How to Shave Pubic Hair Without Irritating
Đăng ký:
Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)
-------------------------------------------
DIY Portanotas | Bluca - Duration: 2:14.
For more infomation >> DIY Portanotas | Bluca - Duration: 2:14. -------------------------------------------
Bangla Khobor 21 Octobor 2017 Today Bangla Breaking News Bangladesh latest news BD News All Bangla - Duration: 19:25.
Bangla Khobor 21 Octobor 2017 Today Bangla Breaking News Bangladesh latest news BD News All Bangla.
-------------------------------------------
Gorgeous new from Taylor - Duration: 2:11.
HEY TRIPPSTERS gorgeous it is the new song that we have gotten to hear by
Taylor Swift now to the best I have found the song was actually played
Thursday and it was released to buy everywhere yesterday ok so you can buy
any place you can buy digital downloads you know Amazon or wherever anyway yes
you can buy this song now this is a promotional single it's not an official
single it is a promotional single it is the second official promo single from
Taylor's new album and it's the third song we've gotten to hear from the new
album which comes out November 14th ok so I like it
ok I have locked all three so far I think this is a great direction that
Taylor has taken I love her music I have all the way back to Tim McGraw okay the
very first song and I think she gets better with every album and this woman's
talent just blows me away she never ceases to amaze me I'm a huge
Taylor fan and I have been from the get-go
but if you haven't heard the new song it's called gorgeous and remember guys
it's a promo single not an official single I will link to her lyric video in
the description below in case you haven't gotten to hear it there is no
official video but there is a lyric video yes put up by Taylor herself so I
will link to that in the description below in case you haven't got to hear it
then you can hear it and if you like it and you want to buy it I will also link
to the place where you can buy the song in case you're interested and you want
it but I just wanted to keep you guys up to date on what's going on with Taylor
and right now that is the latest news which is you know gorgeous the promo
single they new promo single from Taylor Swift you can't hear it and yes you can
buy it if you so choose so the links that you will need are in
the description below I hope you guys enjoy the song as much as I did but that
is going to do it for now this is ICEPETS Queen and I am
tripping out
-------------------------------------------
Kailh Box Red Mechanical Keyboard Build : 60% B.face with Acrylic Case - Duration: 14:25.
Today we're back with another custom mechanical keyboard build for someone, and we're going
with another 60% build, because of its accessibility and modularity.
And here are the parts for today's build.
Since my other B.face build, it's no surprise that some people wanted to have something
similar.
But just so you know, I do have a bunch of different builds coming soon.
So we're again using the B.face R 60% PCB.
However this time to save on some money, we got the resistors and diodes separate, because
it is a pricey item.
Also from the Winkeyless store we have their BBB acrylic case, and this my first time working
with this.
This build is also pretty exciting for me, because we're using the Kailh Box Red keyswitches,
which I'll go more in depth about later.
For the keycaps to match with the acrylic case, we have these blank frost ABS caps.
And then we have the genuine Cherry stabilisers, and some white LEDs to finish it off.
Alright so let's just get straight into the build.
Here's the case, and this is also what the keyswitches will be mounted to, rather than
a more traditional metal plate.
And this is what we call a sandwich case, as these 4 main acrylic pieces stack up to
create
the enclosure.
To start off we have the top 2 plates which will hold the keyswitches in place.
So I'm just gonna put in a few keyswitches to line everything up, and then put the PCB
in.
What makes this slightly difficult is that the Kailh Box keyswitches are plate mount
switches, meaning that they don't have the little prongs that go into the PCB to align,
and hold them in place.
So to hold it in place we just solder in these few keyswitches in each corner.
I'm only going to solder in 1 pin on each to save time desoldering it later.
Normally you wouldn't need to desolder, but for these specific keyswitches we have
to, for the LEDs to fit.
The Kailh Box Red switches are designed to be used with SMD LEDs.
This is because it has a closed design, where there's no holes for a through hole LED
to pop through.
As we can see the top is closed off, and the bottom has a hole to let liquids seep through.
If we open up the switch we can see that the metal contacts are also enclosed in their
own compartment, and are activated by this small green bit which is pushed by the slider.
So if there is a spill, the metal contacts won't be affected.
Another thing to note is that the springs are narrower than standard MX switch springs,
so you can't as easily change them out.
The stems have the same Cherry style cross, but also the surrounding plastic.
So yes, these will fit the standard MX keycaps you find everywhere.
This closed top with the open bottom design by Kailh is intended to keep dust out, as
well as moisture which they say can cause corrosion, and they have been given an IP56
protection rating.
Because of this, we have to put the LED in first, and then put the keyswitch over it.
The other thing is that the gap in the switch isn't that big.
So a typical 3mm round LED will hardly go up through the hole, so I'm using these
rectangular 2x3x4 LEDs.
And these go up quite far because of it's shape.
Before soldering in the LEDs, I also have to put in the keyswitches and then solder
them in place, so that I know how far the LEDs need to go through the PCB.
And this is not a soldering tutorial, I want avoid explaining this every time I do a build,
so I'll link some good tutorials in the description below.
Once the keyswitches are soldered in place, I can push the LEDs all the way through, and
then solder those in.
With the LEDs you just have to look at the polarity for the orientation.
The longer pin will be the positive, with the shorter the negative.
And the PCB will have it labelled on there.
One of the mistakes I made when ordering this stuff, is that I got the plates which have
these big holes for the stabilised keys.
As said before, these Kailh Box switches don't have the prongs to line them up, so they can
swivel around.
So I'm gonna go to the stabilisers first and sort it out after.
Here I have genuine Cherry stabilisers.
And they're nice and easy to put together, but first I'll lube them.
I'm using Super Lube which is easy to buy, but you can also use Dieletric grease.
I like to apply it with a brush, but you can use whatever.
Some people use something like a toothpick.
And you just want to put it on the moving contact points.
You can put less, you can put more.
I do like to put quite a bit to ensure no rattle and get a bit of a softer feel, but
dust can be a problem.
If you have fake stabs, lube is absolutely necessary.
Rattly keys are just the worst, especially a rattly spacebar.
