Topic: Libertarianism and interventionnism (Read 3728 times)

If you are mounted on on the dollar (or on the BTC) and you are well off, you'll hate any interventionism.
If you are born in a shit tier hellhole in an objective dead end, you would miss an state that covered basic needs.
It depends on your point of view.

What is "sometimes", and what is wrong in searching 100% profit ?
What is wrong with wanting to eat all the pie that I backed ?

I am French and libertarian, our government is so bad that it convinced me about the danger of putting too much power into their hands.
I became libertarian, when I finally understood why I did not like neither, green, left, right, middle, and I could finally put a name on what I despise about all of them : Statism and that there is no other alternatives available.

I don't consider any subsidies legitimate, and there is no compromise to be made.
I do not blame the businessman, nor the miserable that profit from it, since, from a libertarian perspective, they are right to act in their own self interest.

But the people who protests to get subsidies and government intervention are the one guilty of putting the gun on my head. They are the real parasites.
In France labor unions can only exist by the subsidies they are granted after a successful strike, in other words they get subsidies to plead for more interventionism. They are the parasite's puppeteer.
And then I must smile when I pay my taxes to finance what I despise ?

The only solution I found is to take more free time so I don't earn too much and don't have to pay too much for the repairs of the holes made in the Titanic.

I am not proud of my country, worse, I am ashamed of it, and won't fight for it.
No need to tell me I can go elsewhere if I'm not happy, I know and I will.

So 90% profit is ok ? How do we count that ? no sense.

It's ok to intervene sometimes, because in such a system humans search 100%profit.

Just a sidenote, not the main topic of this thread, but this:


There is actually a very big benefit from the fact that a company is a separate legal entity. For example, this means that the shareholders of the company aren't personally responsible a loan their company takes. If the company cannot pay back the loan, it will go bankrupt, but the shareholders don't have to personally pay it.

Now, of course some will abuse the system (e.g. take loans which they do not intend to repay). This is a risk the lender takes, and will adjust the interest rate of the loan to reflect this risk.

As long as the majority of people act honorably, the system is beneficial. Why? It allows people to take more risk, so it is easier to start a new company, to try out different ideas. Thus we have more startups and enterpreneurs. A lot of ideas (=companies) fail even if risk-taking is encouraged. You can't often know in advance if an idea is good or not.

When people do criminal things, of course those people need to be personally responsible for that, and not the company. But that is a separate issue.

Thanks, I learnt something.

No idea, would be worth investigating.

This has probably changed around the world now, but I think we got the head start when this was the norm for every movie. I doubt there were movies in the French cinema 30 years undubbed right?

Nope ! And i'm proud to be critical toward my government 

Ranked 35th out of 60 in this year's EF EPI, France’s English proficiency skills are declining, according to data gathered on over 150,000 French adults between 2007 and 2012. France is one of only eight countries whose proficiency scores have dropped by more than two points, although in absolute terms the decline is slight. What makes the situation more remarkable is that most of Europe has either improved or already demonstrates consistently high English proficiency. France currently has the weakest English skills in Europe.

http://www.ef.edu/epi/spotlight/france/

We have subtitles too. For a large amount of movies, you can choose between dubbed (with original voice off, not like in Spain) or subtitled - French subtitles or original language subtitles. I prefer original language subtitles and I agree this is a great experience both for enjoying the movie and for learning the language.

Please stop bashing. I've been in several European countries, I talked with people routinely working in English with non natives. And I can tell you this: we are pretty well positionned when it comes to speak English.

But a Frenchman who doesn't complain is not really a Frenchman "Les Français sont râleurs". Even the American say that we are "judgemental" (always eager to complain).

1.Yes, this is France, the country that created human right (and then they inspired the US constitution amendment), was one of the more libertarian country before WW1, was a great empire and one of the most competitive country of the world for a long time but now people fear so much the future... I'm proud of the history of France but the actual trend is very bad, we go to an Argentina scenario.

There isn't "good language", the good language is the language people want to speak.

2.Netflix story was pretty priceless, netflix don't want to subside French movie so ISP won't include the netflix service and only people who can build an HTPC will use netflix.

