<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/3219100</link>
		<description>Comments by AnarchyPrime</description>
<item>
<title>Center for a Stateless Society : Hayek vs Rothbard On Coercion </title>
<link>http://c4ss.org/content/24306#IDComment883709779</link>
<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;quot;An expansive definition of coercion allows libertarians to achieve a greater depth of understanding about the various ways in which people can be coerced.&amp;quot; &lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;     This is circular.           You can find more instances of people doing X, if you expand the definition of X to include more things that people do... Hmmm.. Really??? </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 2 Oct 2014 15:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://c4ss.org/content/24306#IDComment883709779</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Bitcoin Money Myth - Frank Shostak - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://mises.org/daily/6411/The-Bitcoin-Money-Myth#IDComment621457806</link>
<description>&amp;quot;How can I use some Gold my Great Grandfather stashed away 100 years ago and spend it today at today&amp;rsquo;s values when the effort he put into accumulating his gold nowhere matches/resembles the effort today?&amp;quot;  Subjective Theory of Value Demand for a commodity can change </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://mises.org/daily/6411/The-Bitcoin-Money-Myth#IDComment621457806</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Bitcoin Money Myth - Frank Shostak - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://mises.org/daily/6411/The-Bitcoin-Money-Myth#IDComment621456797</link>
<description>&amp;quot;Time and energy are valued by consumers and already priced in existing monies. The value of bitcoins can be traced back to the value of the resources required to mine them. &amp;quot;  I don&amp;#039;t see how that makes sense. That&amp;#039;s like saying you have a currency, with each unit based on a portion of gasoline, but to produce that unit of currency you have to burn that portion of gasoline. The time &amp;amp; energy required to produce a bitcoin are consumed by the production, and thus are no longer available recipients of the bitcoin. The value of a fiat currency is traceable back to the commodity it is/was based on, which in turn has value based on its own usefulness to people, not on the resources it took to produce that commodity.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://mises.org/daily/6411/The-Bitcoin-Money-Myth#IDComment621456797</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Center for a Stateless Society : A (Brief) People&#039;s History of Gun Control</title>
<link>http://c4ss.org/content/16442#IDComment550084385</link>
<description>There should be zero gun control laws. None of them are sensible.  On the topic of home defense, an M-4 or AK-74 would make a better home defense weapon than a shotgun. Shotguns are longer and heavier, making them more cumbersome to wield inside a house. A shotgun has much, much more recoil, making them borderline uncontrollable for people of a smaller frame. The noise from a shotgun is tremendously louder, making it more likely to cause serious hearing damage. Shooting any gun indoors without hearing protection is loud, but shotguns are especially concussive, and it&amp;#039;s easier to fit a suppressor on rifles and handguns. Shotguns also only hold a few rounds and are slow to reload.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:31:33 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://c4ss.org/content/16442#IDComment550084385</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Center for a Stateless Society : A (Brief) People&#039;s History of Gun Control</title>
<link>http://c4ss.org/content/16442#IDComment550079447</link>
<description>I don&amp;#039;t think too many people expected the government would go that far in that situation. Usually the government only does that in foreign countries. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:23:41 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://c4ss.org/content/16442#IDComment550079447</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Center for a Stateless Society : A (Brief) People&#039;s History of Gun Control</title>
<link>http://c4ss.org/content/16442#IDComment550077237</link>
<description>The history of gun control has demonstrated that all gun control exists on a slipper slope to confiscation. And the firearms they&amp;#039;re trying to restrict happen to be the most suitable tools for home defense. For example, an AR-15 with a 30-round mag is, in most cases, going to be superior for home defense compared to a shotgun or handgun.   Measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals don&amp;#039;t work. Statistically, there is no causal effect to be found between violent crime rates and gun control laws.  What of grenades, landmines, anti-tank missiles, etc? Yes, those should be legalized as well. But even small arms in the hands of guerrilla fighters can be sufficient.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:20:07 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://c4ss.org/content/16442#IDComment550077237</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Center for a Stateless Society : Punishment vs. Restitution: A Formulation</title>
<link>http://c4ss.org/content/16044#IDComment543971573</link>
<description>If value is subjective, how can we objectively identify the line between restitution and punishment? How do we determine proportionality?   If someone breaks in and destroys an irreplaceable heirloom in which you place great sentimental value, could you rightfully say that the value you would get from seeing the vandal jailed for a year or given a couple lashes with a whip is proportional to the value they took from you?  Also, you mention the idea of punishment for deterrence to others as being self-defense, but dismiss it. What about punishment for deterrence to the person being punished? Would this not fall within whatever may be necessary to remove them from your sphere of authority (particularly with repeat offenders)? </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2013 17:18:54 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://c4ss.org/content/16044#IDComment543971573</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Skeptic\&#039;s Case - David Evans - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5892/The-Skeptics-Case#IDComment301538816</link>
