-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[출처: 중앙일보] "문준용 취업특혜설 수사했나" 판사 묻자 檢 놀라운 줄타기
----------------------------------------------------------------------
출처:팬앤마이크
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
정부에서 최근 공무원 채용 범정부계획을 추진중이라고 합니다
다문화, 탈북자같은 외국인, 외국계, 이민자계에게 일정이상 공직할당하는 한국인 차별정책입니다
다문화, 탈북자같이 외국인, 외국계, 이민자계에게 공직에 진출할 수 있도록 채용 목표 설정 등의 방안을 마련했는데
이것은 다문화족속과 탈북자들에게 일정이상 공무원 수와 공무원 비율 할당해서 채용하는 사실상 다문화 공무원특별전형인것이고
한국인 차별하는 매국매족 행위이자 외래종특혜이며 태생에 따른 역차별정책을 시행하는것도 차벌금지법 위반으로 불법행위를 정부에서 자행하는것입니다
가뜩이나 실패가 검증난 다문화 정책으로 외래종 대량양산하면서 한국의 주권과 안보, 국민안전, 사회질서, 국민일자리등 각종 부정적인 요소가 커지는데
거기다 각종 외국인, 다문화가족 특혜주고 한국인차별하는 정책을 벌여서 정치적, 경제적, 사회적으로 소외시키고 차별하고 있습니다
안그래도 외국인-다문화 특혜 한국인 차별정책들이 많아 이를 폐지해도 모자랄판입니다
가령 외국인대입특별전형, 외노자-불체자-다문화와 그 자손 무상의료, 다문화지원금, 외국인초청치료, 다문화고향방문지원, 국공립유치원우선입학, 결혼식·여행 등 각종 비용할인, 대입 다문화가정 특별전형, 육아도우미 무료, 분양시 우선공급대상, 전세자금 대출금리 할인, 다문화가족지원센터, 국제결혼중매비지원, 외국인창업자금 2천만원지원, 다문화가족 금융특혜로 통장 적금이 연 5%가 넘는 특혜와 다문화상품이란 특혜등등 수많은 외국인-다문화 특혜 한국인 차별정책 말입니다
심지어 한국남성과 결혼한 일본여성 사야까씨도 한국인 차별한다고 비난했을정도고
한국남자와 결혼한 어느 일본여성은 한국 다문화특혜정책 반대 청와대 청원까지 올렸을 지경입니다
공부못해도 좋은대학가는등 외국인-다문화 특혜로 인하여 화교의 27%는 의사 약사일정도로 성공한 비율높고
성공한 축구선수 박주호의 혼혈 자식들같이 다문화라고 가난하고 못사는게 아닙니다
한국인이라고 잘사는거 아닌것처럼 말입니다
오히려 특혜받아서 더 잘살가능성 높아지고 외국인-다문화 상류층-귀족화-상전대접 한국인 하층화-노비화만드는 일들을 자행하는 한국인 죽이는정책, 한국인 차별정책, 혐한정책, 매국사대정책인것입니다
한국인이 차별받는 정책들을 폐지해도 모자랄판에
오히려 다문화, 탈북자같은 외국인, 외국계, 이민자계에게 일정비율 이상 공무원직 채용할당해서 매국적폐를 키우고 있습니다
[출처] 다문화, 이민자채용 공직확대특혜주고 한국인차별하는 공무원 채용 범정부계획 철회해야 하는이유
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------
민주당 지들끼리 하는 여론조사에 18프로 정도 나온 모양이다.
이대로 가면 정권 노치고 처절한 우파 보복으로 우리들은 전부 용도폐기 되고 만다 면서
대책 마련 분주 하다고 한다.
이와중에서도 청아대 주사파 새끼들은 민주당 꼰대들 걱정도 팔자다
김정은 수령께서 서울 답방 한방이면 전세 역전 20년 장기 집권 가능하다면서 큰소리 친다고 한다.
오로지 김정은 못먹어도 고고싱 이라고 종서기 외친단다.
믿거나 말거나 일베정보부 첩보 다
[출처] 촉새 유시민 까지 호출 하는 것으로 보아,,,좌빨 새끼들 난리 난 모양이다.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
중국군 S-400 시험발사 성공, "극초음속의 목표 요격"
- 25일 환구시보가 러시아 미디어를 이용해 중국이 러시아제의 최신예 지대공 미사일 시스템
S-400 시험발사를 행하여, 250km 떨어진 지점으로부터 극초음속으로 비행하는 목표의 미사일을 요격하는데 성공했다고 보도됨
- 중국 본토로부터 타이베이가 사정거리에 들어가게 되며 일본의 안보에도 영향을 미치게 될 것으로 보임
- 러시아 타스 통신은 이에 앞서 올해 12월 상순에 중국 내에서 S-400의 시험발사가 행해졌다고 군사외교 소식통의 말을 전한 바 있음
*강한 전자적(電子的)인 방해를 적으로부터 받는 상황을 상정하고 매초 3km로 비행하는 탄도미사일을 격추시켰다고 함
- 러시아가 외국에 S-400을 공여한 것은 중국이 처음으로 S-400은 미국의 최신예 스텔스 전투기 F35B와 탄도미사일의 요격도 가능한 것으로
알려져 있으며, 지대공 미사일로서는 세계 최고 수준의 성능을 갖고 있는 것으로 간주되고 있음
[출처] [외신] 중국군 S-400 시험발사 성공, "극초음속의 목표 요격"/ 일본 지지통신
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEEDG
위생 젓같은 저런 포장마차는 왜 허용하노?