1.I know, being a small country with a language that nobody will ever learn if you don't torture him help a lot. And in your country people don't fear the world and want to learn what happen everywhere more than here i think.

2.But in your country this is not forbidden by law, so i still blame my government  

3.Sure, was so happy to learn English (it's not finish yet), but i started late and i would prefer have more serious English class here like in everywhere else in Europe. English is 2 hours a week from 14 to 18 then one hour a week. Here school program are build by a central authority and they apply in every public school. I have hear you have more education freedom than us.

I'm baffled you even ask, this is France. We can be proud of our history and our language, And don't tell me if would not negatively impact the French language. Your question is a loaded question. I don't know the story about Netflix, but this is France, you speak French. Of course you should be encouraged to know a second language (EU policy is three languages per European citizen).

This reminds me of the famous picture of a pupil asking his teacher "why is it bad to kill people?" and the teacher being unable to answer. I am in the same position there.

I agree with this but they still have their own language first and foremost.

Language is symbol, (sumbolon, "what which unites", opposed diabolon what which divides - and now this explains a lot of things about the Devil in the Bible). A nation (different from "a country") is united by something that transcend petty opposition. A language is such a thing.

Mostly, it's an unintentional consequence of being a small country. For example, with such a small market, we couldn't afford to put voice actors on every movie. Instead they were released with subtitles. This proved a great learning experience because you hear the actors and read what they say at the same time.

Getting to interact with a foreign language in a positive and voluntary is how you learn a new language, not by forcing the kids to sit in front of a white board for hours trying to bend grammar. So I wouldn't credit the school system much for this.

This is what really attracts me to anarchism (although I feel that label may be more a burden. The idea that you don't need to bring in violence where it's unwarranted doesn't need a big name like that). You do not need to subscribe to any ideology or ideas other than that you own your own body (and by extension have right over what that body create). To me, it doesn't matter if you want to work in a commune or top-down big corp.

All ideas are free to flourish or fail on their own merits and people will subscribe to what suits them best.

1.Why have a mandatory French version ? Translation cost money, it reduce the amount of movie French can see. So you don't want Netflix or French TV purpose English movies ?

2.I'm an language utilitarianist, i admire what the north Europe country do to teach English very young to their children so they are fine with the modern world.

No. I would find it normal OTOH, that it is mandatory to have a French version and probably also that the French version is prominent.
Now that I think about it, French airports have huge ads in English.

No debate here, you're preaching the choir
Although I must say I also am a proponent of the linguistic relativity (better known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) and a proponent of diversity.

Well, this is actually pretty widespread out of US and not France-specific at all. US citizen Andrew Tannenbaum (Minix, the inspiration for Linux) said this when he announced that he is behind electoral-vote.com: "I live abroad and you don't have a clue how bad a reputation the US in the world." (I could not google the exact quote).

Just found this
http://anarcho-transhumanism.net/what-is-anarcho-transhumanism/

Ah, good! I thought you disagreed with me.

I must have expressed myself badly. I strongly agree with you. My body is mine, not some god or whatever.

1.Do we need to subside art ? Good for the libertarian vs interventionism debate   But you know, art subside are a way politician give billion per year to their friend and often to produce movie nobody watch...

2.I go in an average countryside public school and English class was just fun time... It's not a secret French have a very bad level in English and most children go to public school...

3.You find normal it's forbidden by law ? Like movie ? And the anti-netflix crusade ?

4.This shit should be closed, language is a bottom up process... another libertarian debate  

How do you know that this is the reasons? Subsidized culture is commonplace in many countries.

What you aresaying is that the french art culture produce things that are such in the nature that no one willingly pays for them and they have to be payed for by extracting money elsewhere and be made to please the bureaucrats who hand out the money.

Of course, the same people get very powerful and can influence the popular opinion that this is the "good art".

This of course also has the side effect of driving out competition from the market. If one type of art gets the money, this is where people flock instead of reinventing themselves to compete for the market share.


It's not just the french who suffer from this, let me tell you how bad it is in Sweden