Gordon G. Chang‏ 

Gordon G. Chang 님이 리트윗했습니다 Todd Griffith

We cannot solve our "#NorthKorea problem" until we are willing to sanction #China for proliferating tech, components, materials, and equipment for nukes and missiles. And did I mention sanctions for laundering money?

Todd Griffith‏

The argument for additional, targeted sanctions is

needed. These Chinese supply chains that sustain

North Korea's ballistic missile program is a great

place to start. The things that Roger Robinson talks

about.

핵과 미사일의 기술, 부품, 재료, 장비 등을 확산시키고 있는 중

국을 제재하지 못한다면, 북한의 문제를 해결할 수 없다.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gordon G. Chang‏ 

Gordon G. Chang 님이 리트윗했습니다 FOX News Radio

#NorthKorea is a threat because #China has made it one. Yes, we have a problem with #KimJongUn, but #XiJinping is the real villain. Xi's the one pulling the strings.

김정은은 시진핑의 조종을 받는 허수아비이다.

-------------------------------------------

Dow‏인증된 계정 

The glue of credit-based capitalism is confidence. For democracy, it's trust. The accelerated erosion of these two has terrible long term implications.

자본주의와 민주제의 핵심은 신용과 신뢰이다. 이 둘의 붕괴는

장래에 엄청난 결과로 나타난다.

-----------------------------------------------------------

DW 中文- 德国之声

‏인증된 계정

30年前的8月23日，人类历史上最长的人链问世。标记了苏联

解体的开始。30年后，正在抗争运动中的香港人走上街头拉起

了香港版的人链，向北京抗命。

https://twitter.com/i/status/1164910117298593793

홍콩 시민들이 인간 띠를 만들어 중국 정부에 항의하고 있다.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paul Mozur‏인증된 계정 

Beijing’s electric eyes: China has 8 of the 10 cities with the most public surveillance cameras. By 2022 China will have one camera (directly controlled by police) for every two people. Findings note video surveillance has little correlation to crime

2022년이면 중국은 2사람당 1대의 감시카메라를 배치하게

된다.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

[단독] 文 대통령 "조국 버리면 총선 패배" 결사항전 지시

출처 일베
-----------------------------------------------------------

좌우를 불문하고 걍 정치인들한테 국민들은 개돼지일 뿐이고

지들 욕망 채우는데 이용되는 선전도구 그 이상도 이하도 아닌 존재들이야

권력자들이 조종하는 한 마리의 장깃말에 불과한 존재들이 우리같은 소시민임

정치인들 입장에선 개 돼지들은 섬기는게 아니라 조련하고 길들여야 하는 존재들일 뿐이야

좌파가 정권 잡으면 좌파식 조련 우파가 잡으면 우파식 조련인거고

설마 정치인들이 국민을 섬기겠다고 하는 헛소리 믿는 흑우 없지?

너네 박근혜가 정말 민주주의다 뭐다 해서 국민의 힘으로 탄핵된거라 생각하냐?ㅋㅋㅋㅋ

실상은 권력투쟁이서 진것 뿐이야

박근혜가 죄가 있다면 개돼지들을 제대로 길들이고 선동하지 못한 죄 말곤 없어

대깨문들도 양심이 있다면 지들이 이번 사태에 침묵하는게 내로남불이라는거 잘 알텐데

입도 뻥끗 안하는거봐라 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ 이미 뭐가 옳고 그른지 분간을 못할정도로 세뇌된 중환자들임

겉으로는 틈만나면 민주주의 어쩌고 떠드는 놈들이 정작 자신은 세뇌된 좀비라는걸 모른다는거지

상식적으로 뭔가 비정상적인 사상을 계속 주입당하면 뭔가 이상하다는걸 느껴야 하는데

이걸 자각하지도 못할 정도로 자연스럽게 세뇌를 시킴

좌좀들한테 물어보면 하나같이 우리는 선동같은거 당한적 없고 애초부터 신념이 그런거라더라 ㅋㅋㅋ

자기가 선동당하고 있다는걸 모르게 선동할수 있다는게 진짜 무서운거고

그래서 좌파들의 선동술이 무섭다는거임

출처 일베
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

24일 자유한국당은 서울 광화문 세종문화회관 앞에서 ‘살리자 대한민국! 문재인 정권 규탄 광화문 집회’를 개최했다. [사진= 자유한국당 제공

-----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------

Daniel Hannan‏인증된 계정 

Daniel Hannan 님이 리트윗했습니다 Jordan Weissmann

This is horribly typical, not just of Twitter, but of the angry, tribal age in which we live. A rich man chose to spend his money on things he believed in rather than himself. People who disagree with his views now revel in his death. For the love of God, what has come over us?