출처: 일베
미국 우선주의가 성공적이라 해도, 중국, 러시아, 이란, 북한 등 악당들과 대결하려면 동맹이 필요하다.
---------------------------------------------------------------
시진핑은 미국을 조공국으로 여기고, 러시아는 무력으로 유럽의 지도를 바꾸고 있다. 지금 재무장을 하지 않으면 세계 대전으로 발전할 수가 있다. 세계는 2차 대전이 발발하기 직전인 1938년의 상황과 유사하다.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Japan Gives Up On Inflation, Now Wants Deflation (Sort Of) To Offset Tax Hikes
경기 부양을 위해 2% 인플레를 지향했지만 실패한 일본.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
How a World Order Ends
And What Comes in Its Wake
By Richard Haass
기존의 세계 질서가 무너지고 새로운 세계 질서가 태어나려 하고 있다. ----------------------------------------------------------
강제 히잡에 반대했다가 1년의 선고를 받은 참다운 여권론자----------------------------------------------------------https://twitter.com/i/status/1077181016836591617
물 위를 타고가는 스키-----------------------------------------------------------------
지구 온난화에 집착하는 서구의 집단 사고에 세상은 관심이 없다. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
아이큐 테스트는 심리학자들이 개들의 지능을 측정하는 것과 유사하다. 그것은 개들이 인간에 종속하고, 얼마나 빨리 그들의 지시에 따라 움직이는지는 측정하는 것이다. 결국 가장 똑똑하다는 보더콜리는 모든 개들 중에 가장 굴종적이다.------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------나심 탈레브
1) Charlatans with something to sell: without IQ & other *testing* psychologists have little to sell society; there is a vested interest in hacking/massaging the stats & defending the products.
2) Pple who want some races to be inferior.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
소비에 반대한 스크루지
저축과 자본 축적은 노동의 생산성을 높이는 주요 요인이지만, 그렇다고 소비가 도덕적으로 문제가 있는 행동은 아니다.
생산의 목적은 바로 소비이고, 생산 요소들의 가치는 소비자들에 의해 평가된다.
Ebenezer Scrooge's Tiresome Crusade Against "Consumerism"
Ryan McMaken
Although some capitalists and defenders of free markets believe that Ebenezer Scrooge has much to teach us about good economics, I have long found him to be less than inspiring in this respect.
Scrooge, for example, demonstrates a lamentably bad understanding of the subjective nature of value, nor does he understand the concept of psychic profits. In Scrooge's mind, nothing has value unless it can be calculated on a ledger. He denounces his nephew Fred for enjoying the company of friends and family on Christmas, sarcastically telling Fred "Much good [Christmas] has ever done you!” Scrooge further concludes that anyone who derives pleasure from the experience of Christmas — something which, of course, cannot be calculated on paper — is a fool.
Scrooge vs. His Nephew
From what we can glean from Dickens's text, it appears in Scrooge's mind, those who spend and consume are his moral and intellectual inferiors, quite incapable of good planning or astute observation.
In his extended condemnation of Christmas, expressed to his nephew, Scrooge rages:
What’s Christmas time to you but a time for paying bills without money; a time for finding yourself a year older, but not an hour richer; a time for balancing your books and having every item in ’em through a round dozen of months presented dead against you? If I could work my will,” said Scrooge indignantly, “every idiot who goes about with ‘Merry Christmas’ on his lips, should be boiled with his own pudding, and buried with a stake of holly through his heart. He should!”
These judgments by Scrooge, however, are apparently based on fantasy. At no point do we see any evidence that Fred is incapable of paying his bills or managing whatever debts he might have. On the contrary, everything we know from the text suggests that Fred enjoys a comfortable middle-class lifestyle. Fred, for example, has servants, he provides for a wife, and he has the means of entertaining friends at his home. We also learn from the Ghost of Christmas-Yet-to-Come that Fred will soon be in a position to hire one of Cratchit's sons as a employee.
For Scrooge, this is all so much imprudent extravagance. Fred, it appears, might only gain his uncle's good favor if Fred were to ditch all his friends, his wife, and his servants in favor of living a live of austerity like Scrooge.
Moreover, we find that Scrooge can offer no examples of people for whom Christmas is primarily about "paying bills without money."
It's entirely possible he personally knows some people who have failed to pay their bills. Although Scrooge provides no examples. It's unclear, however, why he thinks these cases justify an overall condemnation of spending in general.