It honestly makes such a huge difference in the typing experience and usability of the
keyboard.
And this is where my mistake was actually quite fortunate.
Normally you would put the stabilisers in right at the start, because the mounting plate
goes on top of it.
And if the stabilisers pop out by accident, then you would have to desolder the switches
to get access to them.
With this, they can be taken out and put back in at anytime.
I also did the toothpick mod for the stabs to ensure they don't come out, which can
happen with these clip in stabs and tight keycaps.
And then I just tried my best to line things up and then soldered in the rest of the switches.
Now to the boring and tedious diodes and resistors.
We need the diodes for the keys, and the resistors for the LEDs.
And these are both SMD components, but you can also use through hole diodes which are
much easier to solder if you're just using a regular soldering iron.
It's mainly difficult because of how small they are.
But basically I just put solder on one pad, reflow it and put the component in place.
And then solder in the other side.
For the resistors the orientation doesn't matter.
But for the diodes, it's just like the LEDs.
On the PCB it'll show the flow of the current with this symbol, and then you just line up
the cathode pin accordingly.
All that brownish residue is just the flux, and can be later cleaned with isopropyl alcohol.
And here's the soldering all done.
For most PCBs you won't need to solder the diodes and resistors, so it doesn't really
take long.
But now to put the rest of the case together.
First we'll do the foot which angles the board.
This as well can be had in various colours, and it comes in 4 pieces.
On the end of each piece there's a hole denoting the order in which it stacks.
There's 3 spaces for some threads to go into which will allow us to secure it to the
base.
And the whole thing comes together with these hex screws and matching threads, and they're
also all the same size to make it easy.
And to finish it off, it comes with some 3M feet to stop it from sliding.
And here it is all done.
With all the lighting off, it's quite a unique look.
We have this completely frosted white look.
The keycaps are quite similar to the case, but not as textured.
And they're not that thin at actually about 1.2mm, so that's not bad for super cheap
keycaps.
Also yes these are blanks.
I personally can type without looking at my keyboard, so it's no problem for me, but
of course it will be difficult for others.
The one thing about the Kailh Box switches is that the red colour goes through the keycap
quite a bit because of how big the stem is.
So it's like the keyboard has a bit of a red tint to it.
The case itself is very slim at just over 12mm.
The long foot adds that bit of angle to the case, but also acts as structural support
for the whole keyboard, because it does flex a bit which is understandable.
It is pretty light at about 580 grams, but that's not bad at all.
I was expecting it to be lighter, but it's not far off other 60% boards.
There's a heap of options for different colours for the different layers of acrylic
but we've kept it simple.
And there's also black screws available, but we went with these ones.
And it's a very DIY type of look with the layers and the exposed screws.
It's not for everyone, I personally really like it.
Turning the lights on and we have this.
For the key lighting we just have the white LEDs.
But because of how the switch is constructed, the lighting also has quite a bit of a boxy
look with the top bit of the keycap illuminated.
But of course on the longer keys, we just have the central illumination.
And then we have the RGB underglow.
Because the whole thing is made from acrylic, including the mounting plate, the whole thing
lights up.
And it's a pretty nice and unique effect.
Since it isn't a uniform piece, it is broken up a bit, and the light doesn't really spread
to the sides as much.
The lighting can be customised though in the boot mapper client.
For the top key lighting, we can adjust the brightness and there's a few effects.
And for the bottom underglow we can change the colours to whatever since it is RGB.
And there are also a bunch of effects that you can do.
One of the cool things in my opinion is that the foot that angles the keyboard also lights
up really really nicely.
And of course the typing experience.
I had such a great time with this keyboard, and I got quite attached to it.
The complete acrylic construction does impact on how it feels.
It kind of softens the feel, where metal plates can have a kind of sharp and harsh bottoming
out.
With this it's not so harsh, and in turn makes it slightly quieter.
From this limited experience, I would say the switches are quite smooth, and are at
about Gateron level.
It's hard to say for me, since this is based purely on feel, and some switches are buttery
smooth,with some not so much.
Perhaps they're smoother than Gateron, but I can't say for sure.
So all up it was a fun build, and is the first sandwich build on the channel, so that was
good.
The typing experience is something I really like, with the Kailh Box Red keyswitches offering
a nice alternative for builders.
The look is different to anything I've had on the channel so far.
We've gone full frost to create this ghostly look, with this very DIY look.
I've done the other underglow build before, but this is a different angle to that approach.
I'm actually quite sad I have to send this away, because I got quite attached to using
it on my desktop.
I'll put links in the description for the stuff, and I'll have more Kailh switch builds
coming up soon.
-------------------------------------------
Los errores del liberalismo clásico | Hans-Hermann Hoppe - Duration: 1:01:07.
On behalf of the organizing committee, I would like to welcome you to the opening
of the Australian Mises Seminar.
We are at a critical juncture in Australian history.
The state is receiving overwhelming intellectual and popular support.
for greater intervention in the economy and our private lives
Yes!
A shame!
Politically we have the unhappy choice between the evil party and the stupid party.
And now the Greens have added another dimension, the "evil stupidity" in Australian politics
but like many of you, I do not see the State
as the great protector of our economic and civil liberties,
but rather its main enemy.
This incredible momentum of state intervention must stop
but not with bullets, bombs or blood, this battle must be fought and won in the field of ideas.
To quote one of my favorite movies a classic of all time Ben Hur.
How do you fight an idea? The answer is with another idea.
This is the foundation on which the Seminary of Mises was conceived.
Our goal is to strengthen the intellectual movement of the Austrian School of Economics
to pose a clear and present danger to the imperfect rhetoric of the free market of the mainstream.
The Austrian school has represented more than a century as a beacon of good economic analysis.
and theoretical insights second to none but what
fundamentally sets apart the Austrian school from the mainstream schools of
economic thought is the consistent focus upon individual human action as the
driving force behind economic activity.
Especially using praxeology as a one of our key epistemologies.
Now professor Ludwig von Mises is the most notable figurehead
for the Austrian school laying the foundations of monetary and business cycle theory
which has consistently been used by the Austrian school.