보수 인사의 죽음에 저주를 퍼부은 사람들. 이런 사람들의 머

리 속에는 무슨 생각이 있는 걸까?

Jordan Weissmann

David Koch was a villain who devoted his wealth to

further enriching himself and his fellow plutocrats,

while spinning us all toward environmental doom. I

don’t believe in an afterlife, but if there is one, I hope

his soul suffers for eternity.

David Koch, billionaire conservative activist and philanthropist, dies at 79

He and his brother, Charles Koch, helped to build a massive conservative network of donors to support libertarian-leaning economic policies.

------------------------------------------------------

Jacob Sullum‏인증된 계정 

David Koch's "far right" agenda, per @nytimes, included gay rights, legalization of drugs and prostitution, opposition to restrictions on immigration, opposition to the draft, and criminal justice reform.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Garic Moran‏ 

1000 PHD's in economics went to Jackson Hole to figure out how to fix the world economy; yet, not one pointed out the historical fact that the USA grew twice as fast under a Gold standard when 0 PHD's in economics set interest rates and instead free market capitalism set rates!

1,000명의 경제학 박사들이 잭슨홀에 가서 세계 경제를 바로

세우는 방법에 대해 토론했다. 하지만 금본위제도 하에서 어떤

경제학박사도 금리를 조작하지 않고, 자유시장에서 수요공급

에 따라 금리가 결정되었을 때, 미국이 지금보다 2배로 성장했

다는 사실을 지적한 놈은 하나도 없었다.

---->아주 좋은 지적이다.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Nassim Nicholas Taleb Bot더 보기

"In science you need to understand the world; in business you need others to misunderstand it." - @nntaleb

과학에서 과학자는 세계를 이해해야 한다.

비즈니스에서는 세계를 잘못 이해하는 사람이 있어야, 당신이

성공한다.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Claire Lehmann‏인증된 계정 

Claire Lehmann 님이 리트윗했습니다 fatprop

Almost all smart people struggle with common sense, in my view. There's also an observable syndrome in hyper-smart people where expertise in one area licenses them to feel as if they're experts in many others

가장 우수한 사람들은 한 분야의 전문지식을 가졌다고, 다른

분야에서도 전문가 행세를 하려는 병리 증상이 있다.

Self Employed‏ 



\@clairlemon 님에게 보내는 답글

This is exactly right. I remember working with lawyers and suspecting there must have been a law school class that taught Literally All Knowledge, because they seemed awfully confident of their expertise in areas where they had zero experience.

변호사들과 일해보았는데, 그들이 전혀 경험이 없는 분야까지

도 전문가처럼 행세해서 놀랐다.

Cole Kinson‏ 
5시간 전

@clairlemon 님에게 보내는 답글

I think I heard this ‘expert in everything’ effect somewhere referred to as the ‘Paul Krugman effect’, but I might be misremembering the exact phrasing.

만물박사 효과는 어딘가에서는 크루그먼 효과라고 한다.

------------------------------------------------------

Justin Gaffrey. 파도와 태양은 거칫 붓으로 몇번 터치한 듯한데 생동감이 넘친다.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
출처 영국 데일리메일

North Korean uranium plant 'is leaking radioactive waste into a nearby river putting hundreds of thousands of people at risk of cancer and brain defects'

• Pyongsan uranium plant turns ore into 'yellowcake' which can be used for fuel
• Chemical process produces highly toxic waste water, which is sent to a reservoir
• But satellite photos show pipe which carries waste is leaking into nearby river
• Researcher Jacob Bogle says waste will contain radioactive radium as well as heavy metals, putting about 400,000 people at risk of cancer and brain defects

북한의 방사능 물질 유출 사건. 일단 철저한 조사가 필요하다.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

버니 샌더스의 거꾸로 된 도덕

샌더스는 사회적 약자를 돕는 도덕적 방법은 단지 정치적인 수단 밖에 없다고 호소한다.

하지만 정부의 복지 프로그램을 시행하려면 세금이 필요하고, 세금을 걷으려면, 무고한 시민들을 강제력으로 협박해야만 한다. 이에 비해 개인적인 자선은 평화적이고 자발적인 헌금에 의해 유지된다.

