무학산 (조갑제닷컴 회원)
오늘 조선닷컴에 다음과 같은 헤드라인이 있다 <김경수 "물증 없다"는데…판결문엔 증거목록만 20쪽>, 이 기사에 달린 댓글 중에 혼자 보기에 아까운 것이 있어서 퍼 왔습니다.
============================
XX(terr****) 2019.02.0108:54:45
증거 나오기 전까지는 모두 거짓으로 몰아 버리고
증거를 들이대면 나는 모르는 일이라고 오리발 내밀고
실형 판결 내리면 적폐세력의 잘못된 판결이라고 몰고
감옥에 가는 일을 민주 투사가 탄압받는 일이고
감옥에 갔다 풀려나오면 자신의 승리라고 하는 몰염치,
무죄의식으로 똘똘뭉친 전대협 주사파들
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
이언주 “손석희, 그가 외치던 ‘권력의 사유화’ 종결자”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[손혜원 동생입니다 2편]
돈과 권력을 이용해서 여호와의 증인인 가족들까지 목포에 데려가서 언론에 쇼잉하는걸보고 제 목숨을 걸고 호소드립니다.
전체 모든 글은 사실에 입각한 것이니 우진영이나 좌진영 할것없이 진실을 봐주실 것을 간곡히 부탁드립니다. 정치논리를 따지기전에 손혜원이같은 이런 쓰레기가 국민 위에 군림하며 위정자 행세하게 놔둘 수는 없지 않겠습니까? 여러 사람이 꾸는 꿈은 희망이 되어 이루어지지만 한 명이 헛되게 꾸는꿈은 망상이고 일장춘몽이 된다는 것을 꼭 보여주고 싶습니다.
손혜원이는 제가 말한 부동산차명의 증거에는 변명도 못하고 그저 한다는 짓거리가 자기 영향권 아래 있는 가족을 동원해서 허무맹랑한 제 인신공격만 하고 있습니다. 오늘 어떤 언론에 나온 손혜원이의 거짓말을 반박합니다.
손혜원이 문화사업을 한답시고 목포에 30채이상 부동산을 차명으로 투기하고 만든게 여관, 커피숍, 그리고 역사적인 유물로 남겨놔야할 5.18유적지에 칼국수집 만든게 다입니다. 나중에 모두 권리금받고 팔 수 있는 것들이죠.
제가 초등학교때부터 대학때까지 손혜원이가 여호와의 증인이었다고 말했죠. 거기에 대답은 못하고 지금은 개신교라고 변명합니다. 물론 지금은 개신교에 들어가서 거길 또 이용하는 거겠지만 성장기에는 여호와의증인이었다고 말하는 겁니다.
손혜원이가 대학때부터 결혼상대자라고 집에까지 데리고 와서 인사시킨 분이있었는데 어느날 저희집에 하숙하던 은행원 정건해와 눈이 맞어 하루아침에 그 분을 버리고 돈을 쫒아 결혼할때부터 손혜원이는 금전을 인생 최고의 가치로 아는 사람이라고 알고 있었습니다.
손혜원이가 저보고 도박한다고 말하는데 제가 어떤 도박을하는지, 단 한번이라도 도박하는 걸 본적있는지 묻고 싶습니다. 보통사람들이그렇듯이 저도 아는 사람들과 밥내기 술내기는 했지요. 보통남자들이 하는 정도였지 전문도박꾼이라는건 말도 안됩니다
사업하다 장사 안되고 부도나서 변제안되면 징역갑니다. 제가 파렴치범도 아니고 그저 사업하다 고생한겁니다.
어떤 형수라는 여자가 나한테 가게를 얻어줬는데 내가 그 보증금을 빼서 가졌다구요? 그게 누군지 저도 궁금하네요
저는 분당에서 도시락공장을 했었습니다. 학교급식이 시행되기 전이라서 장사가 잘되서 한때는 하루 4000개까지나갈 때도 있었습니다. 급식이 시행되면서 판건데 손혜원이가 경매들어간 돈을 줬다구요? 개가웃겠네요. 전 손혜원과 돈거래한 적이 단 한번도 없습니다
식구 중에 누가 저에게 차를 세 대 사는데 보증을 서줬는데 제가 그 차 세대를 팔아먹었다구요? 어이가없네요. 제 기록을 뽑으면 제가 차 세대를 판게 있는지 없는지 금방 아는데 이런 거짓말을 하네요. 전 그런사 실이 없습니다.