Scrooge is free to take this position for philosophical reasons, of course. He puritanical moralism is his own business. But let's not pretend that his views are necessarily the result of sound economic analysis.
Saving Good, Consumption Bad?
In economics, saving is not "good" and spending is not "bad." There is not moral vice or righteousness attached to either act.
Certainly, production is a good thing. Saving and investment are the most critical factors in economic growth. This is because saving and capital accumulation are key factors in increasing worker productivity. It's the savings that are used to create the tools, machines, computers, and vehicles that allow workers to produce more in less time. More productive workers are then able to buy more things, enjoy more leisure, and generally lead more comfortable lives.
This does not mean, however, that consumption has no purpose, or that consumption is a morally problematic activity.
Indeed, the purpose of production is consumption, and the value of the factors of production are determined by how consumers value the retail products and services they ultimately consume.
Scrooge Needs Consumers
Although he fails to realize it, consumers are important to Scrooge personally. The text does not say so explicitly, but Scrooge has long been assumed to be a moneylender. Whether he engages in wholesale or retail lending, it is the consumers — the people for whom Scrooge shows such boundless contempt — who provide him with a living. The money Scrooge lends is ultimately used to purchase consumer goods directly, or it is used by businesses to provide consumer goods or services to shoppers.
Without these consumers, Scrooge would be begging for a living, as his business activities would have no value in the marketplace. And if everyone lived like Scrooge does, he'd have few customers.
Moreover, Scrooge appears to be unaware that the people who consume his goods and services must themselves be producers — either as laborers or entrepreneurs — in order to have money to spend on his services.
Are some of these people unable to pay their bills? That is likely. This fact, however, hardly justifies Scrooge's raving about every person who decides to buy a slightly larger family meal for Christmas, rather than save every single penny.
Where Did Scrooge Get His Ideas?
In his book An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought, Murray Rothbard examines the idea that saving and labor are morally superior to consumption — what Bob Cratchit would call "making merry."
As a case study, Rothbard points to differences in emphasis between some Catholic groups and some Calvinist groups in how they viewed saving and spending in the sixteenth century.
Rothbard writes:
A Calvinist emphasis on postponement of earthly gratification led to a particular stress on saving. Labor or "industry" and thrift, almost for their own sake, or rather for God's sake, were emphasized in Calvinism much more than in the other segments of Christianity. ... [A] rather grim emphasis on work and on saving began to be stressed in Calvinist culture. This de-emphasis on leisure of course fitted with the iconoclasm that reached its height in Calvinism — the condemnation of the enjoyment of the senses as a means of expressing religious devotion. One of the expressions of this conflict came over religious holidays, which Catholic countries enjoyed in abundance. To the Puritans, this was idolatry; even Christmas was not supposed to be an occasion for sensate enjoyment.
The popularity of these ideas in some parts of the world led many to assign a moral value to saving, which in turn often led to economic theories in which saving was necessarily superior to spending in nearly all circumstances.
The Catholic scholastics, on the other hand, took a more benign view of spending:
The focus, then, both in Catholic countries and in Scholastic thought, became very different from that of Calvinism. The Scholastic focus was on consumption, the consumer, as the goal of labor and production. Labor was not so much a good in itself as a means toward consumption on the market. The Aristotelian balance, or golden mean, was considered a requisite of the good life, a life leading to happiness in keeping with the nature of man. And that balanced life emphasized the joys of consumption, as well as of leisure, in addition to the importance of productive effort.
In Rothbard's view, these theories then filtered their way down into various views about society in general:
Particularly influential was the early-17th-century Cambridge University academic, the Rev. William Perkins, who did much to translate Calvinist theology into English practice. Perkins denounced four groups of men who had "no particular calling to walk in": beggars and vagabonds; monks and friars; gentlemen who "spend their days in eating and drinking"; and servants, who allegedly spent their time waiting. All these were dangerous because unsettled and undisciplined.
Rothbard's point is not that all Catholics and all Calvinists hold these respective views. There is no doubt significant debate within each group, both historically and today.
What Rothbard does well demonstrate, however, is that these strains of thought have, at certain times and places, been influential, and have colored the thinking of many.
While pre-conversion Scrooge appears to be decidedly un-religious in Dickens's text, it is nevertheless easy to see how Scrooge (or people on whom Dickens may have modeled the character) could have been influenced by the lopsidedly pro-work views labeled by Rothbard here as "Calvinist," while Fred appears to take the more Aristotelian view.
What Scrooge fails to realize is that production is not the end of economic activity. Consumption is. And saving is merely deferred consumption. The fact that not everyone wants to live a life of dour self-denial appears to trouble Scrooge greatly — even though he personally benefits from the consumption of others. Scrooge fails to understand that Fred was right, and that feasting with friends and family brings benefits that can't be calculated on paper, and which will never show up in any statistics about national income or economic growth:
though [Christmas] has never put a scrap of gold or silver in my pocket, I believe that it has done me good, and will do me good; and I say, God bless it!”
-------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기