To foresee every major economic crisis in the past 100 years now Mises
also developed a theoretical basis of the impossibility of socialism due to
the failure of economic calculation by the state which was fulfilled in
collapse of the Soviet Union and finally Mises delineated the epistemological
framework of economic analysis rooted in human action in his magnum opus human
action these are just a few of his ingenious contributions it is with great
respect to these contributions that the Mises seminar bears his name
now the legacy of his followers such as Friedrich Hayek who won the Nobel Prize
in Economics before it was defiled by the likes of Paul Krugman so as
followers Israel cosna and especially Murray Rothbard lives on today within
institutions like the Mises Institute in Auburn Alabama the freedom of property
society founded by honored guest tonight speaker professor hansom and hopper and
also in the presidential campaign of Republican congressman Ron Paul
[Applause] the Australian Mises seminar aims to be
the genesis of an Austrian revival in this country and also in the
asia-pacific region now Austrian economics is a value-free
school of economic thought that accurately informs us of the destructive
consequences of government intervention into the economy as libertarians err we
seek to minimize or abolish state intervention into our economic and
private lives there was no greater defender of private property economic
freedom and civil liberties the Murray Rothbard and we honor his immense
intellectual contribution in this seminar so we aim in this Mises seminar
to educate an advanced libertarian political philosophy to create a vision
of a peaceful and prosperous society free of state and
vention and i would like to invite neville Kennard has largely made this
conference possible to introduced our most honored guest speaker a colleague
of answers Stephan Stephan Kinsella dr. stephan kinsella - I've met after the
PFS at in Turkey has recently he's written a little book and done it does a
course called read hoppy and nothing is the same I can vouch for that because
I've been down the road the DNI's ian Rothbard II and I'd read all those
things when I read hoppy something clicked that hadn't quite clicked before
radical extreme all of those things but there's something very special in his
viewpoints and the presentation of those viewpoints
if pub might need a few exposures a few listenings of here readings to sort of
gather at all I would urge you we've got to we've got this terrific opportunity
with hands giving a talk now right and and then another second talk tonight and
then tomorrow he's going to give two talks I mean where we're getting value
for our their money here and but I would urge you to he'd take in and pursue a
bit further lady I don't professor Hanson a hobby
I would like to thank Neville Kennard
first of all for having sponsored my trip.
I also want to thank Benjamin Marx who was the main spirit behind
organizing this this conference I thank you all for showing up for this event
is never Kennard indicated I want to break up my speech in into two parts
have a little break in between, the first one is so to speak more critical
and then people always expect to do something constructive
so I hope to say something constructive about what is the alternative to the State
but first I want to, the first part of this speech I want to deal with what States what States are.
And even before that I want to explain what I consider to be
the problem of social order and begin with very elementary considerations
imagine Robinson Crusoe alone on his Island.
He of course can do whatever he pleases because for him the question concerning rules of orderly human conduct
simply does not arise,
this question can obviously only arise if a second person
Friday, appears on the scene
Yet even if we have two people
Crusoe and Friday the question of what are the rules of human conduct
would remain largely irrelevant as long as there is no scarcity.
Imagine for instance that we inhabit the Garden of Eden
Where all external goods exists in in super abundance,
there is no scarcity of them whatever we want we can have.
These Goods are so to speak free goods
just as the air that we breathe in and out, this is a free good.
Whatever Crusoe does with these goods his actions have absolutely no repercussions
on Friday what Friday can do and the actions of Friday have no repercussions
on the actions of Robinson Crusoe because everything exists in super abundance.
Because of this it is to a large extent impossible that a conflict
regarding the use of different goods could arise between Friday and Crusoe.
Because for a conflict to be possible it is necessary that a good is scarce that
there are not enough goods around.
And only if there is scarcity do there exist a need
to formulate rules of orderly human conduct only because of conflicts do we need rules.
Now, but even in the Garden of Eden some conflicts are still possible
because some goods are scarce even in the Garden of Eden .
They exist to scarce goods in the Garden of Eden.
One is the physical body of a person.
We have each of us has only one we do not have an unlimited supply of physical bodies.
And secondly of course the standing room
where my body rests so even in the Garden of Eden is as possible that
Robinson Crusoe wants to do something to Friday to Friday's body
or Friday wants to do something to Robinson Crusoe's body I do not have to describe
what the possibilities are and in this regard but it should be pretty clear
that the possibility exists and obviously they cannot both occupy the same space.
If I want to stand on one place and other person has to be no room to put his feet down
at the exactly the same place.
So accordingly even in the Garden of Eden we would need rules that make peaceful cooperation between
Robinson Crusoe and Friday possible, and these rules would be rules
laying down who has exclusive control over these scarce goods,
over those things over which conflicts can possibly arise.
And in the real world of course which is characterized by all-around scarcity, not just bodies and standing room is scacrse
almost everything is scarce we need rules allowing us to avoid otherwise unavoidable conflicts
that determine who has exclusive control over what, and who has not exclusive control over what.
Now if we go into the history of social and political thought
they have been many proposals made
and offered as solutions to this problem of social order .
And again this problem of social order is the problem:
How do we make peaceful relations, peaceful cooperation with human humans possible,
given the scarcity of objects and the possibility of conflicts over scarce objects
and the fact that many proposals have been made has led
many people to believe that there exists no single correct solution to this problem of social order
but in fact there does exist a correct solution to this
and I have not invented the solution, the solution has been discovered
hundreds actually thousands of years before it has been reformulated, refined and so forth.
But as soon as I will explain it you will recognize that
it is a very simple solution.
The solution is basically the idea of private property, now let me explain.
First a solution apply to the Garden of Eden where the scarcity exists only
with regard to scarcity of physical bodies and standing room,
what rules would people most likely accept as fair and just rules it or to avoid conflict in the Garden of Eden
and then following that I'll explain the rules that apply in the real world was all around scarcity.
Now in the Garden of Eden the solution is simply provided by a rule that says everybody
may place or move his own body wherever he pleases
provided only that no one else is already standing there and occupying the same space
Everybody is the exclusive owner of its own body, can do with his own body whatever he wants.
