Search results

or we fight the yellow menace. far more likely.

taiwan was the first to fall my friend. the US lost the ability to defend taiwan by conventional means in 2009.

well who else would it be? a kraut? a mick?

the next government will be something akin to a triumvirate (one australian triumvir, one american, one british) following the chinese annexation of indonesia (circa 2030) discuss

not necessarily. i know that governments create and allocate property rights, as with all rights, and as a consequence we are lawfully bound to respect these rights. whether this is an ethical arrangement escapes me.

the most "compelling argument against taxation" is NOT that they SHOULD have the liberty to do with it what they will. i never said should, and nor did milton friedman. this is positive economics 101: the reason they accumulated the wealth/worked hard in the first place was that they WOULD have...

mind blowing

lentern, the free market is not necessarily about "theoretical rights", unless you say that to mean purely formal-legalistic rights (as opposed to metaphysical like self-sovereignty or some such), so i'm not quite sure what the relevance of an inheritance tax is to a breach of theoretical...

id give her a go

i don't wipe my bum

hypothesis: lentern is an economic illiterate (see post #3) prediction: if he is an economic illiterate, he will avoid actual discussion on aforementioned economics. will eventually drop his line of argument in favour of bad internet forum tactics evidence: lentern claims that economics and...

we don't know if he was involved in fight club because the first rule of fight club is no blacks

sage advice bro

still using weasel words. you might try providing an example. otherwise, i cannot speak for these "fallacies."

weasel words. define "logically watertight" if you mean that they are internally consistent, and their conclusions follow from the premises, then yes, there are plenty of "watertight theories" out there. this is kind of the whole point of any rational research project. somehow, i don't think...

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who: .... (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless: (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or...

no

if you read the magazine it is quite clear that she is a fuck up and has been unfortunate as well. she's obviously just being taken for a ride by her legal counsel

of course there is an agreement between the contracting parties lentern, its a fucking business. and like many private businesses dealing with intangibles and indirect outcomes, the terms of the contract obligate the delivery of a product/program (i.e. both education and extracurricular), not...

this surplus has nothing to do with keynesian economics so this entire thread is absurd and that article is terrible and lentern is an economic illiterate