손혜원은 국회 들어오기 전에 자기가 운영하는 하이핸드코리아 매장직원들에게 퇴직금을 주지 않기 위해 11개월짜리 계약을 매년 갱신했었습니다. 그정도로 돈에 무서운 여자입니다.
제가 사채업자한테 돈을 빌리고 도박하고 그 돈을 받기 위해 사채업자가 찾아왔다고 했는데, 완전 거짓말입니다. 제가 사업하는데 일부 동업하던 사람과 정리하는 과정에서 80만원이 차이가 났고 대화하던 중에 서로 격해져서 그 사람이 손혜원사무실에 전화를했답니다. 시끄러워지는게 싫어 물론 80만원 갚았고요. 근데 금액도 말 안하고 그 분을 사채업자라고 거짓말하네요.
한결같은 얘기지만 저는 손혜원의 이름만 들어도 토가 나옵니다.그 여자와 얽히는게 싫은겁니다. 제가 돈을 바란다면 가만 있어야되지요. 손헤원의 의도와 그 여자에게 이용당하는게 싫을 뿐입니다.
제가 가족과 왕래 안하는 이유중 하나가 또 있습니다.
저는 죽을각오로 싸우고있기에 생전 처음 입밖에 내봅니다.
저희집에는 경악할 사건이 하나 있었습니다.
성에 관련한 패륜적인거죠.
저는 더러워서 입밖에 내기도 싫으니 손혜원에게 기자님들이 물어보세요.
되서는 안될 사람이 완장을 차서 해서는 안되는 일을 벌이고있으니 나라가 이렇게 시끄러운겁니다.
2019.01.31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
출처: 일베
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
왜 그린 에너지는 소용이 없는가?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
평화는 통합된 공존에 의존하지 않는다. 그보다 집단들을 분리하는 명확히 구분된 지형학적, 정치적 경계에 의존한다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can easily have a nation-state with 2, even 4 languages (Belgium, Switzerland), but you can't easily have a nation-state with 2 religions. --- 탈레브
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you have earned your self-respect, respect by others is a luxury; if you haven't, respect by others is a necessity." - Nassim Taleb
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is something common to modern "liberal" and Sunni-Salafi education: They teach students answers rather than how to ask questions." - Nassim Taleb
현대 좌파와 수니-살라피 교육에는 공통점이 있다. 그들은 학생들에게 질문하는 방법을 가르치지 않고 대답을 가르친다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
문재인 대통령 당선무효 가능한가?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
자본주의 혁명
이전의 생산 양식과 구별되는 자본주의의 특징은 새로운 마케팅 원칙이다. 자본주의는 단지 대량 생산이 아니라, 대중을 만족시키는 대량생산이었다.
부자가 되려면 단지 한 번 자본을 저축하고 축적해서는 안 된다. 부자가 되려면 소비자들이 요구하는 곳에 반복해서 자본을 투자해야 한다. 따라서 시장의 과정은 매일 반복되는 투표와 같다.
자본주의 하에서 부자가 되는 유일한 방법은 다른 사람보다 더 유능하게 그리고 저렴하게 소비자에게 봉사하는 것이다.
The Capitalist Revolution
Ludwig von Mises
The pre-capitalistic system of product was restrictive. Its historical basis was military conquest. The victorious kings had given the land to their paladins. These aristocrats were lords in the literal meaning of the word, as they did not depend on the patronage of consumers buying or abstaining from buying on a market. On the other hand, they themselves were the main customers of the processing industries which, under the guild system, were organized on a corporative scheme. This scheme was opposed to innovation. It forbade deviation from the traditional methods of production. The number of people for whom there were jobs even in agriculture or in the arts and crafts was limited. Under these conditions, many a man, to use the words of Malthus, had to discover that “at nature’s mighty feast there is no vacant cover for him” and that “she tells him to be gone.” But some of these outcasts nevertheless managed to survive, begot children, and made the number of destitute grow hopelessly more and more.