If somebody else wants to do something to my body then he needs my permission and
If I want to do something to somebody else's body then I need his permission.
I don't want to go into great detail if you see the
alternatives that you could think of would immediately lead to conflicts and
again recall the purpose of rules is to avoid conflicts regarding scarce resources
rules that do not avoid conflicts are not norms or rules they are perversions
the purpose of rules is to avoid conflict not to create it.
Now outside of the Garden of Eden that is in the realm of all-around scarcity
the solution is provided by four logically interrelated rules.
The first rule is, as I already said that would also hold in the Garden of Eden
every person is a private exclusive owner of his own physical body.
You could simply ask, who else if not Robinson Crusoe should be the owner of Crusoe's own physical body?
Should Friday be the exclusive owner of Robinson Crusoe's body?
or should Crusoe and Friday own the body jointly and the answer is of course
that the alternatives do not avoid conflicts they make conflicts permanent.
And the second rule is every person is a private owner of all nature given goods
that he has perceived as scarce and put to some use before anybody else has done this.
And again without going into a deep sophisticated justification of these rules which I can also give
I only appeal to your intuition.
Who else if not the first person putting something that was previously unowned
to some use should be the owner?
The second person? The first and the second person together jointly?
But that would automatically again lead to conflict, worse if the first one is made the owner of it,
he does so without running into any conflict because nobody else claimed these goods before
he was the first one he appropriated them without any conflict anybody who comes later
and then wants to have it would automatically of course run into conflict and again as I explained
the purpose of norms is to avoid conflicts not to generate them.
The third rule is implied already in the first two.
The third one is:
Every person who with the help of his body and his originally appropriated goods
that is goods that were previously owned or taking possession of by the first to first-time
produces now new products thereby becomes the proper owner of these products,
the exclusive owner of these products provided only
that in the process of production he does not physically damage the property of other individuals.
And the fourth rule again implied already in the previous three is:
Once a good has been first appropriated or produced
ownership in it can be acquired only by means of a voluntary contractual transfer
of its property title from a previous owner to a later owner.
Again let me just emphasize that anybody who just suggests different rules
suggests essentially rules that do not avoid conflict but create conflict and
that we in our daily lives now a daily private lives by and large adhere to these rules
and recognize them as of course what else could please people
possibly accept as fair rules.
now a few statements in order to emphasize these points
Contrary to the frequently heard claim that the institution of private property is only a convention
it must be categorically stated that this is untrue.
A convention serves a purpose
and it is something to which they exist an alternative
this is what a convention is.
So the convention has a purpose and if it's something is a convention
then there exists an alternative to it.
To give you an example
The Latin alphabet serves the purpose of written communication
and there exists an alternative to it we can also use the Cyrillic alphabet
that serves the same purpose.
That is why it is refer to as a convention the Latin alphabet is a convention
What however is a purpose of action norms and already pointed out
what it is if no interpersonal conflict exists
if there's perfect harmony among mankind
you always do what I expect you to do
and I always do what you expect me to do
then we would not need any rules whatsoever
and there would be perfect perfect harmony.
But since that does not exist
since there are conflicts we do need norms
and it is the very purpose of norms
to help avoid otherwise unavoidable conflict.
A norm that generates conflict rather than help us avoid it is contrary to the very purpose of norms.
It is so to speak a dysfunctional norm or as I said before is a perversion
and with regard to the purpose of conflict avoidance which is
the sole purpose so to speak of norms
with regard to the purpose of conflict avoidance
the institution of private property is definitely not just a
convention because there exists simply no alternative to it.
If there are conflicts over scarce goods the only way to solve it is to assign private property rights.
I can control it you cannot control it you can control this
and I cannot control that, otherwise we would always have to assume perfect harmony
among all interests which simply does not exist.
Only private or exclusive property makes it possible that all
otherwise unavoidable conflict can be avoided and only the principle of
property acquisition through acts of original appropriation
performed by specific individuals at specific places and specific points in time
makes it possible that conflict can be avoided from the beginning of mankind onward.
Since only the first appropriation of some previously unappropriated good
can be a conflict-free appropriation simply because by definition
no one else had any previous dealings that with particular good.
Okay now we come to the
next important problem.
Now as important as the insight is that the institution of private property
ultimately grounded in acts of original appropriation is
without any alternative given our desire to avoid conflict it
is obviously not sufficient in order to establish a social order
because even if everyone knows how conflicts can be avoided is still
possible that people simply do not want to avoid conflict because they expect
to benefit from conflict at the expense of other people
in fact as long as mankind is what it is there will always exist murderers
robbers, thieves, thugs con artists and you name it.
Hence every social order
if it is to be successfully maintained requires an institution or requires
institutions and mechanisms designed to keep such rule breakers in check.
And how do we accomplish this task and by whom should this task be accomplished?
So libertarians do not believe in imperfect man, a transformation of mankind
quite to the contrary, we have a very real realistic view of mankind,
there are evil bad people out there
and what is the best method in order to check these people?
control these people to bring people to respect the rules that I initially explained.
Now the standard reply to this question
"how do we enforce these rules?" is to say this task that is
the enforcement of law and order as I described law and order is the first and
the primary duty and indeed the reason for the existence of the state.
In particular this is also the answer that classical liberals such as my own
intellectual master Ludwig von Mises has given.
But whether or not this is a correct answer depends of course on how is state defined.
Now according to the standard definition there's not the definition that I make up that subject
or do you generally agreed upon definition of the state
the state is defined not as a regular specialized firm, rather it is defined as an agency
that is characterized by two unique but logically connected features.
The first feature is and the decisive one is, the state is an agency that exercises
a territorial monopoly of ultimate decision-making that is,
the state is the ultimate arbiter or the ultimate judge in every case of conflict
including conflicts that involves the state or the agents of the state itself.
Did you see if you have a conflict with a state agent it's a conflict with a policeman
who decides who is right and wrong in this conflict
the answer is given by a judge that is employed by the same agency as a policeman.