<description>I don&amp;#039;t think you quite understand the case against econometrics. The inherent flaw with popular econometrics is that economists are attempting to objectively measure events that depend upon subjective valuations. This isn&amp;#039;t the case with climate study. If you have a fire, and you plan to pour gasoline on the fire, knowing the conditions of the fire and the amount of fuel you plan to pour on it, I can predict what the temperature will change to once you dump gasoline on it. I cannot predict if you will pour the gasoline, I can&amp;#039;t predict if you&amp;#039;ll think the additional warmth feels cozy or too hot, but I can accurately predict what will happen to the fire if you pour the gasoline on it. Climatologists aren&amp;#039;t trying to predict what people will do, nor are they trying to objectively measure subjective values.  </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2012 21:19:08 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5892/The-Skeptics-Case#IDComment301538816</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Skeptic\&#039;s Case - David Evans - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5892/The-Skeptics-Case#IDComment301027185</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m skeptical of AGW theory, but I think your assessment of the is off. The problem with economic models is that it is attempting to mathematically predict human behavior. Physics, chemistry, mathematics - these things actually can be applied to the predicting of the climate - it&amp;#039;s a matter of getting the data and science right. So far it doesn&amp;#039;t seem like they have. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:30:09 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5892/The-Skeptics-Case#IDComment301027185</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Skeptic\&#039;s Case - David Evans - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5892/The-Skeptics-Case#IDComment301026356</link>
<description>AGWers warn of the melting of ice that is on land, not ice that&amp;#039;s already floating in the ocean. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:28:22 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5892/The-Skeptics-Case#IDComment301026356</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : Understanding the Costs of Empire - Robert G. Perrin - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5896/Understanding-the-Costs-of-Empire#IDComment296089188</link>
<description>&amp;quot;engaged by Philippine revolutionaries after Spain ceded the Philippines to the US&amp;quot;    As if it were the right of either Spain or the US to do such a thing.    &amp;quot;the sinking without warning of the Lusitania (costing 120 American lives)&amp;quot;    Which is precisely the type of nonsensical excuse a burgeoning empire would use to get involved in a war that would cost 1000x as many American lives.    &amp;quot;The number of US troops in S. Korea as of October 2010 is 28,500, NOT the 40,000 you stated. &amp;quot;    There is a footnote source for the article that lists 28500. Is 28500 that much smaller of a number that it undermines the point of the article, or were you just nipicking over a probable typo?   &amp;quot;And Korea was a UN &amp;quot;Peace Keeping&amp;quot; operation&amp;quot;    Well, if that&amp;#039;s what they called it, then it must be true.     &amp;quot;&amp;quot;the Soviet Union&amp;quot;? We went to war against the USSR? When? &amp;quot;    The article doesn&amp;#039;t say &amp;quot;went to war with.&amp;quot; It says &amp;quot;military personnel in (or engaged with).&amp;quot; There were occasional instances of combat directly between the US and USSR militaries (e.g. the Korean War).    &amp;quot;I come to this blog for economic discussions, not political hit pieces&amp;quot;    They do both here. Get over it. </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2012 01:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5896/Understanding-the-Costs-of-Empire#IDComment296089188</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Price Sentinels - Daniel James Sanchez - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5903/The-Price-Sentinels#IDComment289096627</link>
<description>Because that would be misleading and incomplete. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:10:59 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5903/The-Price-Sentinels#IDComment289096627</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : Defending the Austrian Explanation of the Great Depression From an Internet Attack - Robert P. Murph</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5826/Defending-the-Austrian-Explanation-of-the-Great-Depression-From-an-Internet-Attack#IDComment233149003</link>
<description>&lt;i&gt;...then I think it&amp;#039;s important to point out that monetary inflation doesn&amp;#039;t rise prices across the board equally, it usually finds a sector to cause bubbles in. &lt;/i&gt;  Excellent observation, and this is something that Austrian economists repeatedly do point out.  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:32:11 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5826/Defending-the-Austrian-Explanation-of-the-Great-Depression-From-an-Internet-Attack#IDComment233149003</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : A Priori Theory and the Sound-Money Principle - Thorsten Polleit - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5802/A-Priori-Theory-and-the-SoundMoney-Principle#IDComment223915994</link>