But then came capitalism. It is customary to see the radical innovations that capitalism brought about in the substitution of the mechanical factory for the more primitive and less efficient methods of the artisans’ shops. This is a rather superficial view. The characteristic feature of capitalism that distinguishes it from pre-capitalist methods of production was its new principle of marketing. Capitalism is not simply mass production, but mass production to satisfy the needs of the masses.
The arts and crafts of the good old days had catered almost exclusively to the wants of the well-to-do. But the factories produced cheap goods for the many. All the early factories turned out was designed to serve the masses, the same strata that worked in the factories. They served them either by supplying them directly or indirectly by exporting and thus providing for them foreign food and raw materials. This principle of marketing was the signature of early capitalism as it is of present-day capitalism. The employees themselves are the customers consuming the much greater part of all goods produced. They are the sovereign customers who are “always right.” Their buying or abstention from buying determines what has to be produced, in what quantity, and of what quality. In buying what suits them best they make some enterprises profit and expand and make other enterprises lose money and shrink. Thereby they are continually shifting control of the factors of production into the hands of those businessmen who are most successful in filling their wants.
Under capitalism private property of the factors of production is a social function. The entrepreneurs, capitalists, and land owners are mandataries, as it were, of the consumers, and their mandate is revocable. In order to be rich, it is not sufficient to have once saved and accumulated capital. It is necessary to invest it again and again in those lines in which it best fills the wants of the consumers. The market process is a daily repeated plebiscite, and it ejects inevitably from the ranks of profitable people those who do not employ their property according to the orders given by the public. But business, the target of fanatical hatred on the part of all contemporary governments and selfstyled intellectuals, acquires and preserves bigness only because it works for the masses. The plants that cater to the luxuries of the few never attain big size. The shortcoming of nineteenth-century historians and politicians was that they failed to realize that the workers were the main consumers of the products of industry. In their view, the wage earner was a man toiling for the sole benefit of a parasitic leisure class. They labored under the delusion that the factories had impaired the lot of the manual workers. If they had paid any attention to statistics they would easily have discovered the fallaciousness of their opinion. Infant mortality dropped, the average length of life was prolonged, the population multiplied, and the average common man enjoyed amenities of which even the well-to-do of earlier ages did not dream.
However this unprecedented enrichment of the masses were merely a by-product of the Industrial Revolution. Its main achievement was the transfer of economic supremacy from the owners of land to the totality of the population. The common man was no longer a drudge who had to be satisfied with the crumbs that fell from the tables of the rich. The three pariah castes which were characteristic of the pre-capitalistic ages—the slaves, the serfs, and those people whom patristic and scholastic authors as well as British legislation from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries referred to as the poor—disappeared. Their scions became, in this new setting of business, not only free workers, but also customers.
This radical change was reflected in the emphasis laid by business on markets. What business needs first of all is markets and again markets. This was the watch-word of capitalistic enterprise. Markets, that means patrons, buyers, consumers. There is under capitalism one way to wealth: to serve the consumers better and cheaper than other people do.
Within the shop and factory the owner — or in the corporations, the representative of the shareholders, the president—is the boss. But this mastership is merely apparent and conditional. It is subject to the supremacy of the consumers. The consumer is king, is the real boss, and the manufacturer is done for if he does not outstrip his competitors in best serving consumers.
It was this great economic transformation that changed the face of the world. It very soon transferred political power from the hands of a privileged minority into the hands of the people. Adult franchise followed in the wake of industrial enfranchisement. The common man, to whom the market process had given the power to choose the entrepreneur and capitalists, acquired the analogous power in the field of government. He became a voter.
It has been observed by eminent economists, I think first by the late Frank A. Fetter, that the market is a democracy in which every penny gives a right to vote. It would be more correct to say that representative government by the people is an attempt to arrange constitutional affairs according to the model of the market, but this design can never be fully achieved. In the political field it is always the will of the majority that prevails, and the minorities must yield to it. It serves also minorities, provided they are not so insignificant in number as to become negligible. The garment industry produces clothes not only for normal people, but also for the stout, and the publishing trade publishes not only westerns and detective stories for the crowd, but also books for discriminating readers.