So this is the essential characteristic of a state.
It is the ultimate judge in every case of conflict including conflicts involving the state
and its agents itself.
And the second part that is already implied in this second unique characteristic is
that the state is an agency that
exercises a territorial monopoly of Taxation that is to say
the state is an agency that unilaterally fixes a price that private citizens must pay for the
state's service as ultimate judge and enforcer of law and order,
the state then also determines what is surprised that you must pay for him to do this job of being
the ultimate judge involving even conflicts of state agents itself.
Now what are the fundamental errors of classical liberalism?
I think they should have already become apparent by defining precisely what the state does.
So as widespread as a standard view regarding the necessity of the
institution of a state as a provider of law and order is, it stands first and
Foremost in clear contradiction to some elementary economic and moral laws and principles.
First of among economists and philosophers they are exist to nearly
universally accepted propositions.
The first one is every monopoly is bad from the viewpoint of consumers.
Not from the viewpoint of producers every producer loves to have a monopoly
I remember giving lectures to my
students, students always says: or you are working for free market Institute and so on,
you must get huge amounts of money from businessmen, the answer is the
businessmen hate competition, businessmen like competition in all areas except
in the area in which they themselves operate, there they would love to have
ever monopolies so that's why I say from the point of view of a consumer
monopolies are bad, and why are they bad? because let me just define first
what I mean by monopolies in order to avoid any misunderstanding,
monopoly is understood in the classical meaning as
an exclusive privilege granted to a single producer of a commodity or service
or as the absence of free entry into a particular line of production only one agency
agency A may produce a given good or service X.
And such monopoly is obviously bad for consumers because it is shielded from potential new entrants into its
line of production and because of this the price of the product will be higher
than it otherwise would be and the quality of the product will be
lower than it otherwise would be.
Now the second proposition on which almost all economists and political philosophers
agree is this, monopoly is allegedly bad.
Second one is however the production of law and order that is in short of security
security of our bodies and our property is the primary function of sustained as
I have just defined it and security is understood in the
wide sense that is also adopted in the American Declaration of Independence as
a protection of life property and the pursuit of happiness from domestic violence
and from foreign aggression
Now obviously both of these statements are apparently incompatible with each other
inconsistent with each other.
Monopolies allegedly is bad but in this area of production of law and order
everybody seems to think there we need a monopoly.
Now the fact that there is an inconsistency here has rarely caused any concern among philosophers and
economists that hardly anybody is even aware of this contradiction
and insofar as people have recognized that there is some sort of contradiction that you
cannot on the one hand say monopoly is bad and then on the other hand say but
the state must of course be a monopoly of law and order
insofar as people have to recognize this then they have typically taking the position that it is
the first statement that might have flaws that monopolies are not always bad
but the second one is certainly correct that you need a monopoly state that
produces law and order.
Yet they are in fact fundamental theoretical reasons
and mountains of empirical evidence that it is the second statement that is in error.
That we need a monopoly provider of law and order.
Now as a territorial monopoly of ultimate decision-making and law enforcement
the state is not just like any other monopoly such as a milk or a car monopoly
that produces milk and cars
of comparatively lower quality and higher price
in contrast to all other monopolies the state not only produces inferior goods but it produces beds
it produces non-goods, in fact it must first produce bads or non goods namely
taking something from people against their will who are causing conflict and then
deciding the conflict in its own favor in order to do any benefits that it bestows on other people.
To explain that in more detail if an agency
is the ultimate judge in every case of conflict
then it is also judge in all conflicts involving itself
and consequently instead of merely preventing and resolving conflicts
a monopolist of ultimate decision-making
will also cause and provoke conflict in order to settle it to its own advantage.
You hit somebody on the head and then you say: "I did that because you deserved it
you looked at me in a strange way and you call your judges to your help
and they will just say absolutely right that's the way it was.
That is if one can only appeal to the state for justice, justice will be perverted in the favor of the state.
Constitutions and supreme courts and such things notwithstanding
these constitutions and courts are also state constitutions and state courts
and whatever limitations on state action they may set or find is invariably
decided by agents of the very same institution that is under consideration
predictably the definition of property and protection of property will be
continuously altered and the range of jurisdiction will be expanded to the state's advantage.
There is the idea of some given eternal immutable "law"
that must be discovered will simply disappear and will be replaced by the idea of
law as "legislation", is something that is made up by the state as arbitrary state made law.
To give you give you an example when communism fell apart and
people wanted to get their property back that had been expropriated from
them during the communist regime then they turn to the Supreme Court in the so called
"free Western countries" which allegedly protect private property,
do you think in any of these countries the Supreme Court's and decided of course
all the property has to be given back to the previous owners in none of the
states that was decided this, in all of the states the Supreme Court said
"Yes of course we protect private property but you won't get your private property back
and if what you get is compensation
but the compensation has nothing to do with the market value.
Would you ever imagine that the Supreme Court would come to the conclusion that,
"Oh since we are funded by taxation we ourselves are illegitimate institution",
no Supreme Court will ever come up with with an idea like this
would you ever imagine that the Supreme Court comes to the conclusion: "We should
limit the range of jurisdiction, the range of decision-making that supreme courts have"
the answer I have never seen a supreme court ever doing something like this
and I'm betting my life on the fact that it will never happen in the future.
Moreover as ultimate judge the state is
also a monopolist of taxation that is it can unilaterally without the consent of everyone
affected determine the price that it's subject must pay for the
state's provision of its perverted law, whatever it might be
However a tax funded life and property protection agency
is a contradiction in term, that the state is supposed to be protecting our life and property
but how is it protecting our life and property by first attacking our life and our property?
That is a tax funded life and property protection agency is a contradiction in terms.
It is an expropriating property protector.
Now motivated as everyone else is by self-interest and by the fact that nobody likes to work
but equipped as it is with a unique power to tax, state agents will invariably strive to
maximize expenditure on protection and you can use almost the entire GDP
and pretend that you use it for protective purposes
but at the same time do as little as possible,
the perfect position is you maximize expenditures and you minimize actual work
who wouldn't like to be in that position.