<description>So with enough money, you could create enough propaganda for all of the people less astute than you and convince them of pretty much whatever you want?  </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5802/A-Priori-Theory-and-the-SoundMoney-Principle#IDComment223915994</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : A Priori Theory and the Sound-Money Principle - Thorsten Polleit - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5802/A-Priori-Theory-and-the-SoundMoney-Principle#IDComment223615478</link>
<description>Are you convinced by the propaganda? </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5802/A-Priori-Theory-and-the-SoundMoney-Principle#IDComment223615478</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : Decriminalize the Average Man - Wendy McElroy - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5759#IDComment206536799</link>
<description>It stands to reason that restitution - making the victim whole again - should be of primary importance. Undo the harm and eturn the victim back to the way they were before to the extent possible.   But is there not a valid argument for retributive justice under libertarian theory? Is punishment not a valid  extension of the right to defense? I think Rothbard made an argument along this line, with the qualification that the maximum limit of punishment is proportionality to the crime. If the criminal does not suffer for their crime, even if they were ultimately unsuccessful, what incentive do they have to not attempt it again? A thief who steals $100 and is later made to repay $100 is basically no worse off than they were before. If they were willing to steal before, why would they not be willing to try stealing again? Kinsella has advanced an argument of moral estoppel (others made similar arguments) - that is, the perpetrator has given up their claim to not suffer the crime they committed. If the would-be criminal has reason to fear suffering what they are considering doing to another person, they have a greater incentive to not commit the crime, and this leads to greater security for would-be victims. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:03:05 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5759#IDComment206536799</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Transformation of the American Economy, 1865-1914 - - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/daily/5565/preview#IDComment203451412</link>
<description>Dr. Higgs, You say that you view econometrics, &amp;quot;not as a means of making inferences in testing hypotheses, but simply as descriptive statistics.&amp;quot;  Dr. Rothbard spoke of GPP and PPR as a way of analyzing what happened to the economy during the Great Depression. Yet Austrian economists hold that monetary prices do not measure value, but simply reflect subjective exchange ratio preferences.    I&amp;#039;m sure I&amp;#039;m missing something here. If prices don&amp;#039;t measure value, of what use are the econometrics that depend upon them in describing what has happened in an economy?  Respectfully,  A </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 5 Oct 2011 15:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/daily/5565/preview#IDComment203451412</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : Elizabeth Warren\&#039;s Blank Check - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Daily</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5699/Elizabeth-Warrens-Blank-Check#IDComment202991119</link>
<description>&amp;quot;There is no law preventing a private company from building bridges and charging tolls....but they rarely do it. &amp;quot;  Actually, there are such laws. Look into the history of the Dulles Greenway. It&amp;#039;s a privately built, owned, maintained, and operated toll road. With all the regulation and approvals the company had to go through to get it built, the regulation of the prices they can charge, and numerous threats of having their road confiscated via eminent domain, they said it&amp;#039;s unlikely they would try to build another road in the US ever again.  Ironically, private roads are more prevalent in socialist European countries. Also, the creation of government roads crowds out the creation of private roads. By the early 19th century, when there was less such regulation, there were thousands and thousands of miles of privately built roads in this country.  </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Oct 2011 13:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/preview/5699/Elizabeth-Warrens-Blank-Check#IDComment202991119</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Concept of Subjective Valuation in an Austro-Libertarian Society - Alexander Peterson - Mises Da</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/daily/5625/preview#IDComment196251739</link>
<description>It&amp;#039;s not relevant at all. The morality comes from its advocacy of no coercion.  This hypothetical coercive scenario does not fall within what&amp;#039;s advocated by Austrian economics.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:45:15 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/daily/5625/preview#IDComment196251739</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Ludwig von Mises Institute : The Concept of Subjective Valuation in an Austro-Libertarian Society - Alexander Peterson - Mises Da</title>
<link>http://direct.mises.org/daily/5625/preview#IDComment196251249</link>
<description>One can value nothing if one is dead. I think your analogy might be more meaningful if you compared cutting the wrist against having the entire arm amputated.  Either way, the aggressor is the one making the choices, not the victim. If the would-be victim can&amp;#039;t walk away unharmed, there really isn&amp;#039;t much in the way of choice available to them. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:43:46 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://direct.mises.org/daily/5625/preview#IDComment196251249</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>