There is a second important difference. In the political sphere, there is no means for an individual or a small group of individuals to disobey the will of the majority. But in the intellectual field private property makes rebellion possible. The rebel has to pay a price for his independence; there are in this universe no prizes that can be won without sacrifices. But if a man is willing to pay the price, he is free to deviate from the ruling orthodoxy or neo-orthodoxy. What would conditions have been in the socialist commonwealth for heretics like Kierkegaard, Schopenauer, Veblen, or Freud? For Monet, Courbet, Walt Whitman, Rilke, or Kafka?
In all ages, pioneers of new ways of thinking and acting could work only because private property made contempt of the majority’s ways possible. Only a few of these separatists were themselves economically independent enough to defy the government into the opinions of the majority. But they found in the climate of the free economy among the public people prepared to aid and support them. What would Marx have done without his patron, the manufacturer Friedrich Engels?
Excerpted from Liberty & Property
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
베네수엘라가 당장 시행해야 할 개혁들
The Reforms that Venezuela Needs Right Now
Rafael Acevedo
Venezuela's government is in a state of upheaval. Foreign nations are lining up to support either the regime of Nicolás Maduro — who claims to be the legitimately elected president — or that of Juan Guaidó, who the opposition claims is now the constitutionally mandated interim president.
The current situation has been brought on by nearly twenty years of Chavismo, a hard-left socialist ideology, which has left the Venezuelan economy in ruins.
Understandably, many Venezuelans are now hoping for a political change. and many believe no real change can be had until the current regime is gone.
But no matter who is president a week — or a year, or five years — from now, prosperity can only be regained by enormous reforms to the Venezuelan political and economic systems.
Venezuelans must act now to demand these changes, because bringing in new politicians won't be enough to turn the nation around:
*Open the road to monetary freedom, eliminating all legal tender laws and the nation's central-bank supported system of fractional-reserve banks. Allow Venezuelans to adopt whatever medium of exchange they wish. Even dollarization ought to be on the table.
*Open the country to International Trade: eliminate all tariffs, taxes, and trade barriers. All of them.
*Privatize Everything! All state-owned companies and assets, following Econintech's proposal.
*Decentralize the Government: Grant total administrative and budgetary autonomy to Venezuela's twenty-three states . Decentralization is a key to minimizing the damage an abuse central government can do.
*Lower taxes drastically, and decentralize tax collection and administration to the state level. All new taxes must be approved by referendum.
*Allow private Venezuelans to access and accept both humanitarian and security assistance from foreign organizations.
*Guarantee the right to self-defense: demobilize all the armed groups, purge the prisons, implement widespread private gun ownership, and auction to the public all weapons confiscated by the state.
Should Venezuela finally move toward real reform, Venezuela could reclaim its position as one of the most prosperous nations in Latin America. At times like this, Venezuelans can look at former communist countries — such as Poland — that applied radical free-market reforms and now are moving toward a far more prosperous future.
-----------------------------------------------------
元好问
眼处心生句自神，暗中摸索总非真。
画图临出秦川景，亲到长安有几人？
赏析
元好问主张：诗歌是现实生活的反映，作家只有“亲到长安”，面向现实，才能“眼处心生”，激发真情，才能产生有“神”的诗句，画出逼真的图景；若“暗中摸索”，“闭门造句”，则断然写不出好作品来。
시가는 현실을 반영해야 하며, 만일 작가가 현실과 유리된 채 암중모색하고 언어의 유희만을 즐기면 좋은 작품을 쓸 수가 없다는 뜻이라 한다.眼处心生句自神，暗中摸索总非真。
画图临出秦川景，亲到长安有几人？
赏析
元好问主张：诗歌是现实生活的反映，作家只有“亲到长安”，面向现实，才能“眼处心生”，激发真情，才能产生有“神”的诗句，画出逼真的图景；若“暗中摸索”，“闭门造句”，则断然写不出好作品来。
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기