f7ebc20c97
f7ebc20c97 on Hacker News
The only solution is a market for resources. How would you implement a market for resources within a firm, though?
I disagree. It's just another housing bubble. That should be bleeding obvious from looking at the article's FRED chart. Scarcity was not suspended from 2007-2012 when the previous bubble collapsed and brought housing prices down to settle on long-term inflation
as if the previous 10 years never even happened.
Blaming NIMBYism instead of loose debt looking for a safe haven is either a well-funded political agenda or mass hysteria of bloggers getting wound up on each others' articles.
I wonder what it sold for, besides the trinkets mentioned at the end. If they had hodled they could clear maybe a trillion on the open market today (which consists of sovereign states).
Highly enriched U-235 would also be a sound basis for a commodity-backed hard currency, though not quite as good as the US Dollar and the Ruble which are backed by Pu-239.
"At some point in this series of lectures, I will slip in 1 fact that is completely false. Take care!"
So you're saying that people should not be allowed to build log cabins because they don't contribute to your definition of acceptable housing stock? What if someone would
prefer to live in a log cabin than commie block apartment? Is there any human freedom safe from such communistic arguments?
Regulations are not the primary reason for safety in vehicular design. I know you'll never believe that, however, it probably goes counter to your entire world view, so don't bother responding.
Whether you like it or not, there is dollar number on the value of a human life, and liability insurance (and vehicle design and regulation) revolves around it. Safety has diminishing returns and there is a market clearing point. Brush guards are just as dangerous as spikes, for instance, would you like to ban them? Or would you make a government form to apply for an exception if the brush guard is for an approved acceptable use by you for someone who has a license for their proper use off-road by someone with an acceptable economic reason fitting the social and economic calculations for the current five year plan determined by your Ministry of Truth?
I find your views so illogical that I can only conclude that you're trolling.
I'm gonna name my band an 18 TB string of random characters, interspersed with an "idea" that you can't even put into text! Take THAT, Unicode!
Dude, it's a cabin. It's made out of logs. You should at least be able to opt-out. If you're concerned about resale value then you can pursue a NACHI seal of approval.
You should be free to drive a car with friggin spikes on the front, and the insurance industry should be free to charge you accordingly for the liability risk. That's freedom.
Then why can't you build a perfectly fine cabin on your own rural property without government inspectors coming around and micromanaging.
US/Canadian automobiles are also needlessly expensive, there are many awesome vehicles sold in Mexico etc., like the Hilux, and I don't see it as a conspiracy to keep poor people down, but an overabundance of caution from bureaucrats covering their ass and regulatory capture.
It's really hard to argue the libertarian point of view because you're always trying to point out the "unseen costs".
Do they really? You can just build a factory in your back yard and pursue the American Dream? Or do they still effectively have zoning laws?
There is zero technical reason why housing can't be cheap as hell in this day and age. It's all due to government restrictions. And I'm not talking about shanty towns either - that's what you get when legal housing is too expensive to build!
Regulations such as zoning are enormous social experiments.
Experiments should have control groups! Where are the control group cities?
Why do experimental social regulations have to be universal? Would life without them be great? Would it be terrible? I doubt that mankind evolved to require so much micromanagement in all aspects of life.
Dude, 4GB of RAM? Sure, it's fine for the software I write. But what about normal people?
Okay, buddy, we have this thing called the Internet now. It's a magical place where you can be anonymous and say whatever the fuck you want. The cat has left the bag.
All restrictive speech laws do now is push dissidents underground into radicalizing echochambers like 4chan, while at the same time rapidly expanding the scope of "dissident" to include anyone who says anything remotely offensive to anybody. Is that what you want?
The slope is slippery because, given enough time, lawyers are always be able to form a causal effect chain from human action A to undesirable outcome B.
I keep hearing this a lot, but how do "we as a society" have a "conversation" about something, exactly? Twitter?
What if you live in a closed bartering community of abstract economic business entities and everything is a cost basis for something else?
Perhaps there is a way to pay for these things besides taxes? Unthinkable!
I'm a fan of some, but it's a subjective thing, isn't it? Don't you think that maybe perhaps some of the "auction prices" and "appraisals" are a bit more "objective"? Can nobody on this website think outside the box?
Technically everything is a cost, though, right?
Art sales and donations are used for money laundering and tax evasion. That's why the quality of art has no relation to its price anymore.
Modern art streamlined this business (since it can be mass produced quickly) and NFTs streamline this even further.
Society wouldn't function if people weren't willing to bend the rules.
In 20 years desktop users will look back at Windows 11 as "the good old days"
Maybe in 20 years we'll be hacking on this on our desktops while every other user OS is still an heroing for the "grandma's tablet" market.
The "trade-off" system is where nobody has any privacy except for politically-protected criminals.
Real straight shooters with upper management written all over them.
Drug dealers are highly opposed to drug legalization.
If you find one, let me know!