So these are the general errors of statism, so to speak.
Now I come to the specific errors of "democratic states".
Most people think of course that democratic states are some great invention, great improvement.
What I want to show is that democratic states are even deterioration or as compared
to what we had, what we had before.
The traditional pre-modern state form is that of an absolute monarchy.
Yet monarchies were typically criticized
in particular also by classical liberals such as Mises and so forth
for being incompatible with the basic principle of equality before the law.
Monarchies rested instead on personal privileges there were higher law higher laws
that applied to the king and lower laws that apply to the rest of the people
so to speak.
So the critics of mark he argued the monarchical state
had to be replaced by a democratic state by opening participation in entry into the
state government to everyone on equal terms
not just to in hereditary class of nobles and so forth
it was sought and it was claimed that the principle of equality of all before the law
had been satisfied.
Now however the democratic equality before the law is something entirely different
and completely incompatible with the idea of one universal law
applying to every person in exactly the same way and everywhere and at all times.
in fact the objectionable schism between
a higher law applying to Kings and the lower law applying to regular folks
exists under democratic conditions just as before.
It exists in the form of the difference between a higher public law that applies to public officials.
and a lower private law that applies to a regular folks.
Under democracy everyone is equal insofar as entry into government is open
to all on equal terms everyone can become king so to speak,
not only a privileged circle of people thus in democracy no personal privileges,
or privileged persons exist however functional privileges and
privileged functions exist, public officials as long as they act in an
official capacity are governed and protected by public law and occupies
thereby a privileged position vis-a-vis persons acting under the mere authority of private law.
To give examples public officials for instance are permitted to
finance or subsidize their own activities through taxes if as a private
person I simply take your money out of your wallet this is considered to be a
criminal offence and I will be punished if as a public official I come to you
and do exactly the same thing this falls under public law is considered to be a legal activity.
If there's a private law I take you and beat you up and force you
to work for me day and night, this would be considered kidnapping, slavery and
whatever and is of course the great offense if I do that as a public official
then it is called public service, military draft and things like this
is perfectly all right if there's a private citizen I take your money
and against your will and then give it to somebody else
this is considered to be stealing and fencing off stolen good.
if I do that as a public official then this is then this is called social policy or redistribution
of income from the point of those people who are affected by it it makes
absolutely no difference so you realize quite clearly that there exists this
difference between a higher law applying to public officials functionaries
and a lower law applying to normal citizens is just as much preserved
under democratic conditions as it existed under monarchies.
You can say for the privilege and legal discrimination and the
distinction between rulers and subjects will not disappear under democracy.
To the contrary rather than being restricted to princes and Nobles
under democracy privileges will be available to all
everyone can engage in theft and live off stolen loot if only he becomes a public official.
Nope, what you can predict them is that under democratic conditions the tendency
of every monopoly of ultimate decision-making to increase the price of
justice and to lower the quality of justice and to substitute injustice for
justice is not diminished but it is actually aggravated because everyone can engage in this
As a hereditary monopolist now I come to some interesting differences between
monarchy and democracy as a hereditary monopolist
a king or prince regards a territory and the people under his jurisdiction
as his personal property and engages in the monopolistic exploitation of his property.
Under democracy monopoly and monopolistic exploitation do not disappear
rather what happens with democracy is simply this:
Instead of a prince and a nobility who regard the country as their private property
a temporary and interchangeable caretaker is put in monopolistic charge of the country.
The caretaker does not own the country
but as long as he is in office he is permitted to use it to his own advantage
he uses so to speak the current use of the country, in latin terms he has usufruct
of the country but he does not own the capital stock.
But this does not eliminate exploitation to the contrary it makes exploitation less calculating
and carried out with little or no regard to the capital stock,
exploitation becomes short-sighted and capital consumption will be
systematically promoted let me explain this by a simple example let's say I
give you a house under two different conditions.
One case I say I make you the owner of this house you can sell the house in the market you can pass it on
to future generations, whatever you do to the house you will see what happens to
the price of the house in the market, and in the other case I say here you have
the identical house and you are made for four years a caretaker of this house,
you cannot sell the house, you cannot pass it on to whoever you want to pass it on
but for four years you can draw any advantage that can be drawn out of this house
and and use it for your own personal advantage.
Now ask yourself will you act differently in these two different scenarios and the answer is
of course you will act very differently! In one case you will try to preserve
the capital value of the house for the reason that you might want to
pass it on to a future generation or for the reason that you might want to sell it
for as high a market price as you get you will also take into
consideration what are the repercussions of my actions that I perform with the
house in terms of roses drop the market value of my house
or will that increase the market value of my house
but if you just our four-year eight-year caretaker of the house you will give a damn what happens
to the capital value of the house, we will try to loot the capital value
as quickly as possible because after four or eight years you have no chance whatsoever
anymore to do it, so this is one fundamental difference
between the activities of kings and the activities of democratic politicians.
But there is even more to this.
Under monarchy is perfectly clear who the ruler is and who the rules are.
You know that I will never become the king and because of this every attempt on the
part of the Monarchs to just increase taxation rip you off more
there will be a resistance, why does he do this to us? under democracy
the distinction between the rulers and the ruled becomes blurred, it exists nonetheless
but the illusion arises we all rule ourselves.
It is ruled by the people, for the people, of the people right, thank you, and you realize that
or maybe I end up on the other side of the coin, so it's not very nice if they rip me off
but maybe tomorrow I will be the one who rips other people off
and that is so to speak, a consolation prize so you do have there is less resistance
against these types of attempts to continuously rip you off.
Another important difference is this, people say: "look what democracy has the advantage
there's at least competition for a position of the rulers and are we
in favor of competition worse under monarchy there is no competitions
always clear who becomes a next king and isn't that the monopoly and wouldn't we have
to just be opposed to that and be in favor of competition".
Now the answer to this is
"yeah competition is good as far as the production of good things is concerned"
but competition is not good as far as a production of bad things is concerned.