경제학자 월터 윌리엄스는 자신의 사회적 정의를 이렇게 말했다.

“내가 번 돈은 내가 갖고, 당신이 번 돈은 당신이 갖는 것이 사회적 정의요. 동의하지 않는다고요? 그러면 내가 번 돈의 얼마가, 무슨 이유로, 당신한데 가야하는지 말해 주시오,”

약자에 대한 진정한 도덕과 자비는 동정심을 발휘하는 각 개인의 가슴 속에 있는 것이지, 정치적 지시에 대한 굴종에 있지 않다.

 

Bernie Sanders's Upside-Down Concept of "Morality"

 

Bradley Thomas

 

Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign has served to once again confirm that his — and those of the "democratic socialist" and "progressive" movements — vision for society endorses an aggressive threat of violence against innocent individuals, and seeks to negate morality itself.

 

While often declaring goods like health care and day care “rights,” Sanders also insists that political solutions, rather than voluntary charity, are the only truly moral means of achieving justice.

 

For instance, Sanders recently tweeted that his Medicare for All plan is “the moral thing to do.”

 

Compare this to Sanders’s longstanding aversion to private charity. Despite his status as a millionaire, Sanders is notoriously stingy in giving to charity, and has a past of being downright hostile to it.

 

''I don't believe in charities,'' Sanders told a crowd gathered at a local 1981 United Way fundraiser, when he was mayor of Burlington, Vermont. According the New York Times, Sanders "went on to question the 'fundamental concepts on which charities are based’ and contended that government, rather than charity organizations, should take over responsibility for social programs."

 

In other words, Sanders would have us believe the only moral avenue to help the needy is through political means. Somehow the "fundamental concepts" of private charities are not sufficient in Sanders’s view.

 

To evaluate these claims, we can compare the two institutional frameworks constituting the hero and villain in Sanders’s narrative: government programs versus voluntary, private charity.

 

The use of force backed by the threat of violence is the bedrock upon which all government programs are built. Their very existence relies on compelling citizens to pay their taxes lest they be punished for their resistance. And to be clear, such threats are not leveled against the perpetrators of any crime, but rather against innocent victims who have aggressed against no one.

 

By contrast, private charity programs rely on peaceful, voluntary donations for their existence. Donors are free to refrain from turning over their money to an organization which they object to the goods or services being provided, or feel the organization is not effectively using funds to benefit those in need.

 

Contrast that with how the government would react if you decided to stop paying taxes because you don’t like the services it offers and provides in return. Agents of the government would descend upon you and threaten fines and imprisonment — resorting to physical assault if necessary — if you didn’t obey.

 

So, without you having threatened or aggressed against anyone, but merely by boycotting the submission of your property (via taxes) to the government, this organization would not stop short of invading your property and initiating violence against you.

 

Such is the true nature of how to achieve Sanders’s "moral code" of "economic rights." This is what progressives often refer to as "social justice."

 

I prefer the definition of justice offered by economist Walter Williams: "What’s just has been debated for centuries but let me offer you my definition of social justice: ‘I keep what I earn, and you keep what you earn.’ Do you disagree? Well, then, tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you — and why."

 

Finally, Sanders’s brand of "morality" not only extols the use of aggressive violence against innocents, it would run the risk of extinguishing the ability of individuals to exercise moral judgment, thus negating real morality. True morality and charity for those in need is housed in the hearts of individuals expressing their own compassion, not in response to political orders.

 

As Friedrich A. Hayek stated, "Responsibility, not to a superior, but to one’s own conscience, the awareness of duty not exacted by compulsion, but the necessity to decide which of the things one values are to be sacrificed to others, and bear the consequences of one’s own decision, are the very essence of any morals which deserve the name."

 

Or, as Murray Rothbard so succinctly wrote: "No action can be virtuous unless it is freely chosen."

 

Humans act in accordance with their own judgment. This includes judgment about helping others in need, as determined by one’s own conscience. Government, however, interferes with the connection between judgment and action. As the state forcibly outsources the exercise of moral compassion, individuals’ ability to do so atrophies.

 

Sanders’s and other progressives’ blustering about "morality" is really a smokescreen designed to distract from their vision of a society organized around the threat of government aggression against innocents and devoid of the exercise of individuals freely expressing true moral acts.

 

Bradley Thomas is creator of the website Erasethestate.com, and is a libertarian activist and writer with nearly 15 years experience researching and writing on political philosophy and economics.

-----------------------------------------------------------