvious that he's being sacrificed so that the political system can continue to be superficially fair.
The fnord is "Some corrupt politicians who do bad things get caught (the ones who break the rules too flagrantly). Therefore, the entire system is fair and has no defects that need to be corrected."
Most political conflict is merely staged conflict, to give the illusion of meaningful political discourse and conflict.
I'm going on a job interview as a web developer for an adult-themed website. My reaction is "This is a job where I'd be doing something useful!" What is more pornographic, writing financial software, or writing software that actually helps people find what they want?!
3 comments:
Fsk,,Thank you for taking time to respond to the comments I have left on your blog. It means alot to me.
Fritz
test
Fsk, Robert here.
I commented on your blog one year ago and have been following it for maybe two. When I think of specific questions to ask I'll do so in the future. For now, I wanted to make a thoughtful suggestion about your style with the bloggers who post on your site. I know that a lot of them may be either purposely trolling or unknowingly perpetuating troll propaganda. But I've been reading some comments that a few people have left on your site that seemed to be meant well where you were too hard on them. I know you have strong convictions and I understand your style, I'm a lot like that myself, but man sometimes just take it easy a bit. I don't mean "take it easy" on your content or convictions AT ALL, I mean the language you use sometimes in responding to people who may have nothing but honorable intentions in engaging in a dialogue with you. You are most likely going to respond to this very defensively and call me a troll or something and at the very least question my intentions, which is fine, but I really think if you were just a bit more gracious in your style you would be able to better achieve some of the goals you've mentioned that you have set for yourself. You want to put in some ad widgets and maybe generate revenue for the cause of agorism? Great! Want to expand the number of visitors on the site? Great! But this cult of personality, "with me or against me" mentality is not going to get that done. Again, I am not encouraging you to dilute your content or betray your convictions one bit, only to maybe just HELP some people along who may not know all the things you do yet but are not pro-state trolls and want to learn more! Help that person FSK, don’t excoriate them or that will be an honest visitor who could have joined the cause but will never come back because of a lashing they received from you. I can already see that, slowly but surely, the only two types of people who are commenting on your site are either criticizing you or are butt-kissing sycophants. That's like one of the worst pro-state trolls ever, Rush Limbaugh. If you notice, his callers on the radio are either on one extreme or the other like that. Is that what you want? That was not a rhetorical question by the way, I'd really like for you to answer it if nothing else in a response. I'm afraid you'll have some harsh comeback to this, but there's no need for a "comeback" because this comment isn't an attack in the first place, only a suggestion from an admirer of yours, who wants to see your site expand, and has a lot of the same profound goals for humanity that you do. Take care and keep up the good work!
Robert
Post a Comment