We would not want to have a competition who is the best prison guard
who is a best murderer, who is the best demagogue and so forth
there we are happy if we have dilatants doing the job
people who are entirely incompetent to doing the job so we are not in
favor of competition in all areas, we are in favor of competition in the
production of goods and we are against competition in the production of bads.
To illustrate this a little bit further:
A king comes to power by accident of birth
okay he might be a bad guy there are many bad guys many bad kings in history
nobody will deny this, but first thing has to be considered is this
a king is of course expected by his own dynasty to just keep the dynasty alive
after all their family you want to inherit this stuff if the guy gets too crazy then his,
own family will see to it that he will be surrounded by people who control him
and if that doesn't work they will assign some close relative or distant
relatives to make the guy it cut the head shorter so kings were frequently
killed because of these sorts of things.
On the other hand
because he comes to power by accident of birth kings are of course people who can be nice guys
just nice daddies, nice grandpa's and so forth who do nice things and we
are concerned about the wilderness and this and that and leaves the people more or less alone.
Think of a guy like Prince Charles if he would be the absolute ruler of Australia
I think he would definitely be an advantage of over your current rulers
On the other hand if you ask yourself
how do how do people rise to the top in a democracy the answer is,
you must be an intelligent bad guy in order to rise to the top
imagine you would say: "I will look I will protect private property I will not raise taxes I will not engage
in any type of redistribution those I will abolish all types of welfare handouts
what are your chances that you will rise to the top in a big country?
The answer is you can forget it, democracy is, so to speak the guarantee
that only bad people will rise to the top and the more so the larger the country is,
that might not be the case in a small village of hundred people where
everybody knows each other and they know how they acquired their position but as
soon as the masses of people are large enough so that nobody knows from whom
you steal and so forth the worst people will rise to the top.
Last less inconsistent I ain't the first part of this speech
to use a nice analogy between democracy and monarchy.
When the Soviet Union fell apart some people asked me
How do you explain that in these East Bloc countries even during peacetime
life-expectancy declined whereas in all other countries life expectancy rose?
And I thought about for a while and came up with the following answer:
Communist countries were a specific form of slavery,
slavery is defined by two characteristic so to speak,
on the one hand you cannot run away, if you run away the slave owner can capture you
and kill you, beat you, whatever you wants.
And secondly they can assign you to do certain tasks so in this sense we have two types of slavery
we actually traditional type of slavery that we know from from the United States
and many many other countries where you have private slave owners
but communist countries were fulfilling this definition of slavery just as well,
because if you try to run away from East Germany for instance they killed you.
You had to stay there and of course it could also assign you to work.
Now ask yourself would you rather if you have no choice but to be a slave,
to be as privately-owned slave or would you want to be a publicly owned slave
and the answer is of course then if that's the only alternative I have
I prefer to be a privately-owned slave every day because my owner
has an interest in preserving my value after all he wants to keep me healthy,
he wants my life expectancy to rise, he wants me to have children if possible,
he will take me to the doctor and life expectancy of privately owned slaves
rose by and large in parallel to the life expectancy of the free population.
Slaves in the Soviet Union or you did not own them privately could rent them
out in the private market and keep the money yourself but you could nonetheless
tell them what to do and prevent them from running away
you kill them on mass, you didn't do anything to preserve the capital value embodied
in the slave, no private slave, no private owner of the cow so to speak,
You will deliberately kill the cow but if it is a
publicly owned cow, these cows will all on mass killed and this is precisely again
what democracy does and promote.
With this I had my first part of the speech and as I said in it was a little break
in the second part I will now gives a constructive alternative
of how a society could work without this type of nonsense setup that I have described.
-------------------------------------------
Black light - How to make a UV light - Duration: 1:59.
Hello stone's friends
Today we are going to create
a black light
to light up our Halloween stones
The materials we are going to need are
- Scotch tape
- as you want to call it
- A mobile phone
- A permanent blue marker
We start
To begin
First
clean the lens and flash
Let's go taping
and painting on top of each layer
Let's go there
and you will see how simple and easy it is
Put the tape on top of the flash
and we painted it in blue
We repeated this for five times
We paint and paste
we paint and paste
three
four
we re-paint
and five
and we paint again
if you want, to protect the last layer
you can hit another piece of tape
and so protect it
and we already have our black light ready
what do you think?
It's been easy, right?
We can already light our stones
Did you like it?
Well you know, make some stones for this Halloween
We hope you have a great time.
and if you liked
and you want to receive more videos like this
subscribe to our channel
and do not forget to activate the bell
You can also follow us on social networks
Have you seen this creation?
How we grow monsters we will not be able to be at home!
You know, visit our blog
and discover the world of stones
See you soon
Thanks a lot!
-------------------------------------------
Exercises for a Baby with Low Tone #10: Propping on Straight Arms - Duration: 2:14.
Hello!
My name is Amy Sturkey.
I am here with my co-instructor Myla.
I am a pediatric physical therapist.
Myla has low tone, so she is helping me teach exercises for a child who has low tone.
I have tried a couple of different activities to try to get her to be on her stomach.
This is the one that she has tolerated the best.
So, I am just using my leg as the bolster, as a place to help support her trunk.
I have got her up on her arms.
Whoop.
There you go.
You can see we have some weight bearing over her arms.
Her hands, as I look at her, are in front of her shoulders.
So, I don't have great weight bearing yet.
I'd love to get her a little further forward.
So there I've got her shoulders over her hands.
So, I feel like I have great weight bearing through her arms now.
I don't have enough hands, so her legs are all off to the side.
I'm not going to worry about that right now.
I've got her on her arms with her shoulders over her hands.
I can start rocking her forward and back and rocking her side to side over those arms.
Nice job sweet pea.
This is a simple way to work on upper extremity weight bearing, weight bearing on her arms.
I've modified it a little, to make it a little bit easier, to help challenge her for the
next step.
Because we are going to want to her...She is rolling to get everywhere, but she is not
quite crawling everywhere yet...It will help work toward those skills.
I hope this is a simple idea that you can do at home.
And she thinks, I am done too!
Thanks a lot and I'll see you later.
There!
That wasn't so bad...
-------------------------------------------
8 Ball Pool - 400M Coins Giveaway Start Now |100% Do | Free Giveaway Get Unlimited Coins FREE 2017 - Duration: 6:02.
For more infomation >> 8 Ball Pool - 400M Coins Giveaway Start Now |100% Do | Free Giveaway Get Unlimited Coins FREE 2017 - Duration: 6:02. -------------------------------------------
Todesdrama in der Wüste: 20-Jährige von ihrem Freund erschossen - Duration: 4:00.
For more infomation >> Todesdrama in der Wüste: 20-Jährige von ihrem Freund erschossen - Duration: 4:00. -------------------------------------------
Daily Strategies For Skin Tightening For Face | Anti Aging Skin Care | Age Spots - My Health Tube - Duration: 5:10.
For more infomation >> Daily Strategies For Skin Tightening For Face | Anti Aging Skin Care | Age Spots - My Health Tube - Duration: 5:10. -------------------------------------------
Alif Allah Aur Insaan Last Episode - HUM TV DRAMA - Duration: 3:17.
Don't Forget to Subscribe
-------------------------------------------
Jürgen Drews: Beginnt jetzt der Schlager-Zoff? - Duration: 5:13.
For more infomation >> Jürgen Drews: Beginnt jetzt der Schlager-Zoff? - Duration: 5:13. -------------------------------------------
Helene Fischer & Florian Silbereisen: Baby-Drama - Duration: 4:04.
For more infomation >> Helene Fischer & Florian Silbereisen: Baby-Drama - Duration: 4:04. -------------------------------------------
퐁당퐁당 러브 사골이 된 웹드라마|KT-KR - Duration: 8:15.
For more infomation >> 퐁당퐁당 러브 사골이 된 웹드라마|KT-KR - Duration: 8:15. -------------------------------------------
NieR:Automata #46 - Pudełko z duszą [Napisy PL] [18+] (Ścieżka C) - Duration: 29:49.
For more infomation >> NieR:Automata #46 - Pudełko z duszą [Napisy PL] [18+] (Ścieżka C) - Duration: 29:49. -------------------------------------------
Bunny Medical Care ! Pet Care Games ! Game For Kids ! Funny Game ! - Duration: 6:03.
For more infomation >> Bunny Medical Care ! Pet Care Games ! Game For Kids ! Funny Game ! - Duration: 6:03. -------------------------------------------
Eat Garlic and Honey on an Empty Stomach for 7 Days And This will Happen to Your Body! - Duration: 5:41.
empty stomach for seven days and this will happen to your body
taking garlic with honey on associate empty abdomen may be a certainty for
your overall health there's not one treatment that will such
a lot of things at only once and with none aspect effects
do you remember the movie Jamin Jamin Javier Bardem constantly ate raw garlic
because he said it made him as strong as an milk some people looked at him with a
sneer others with disgust but the fact is that his character was doing the
right thing consuming this powerful vegetable so often
if you add some honey to garlic though its properties actually multiply both of
them square measure powerful antibiotics that can jointly preserve your system
the reason we tend to suggest overwhelming this mixture on associates
out the abdomen is incredibly straightforward your abdomen is
currently fully empty and prepared to start operating
that's why it's ideal to start out your day with one thing that prepares your
abdomen to metabolize your food within the most best manner this means two
things one you won't placed on the maximum amount weight and two you'll be
able to create the foremost of the nutrients you absorb and rid of the body
of a lot of toxins and today's article we wish to explain thoroughly the
advantages of ingestion garlic associated honey on an empty abdomen and
therefore the additional bonus if you mix them along
don't miss out why garlic usually this can be simply one thing that
superimposed to your meals to allow them flavor by doing this however you're
simply wasting if several properties is improve the quality of your bloodstream
when garlic reaches your abdomen it promotes the Assembly of stomach ajiz
these area unit essential for the right absorption of iron
in addition thereto it's made in vitamins and minerals
therefore by overwhelming it you enrich your blood
as if that weren't enough it reduces steroid alcohol and lipoid levels
therefore it prevents your blood from thickening permitting it to flow
unremarkable this will facilitate forestall vessel issues tall vessel
issues
nourish your skin garlic is a potent antioxidant that also generates ear
cells this helps you have got sleek soft and acne free skin you get all those
advantages while not having to resort to business merchandise
most of them embody inflammatory chemicals that may harm your stratum
over the future protect your defenses thanks to garlic your system is stronger
serving - to defend you against microbes and microorganism
it's additionally vital to stay your system during a healthy state to avoid
vital conditions like cancer that's why it's vital to try to do everything
you'll be able to to guard yourself otherwise you may land up at the mercy
of any microorganism our microorganism attack
why honey it helps with weight loss this could seem like a lie but it's not in
spite of its sweetness honey is very satisfying when you consume garlic with
honey on an empty stomach at nourishes you while also reducing your cravings
for food in turn this reduces stress and the production of cortisol a hormone
that arises when you experience this state so the effect is actually too real
reduce inflammation if you have got migraines or chronic pain add honey to
your diet it's superb flavor can relax you you may
notice that you just would like fewer pain killers are inside currently this
can facilitate improved your quality of life in place you in an exceedingly
position to devote additional of its low to leisure activities free from pain
a source of energy the day's can be very long your tasks at work start to
multiply and it's hard to reach the end without feeling exhausted
that's why lots of people choose energy drinks or sugary beverages over time
however the consequences of these beverages are harmful rather than
helpful on the other hand honey will provide you with that extra shot of
energy without any side effects how to take garlic with honey on an empty
stomach 12 cloves of garlic one cup of honey 335 grams one glass jar with the
lid preparation chop the garlic cloves or even crush them add the honey to the
jar mix in the garlic close the jar and store it in a dark place for one a week
after this time you can take a tablespoon of garlic and honey on an
empty stomach to benefit your body like never before
keep in mind that the benefits of this treatment are truly amazing
there's no pill in the world that is so complete they'll give it the tribe right
you
-------------------------------------------
How to Shave Pubic Hair Without Irritating - Duration: 5:36.
How to Shave Pubic Hair Without Irritating
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét