한전, 文공약 뒷감당하다 빚 104조→159조 탈원전에 한전공대 비용도 떠안아… 文정부 4년만에 부채 27조원 늘어/ 조선일보 23af**** 한전 자회사 5곳이 33조 3천억의 부채를 안고 있건만 수백억씩 출연료를 걷어서 한전공대를 지어??? 학생 수가 줄어 전국 대학의 4분의 1이 5년 안에 문 닫을 판인데 조 단위 돈을 들여 한전공대를 새로 만든다. 대선 때 호남 공약이란 것이 유일한 이유다. 그 돈은 국민이 낸 전기료로 충당하고. 국민 돈도 제 돈으로 안다. 에너지 전문 인력 양성이 목적이라면 광주과학기술원과 관련 연구 기관 등을 활용하면 될것을 국민의 혈세 못써 안달이 났다. 지혜가 없으면 원칙이라도 있어라. 문재인!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------ “삥뜯는 미국, 빵셔틀 한국... 한미동맹 신화 벗어나야” ‘영원한 동맹이라는 역설’ 낸 김준형 국립외교원장 “한미동맹, 중요하지만 신화 벗어나야” 작심발언 / 서울신문 --->그리 놀라운 건 아니다. 문죄인 정부의 수준이 이 정도라는 건 알고 있었으니까. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LA 시사논평 / 문재인이 사라졌다. 윤석열, 대선출마 못한다. (생방송 3. 31. 2021) https://youtu.be/SJuoB10-Tyo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 이번 보선에선 부정선거가 없을 것 같다. 우선 부정선거 전에 여론조사를 조작해야 하는데, 지금 조작을 하지 않고 있다. (그리 만족스런 조사 결과는 아니지만 어쨌든) 또 이번 선거에서 야당 후보들이 당선되면 저들은 "이것 보라고, 선거 부정은 없었다고!"라고 주장할 수 있게 된다. 그 대신 대선에서 부정선거를 해서 대권을 차지하면 다시 모든 것을 원점으로 되돌릴 수가 있다. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 보수우파에게 현대통화이론Modern Monetary Theory ( MMT)을 권하는 멍청이가 있다 현대통화이론은 정부가 돈을 찍어내서 빚을 갚으면 되므로, 재정적자는 걱정할 필요가 없다고 주장한다. 또 인플레는 세금을 걷어 회피할 수 있다고 믿는다. 하지만 스태그플레이션은 피할 수가 없을 것이다. 또 인플레는 그리 쉽게 통제할 수 있는 게 아니다. MMT for Conservatives David Gordon Jonathan Culbreath, posting on The American Conservative web page (March 24, 2021), urges his fellow conservatives to adopt a fashionable leftist bromide, Modern Monetary Theory ( MMT). Mr.Culbreath relies for his account of MMT on the popular book by Stephanie Kelton, The Deficit Myth, which I reviewed here. According to MMT, a government that controls its own currency never has to worry about deficit spending, because it can always print more money to pay its bills. The only thing holding it back is the danger of inflation, and this can always be averted by withdrawing money from the economy through taxation. Besides, inflation cannot occur to a damaging degree unless there is full employment. Mr. Culbreath evidently has not heard of “stagflation.” He forgets that inflation can quickly spiral out of control. There is no magic by which bookkeeping entries can erase debts without bad consequences. If something sounds too good to be true, it almost always is. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 보중익기탕으로 피부병을 치료 浅谈补中益气汤治疗皮肤病的作用 作者：邓碧云,姜枫,钟江 　　摘要：基于脾胃理论探讨了运用补中益气汤治疗皮肤病的理论依据:皮肤病的润泽有赖于脾胃输布水谷精微;健脾除湿是皮肤病治疗的根本大法之一。本文基于上述理论分析了补中益气汤治疗皮肤病的机制和适应证, 并列举了3个补中益气汤化裁治疗的皮肤病案例, 为从脾胃理论和运用补中益气汤治疗皮肤病提供理论支持和临床参考。 皮肤病学论文 　　笔者有幸参加了广西壮族自治区中医临床技术骨干培养项目并跟随广西中医药大学第一附属医院皮肤科钟江主任学习半年, 钟江主任医师是广西中西结合皮肤性病学会副主任委员, 曾师从成都中医药大学附属医院老中医、博士生导师艾儒棣教授, 擅长辨证运用中医、中西医结合方法治疗皮肤病、性传播疾病的治疗, 尤其是对运用脾胃理论治疗变态反应性疾病如湿疹、荨麻疹, 脱发、痤疮、银屑病等疾病的诊治有独到的经验。跟师过程中深刻体会到中医药治疗皮肤病的独特疗效, 增强了钻研中医理论的动力, 现结合跟师后运用所学运用补中益气汤从脾胃理论治疗皮肤病汇报点滴体会, 供同道参考, 也请方家指正。 　　1 皮肤病的润泽有赖于脾胃输布水谷精微 　　关于脾胃与皮肤之间的关系, 在《内经》中已作了精辟的阐述, 如《素问·经脉别论》云:“食气入胃, 散精于肝, 淫气于筋;食气入胃, 浊气归心, 淫精于脉;脉气流经, 经气归于肺, 肺朝百脉, 输精于皮毛……饮入于胃, 游溢精气, 上输于脾, 脾气散精, 上归于肺, 通调水道, 下输膀胱, 水精四布, 五经并行, 合于四时五藏阴阳, 揆度以为常也。”[1]说明脾胃通过升清功能将饮食水谷精微, 上输于心肺, 外达及四末, 以化生卫气营血, 进而充养滋荣包括皮肤在内的周身。如若脾胃升清之力不足或受损, 不能为脏腑功能活动提供必要的物质基础如营血、津液等, 皮肤失养, 就可能发生各种皮肤病, 如皮肤色泽萎黄、暗淡无光, 甚则硬化、萎缩。李东垣在《脾胃论·脾胃盛衰论》中说:“饮食入胃, 阳气上行, 津液与气, 入于心, 贯于肺, 充实皮毛”[2], 说明脾胃运化功能正常, 才能将水谷化成精微, 生化气血, 通过肺的宣发是皮肤得以润泽。反之, 若脾失健运, 气血不足, 肌肤无以濡养, 就会出现皮肤疾患。 　　2 健脾除湿是皮肤病治疗的根本大法之一 　　皮肤疾患虽现诸于外, 却与在内的脏腑有着密切的关系, 尤其是脾胃二脏。《素问·至真要大论》曰:“诸湿肿满, 皆属于脾。”[3]脾主运化, 脾失健运, 则湿邪内生, 出现渗液、流滋之症, 如湿疹;脾主肌肉, 脾虚生化乏源, 可出现四肢肌肉无力, 甚则皮痹、肌痹;脾与胃相表里, 胃火上炎可出现口疮、口糜。李东垣在《脾胃论》中指出:“若饮食失节, 寒温不死, 则脾胃乃伤;喜怒忧恐损耗元气, 既脾胃气衰, 元气不足, 而心火独盛。心火者, 阴火也, 起于下焦, 其系于心, 心不主令, 相火代之, 相火, 下焦包络之火, 元气之贼也, 火与元气不两立, 一胜则一负, 脾胃气虚, 则下流于肾, 阴火得以乘其土位。”[2]由此阐发了“内伤脾胃、百病由生”和“有胃气则生、无胃气则死”的道理, 说明脾胃内伤不仅引起内在五脏六腑发生病变, 亦可导致四肢九窍不通而出现疾患, 其补虚以补中益气丸为代表, 泻实以三黄丸 (黄芩、黄连、大黄, 治三焦积热所致的痈疖疮痍等皮肤病症) 为代表[2]。此外, 皮肤病的常用治法中的托法和补法, 都是从补益气血的药物扶助正气、托毒外出或者恢复正气、助养新生促进伤口愈合[4]。许多不明原因性皮肤损害, 病因不清慢性皮肤病如银屑病、神经性皮炎、多形性红斑等等常规治疗疗效欠佳者, 从调理脾胃入手论治, 可以取得较好疗效[5,6,7,8,9]。再从地域上讲, 中医治病需要“三因制宜”, 广西地处岭南, 属亚热带气候, 多湿热之邪[10], 皮肤病外因多与湿邪侵犯, 或兼夹风、热等外邪, 湿邪困脾, 脾胃受纳、运化失职, 湿邪内生, 湿邪蕴久化热, 故多用健脾祛湿之法。 　　3 补中益气汤治疗皮肤病的机制和适应证 　　补中益气汤是脾土派创始人李杲的代表方剂, 在李氏代表作《内外伤辨惑论·卷中·饮食劳倦论》《脾胃论·卷中·饮食劳倦所伤始为热中论》均有论及, 由黄芪一钱、人参三分、白术三分、当归二分、升麻二分、柴胡二分、陈皮二分、甘草五分组成, 有补中益气、升阳举陷之功效, 治疗由于饮食失节、寒温不适、喜怒忧恐、劳役过度所致脾胃虚衰、元气不足、阴火上乘, 而见气高而喘、身热而烦、头痛、或渴不止、皮肤不任风寒而生寒热、脉洪大之热中证, 现临床多用于脾虚气陷证, 症见饮食减少, 体倦肢软, 少气懒言, 面色萎黄, 大便稀溏, 舌淡脉虚, 久泄久痢, 崩漏等;或气虚发热证, 症见身热自汗, 渴喜热饮, 气短乏力, 舌淡, 脉虚大无力[11]。补中益气汤用于脾虚所致的各种病证, 适当化裁可广泛应用到皮肤病的治疗中, 并取得理想的疗效。当然从脾胃论治皮肤病, 并非只一味地温补脾土、升阳举陷, 而是要分清阴阳寒热虚实, 辨证施治。有诸于内, 必形于外, 皮肤病的各种表现虽在皮肤, 皆与身体内在功能变化有关, 有多种慢性皮肤病中表现皮肤营养不良性, 功能下降性, 伴有困倦无力、气短懒言、遇劳累症状加重, 病程长经久不愈, 辨证属脾胃气虚身体正气不足者, 应用补中益气汤治疗有很好疗效[6]。 　　4 验案3则 　　案1脂溢性皮炎。患者, 刘某, 女, 25岁。主诉:反复面部皮肤油腻, 红斑, 瘙痒半年, 时伴脱屑。自觉乏力, 畏寒肢冷, 汗多, 动则汗出, 大便稀不成形, 日3~4次, 舌淡、苔薄黄, 脉沉细。西医诊断:脂溢性皮炎。中医诊断:面游风。辨证:脾虚湿热, 湿大于热。处方:黄芪20 g, 炒白术15 g, 陈皮15 g, 党参30 g, 仙灵脾15 g, 当归10 g, 川芎6 g, 荆芥10 g, 防风10 g, 菊花10 g, 浮萍10 g, 白芍10 g, 丹参15 g, 山楂15 g。14剂, 每日1剂, 水煎早中晚饭后温服。 　　二诊:症状大减, 红斑消退, 面部油腻感减轻, 无明显瘙痒, 怕冷症状明显改善, 大便正常, 舌脉同前, 中药守上方去浮萍, 加豆蔻10 g, 14剂巩固。 　　脂溢性皮炎是发生于头面积胸背等皮脂溢出较多部位的一种慢性炎症性皮肤病。西医认为本病病因和病机尚未清楚。在遗传性皮脂溢出素质的基础上, 马拉色菌等微生物的定植与感染有关, 精神、饮食、维生素B族缺乏、嗜酒等因素均可不同程度地影响本病的发生和发展。中医认为本病主要因素体湿热内蕴, 感受风邪所致。本患者嗜食肥甘厚腻及辛辣之品, 以致脾胃运化失常, 化湿生热, 湿热蕴阻肌肤而发本病。投以补中益气汤加减, 健脾除湿清热。 　　案2特应性皮炎。男, 5岁, 患儿反复四肢皮疹, 瘙痒2年余。查体:四肢红斑, 丘疹, 丘疱疹, 抓痕, 少许渗出, 结痂。患儿身体瘦弱, 面色黄, 细声细语, 平时偏食, 饮食量少, 二便正常。舌淡苔腻, 脉沉无力。其母有过敏性鼻炎病史。西医诊断:特应性皮炎。中医辨证:四弯风。证属:中气不足, 脾虚湿蕴。处方:补中益气汤加减, 薏苡仁10 g, 太子参6 g, 白术6 g, 防风5 g, 荆芥5 g, 山药10 g, 白扁豆8 g, 陈皮5 g, 茯苓10 g, 白豆蔻10 g, 半夏5 g, 神曲6 g, 甘草5 g。14剂, 每日1剂, 水煎早晚中饭后温服。嘱患儿及家长注意孩子饮食, 按时吃饭, 注意皮肤保湿, 滋润。 　　二诊时家属代诉服药后无明显不适, 食欲好转, 红斑部分消退, 无渗出, 瘙痒减轻。原方加地肤子10 g, 继服14剂。后随症加减治疗1个月皮疹消退, 无新发皮疹。 　　特应性皮炎是一种与遗传过敏素质有关的慢性炎症性皮肤病。表现为瘙痒、多形性皮损并有渗出倾向, 常伴发哮喘、过敏性鼻炎。西医认为特应性皮炎病因与发病机制目前还不很清楚, 一般认为可能是遗传因素与环境因素相互作用并通过免疫途径介导产生的结果。中医方面, 本病患儿病程2年, 由于先天不足, 禀赋不耐, 脾失健运, 湿热内生, 复感风湿热邪, 蕴聚肌肤而成。方以补中益气汤加减, 祛湿健脾, 疏风清热止痒, 使脾胃气盛, 气血得以充养, 热除痒止则病愈。 　　案3油风。患者, 罗某, 男, 22岁, 发现脱发1个月。自诉1个月前无意间发现后枕部片状脱发, 局部无皮疹, 无脱屑, 无瘙痒疼痛。平素伴有头晕, 失眠多梦, 乏力。查体:后枕部见一椭圆形斑片状脱发, 脱发区皮肤正常。舌淡、苔少, 脉细。西医诊断:斑秃, 中医诊断:油风, 中医辨证:心脾气虚。处方:党参20 g, 黄芪30 g, 炒白术15 g, 当归10 g, 茯苓20 g, 山药15 g, 龙眼肉10 g, 酸枣仁10 g, 远志10 g, 何首乌10 g, 白芷10 g, 甘草6 g。14剂, 每日1剂, 水煎早中晚饭后温服。 　　二诊时, 患者头晕失眠多梦症状明显好转, 仍时感乏力, 查体同前。中药守上方加防风10 g, 豆蔻10 g, 14剂。 　　三诊时诉无明显头晕, 无失眠多梦, 无明显乏力不适, 查体:脱发区少许毳毛生长。中药守上方去酸枣仁、远志, 14剂。1个月后电话随访, 诉毛发已长出。 　　斑秃是一种突然发生的局限性斑片状脱发, 可发生于身体任何部位。西医认为病因病机不完全清楚, 目前认为可能与遗传、情绪应激、内分泌失调、自身免疫、神经精神因素等有关。绝大多数可在6~12个月内自然痊愈。本患者因饮食不节损伤脾胃, 心神失守, 心脾气虚, 精血不足, 血不养发, 肌腠失润, 发无生长之源, 毛根空虚而发本病。 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 익기총명탕을 이용해 시피로视疲劳를 치료하다 运用益气聪明汤从补脾论治视疲劳经验 作者：赵凡 喻京生 　　【摘 要】 视疲劳是眼科常见疾病，患者常自觉视物易疲劳、模糊感、甚者疼痛不适，并且产生一系列烦躁、失眠等心理疾病。近年来随着电子产品的广泛使用，学生学业的繁重，人们长时间近距离用眼增多，该病的发病率也较前明显升高。该病病因复杂，症状多变，给患者正常生活带来不便和痛苦，严重影响人们的生活质量，目前缺少具有针对性的疗法，进而引起社会及大众的广泛关注。中医药治疗视疲劳历史悠久，临床上应用益气明目汤加减治疗本病取得良好疗效。 　　The Experience of Treating Visual Fatigue by Nourishing Spleen With Yiqi Intelligent Soup 　　ZHAO Fan YU Jingsheng* 　　1.Graduate School of Hunan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine，Changsha 410000，China; 　　2.The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine，Changsha 410000，China 　　Abstract：Visual fatigue is a common disease in ophthalmology.Patients often feel that their visual objects are easy to fatigue，fuzzy feeling，even pain and discomfort，and produce a series of psychological diseases such as irritability and insomnia.In recent years，with the widespread use of electronic products and the heavy workload of students studies，people use their eyes more closely for a long time，and the incidence of the disease is also significantly higher than before.The complex etiology and changeable symptoms of the disease bring inconvenience and pain to the normal life of the patients and seriously affect the quality of peoples life.Currently，there is a lack of targeted and accurate treatment，which has aroused widespread concern from the society and the public.The treatment of asthenopia by traditional Chinese medicine has a long history. 　　視疲劳又称眼疲劳，是一种以患者自觉眼部症状为基础，眼或全身器质因素与精神（心理）因素相互交织的综合征，主要表现为视物模糊、不耐久视、干涩不适、酸胀流泪、头痛眩晕、精神萎靡等，在眼科疾病中常见，属于心身医学范畴[1]。多项研究和流行病学调查发现，该病的高发病率与目前视频终端的大量使用密切相关，且逐年递增。患者长期不予重视不仅会影响视力及身心健康，甚者出现眼部生理病变[2]。 　　1 病因病机 　　目前认为本病因复杂多样，包括眼部调节性因素：屈光不正、屈光参差;眼肌长时间收缩;其他多种眼病均可诱发视疲劳，比如：干眼症、结膜炎、角膜炎、睑缘炎、睑板腺功能障碍、白内障等;视频终端（visual display terminal，VDT）操作因素;其他多个全身因素等，由于眼睛视近物超过负荷，都可使患者眼睛过度疲劳[3]。阅读环境灯光闪烁、光线过强或不足的环境因素、长时间脑力劳动、心情焦虑等精神因素[4]，亦可导致视疲劳。 　　我国传统医学很早就有对视疲劳的记载，最早可追溯至唐代，医家孙思邈在《备急千金要方·七窍病上》中指出：“其读书、博弈等过度用目者，名曰肝劳”。并首次明确提出了导致眼疾的19种因素，包括极目远视、数看日月、夜读细书、月下看书、抄写多年、雕镂细作、博弈不休、泣泪多年等。《医学入门·杂病分类·眼》也认为：“极目远视，夜书细字，镂刻博奕伤神，皆伤目之本。”《素问·阴阳应象大论》云：“诸脉者，皆属于目，目得血而能视[5]。”可见古人很早就认为视疲劳与久视、气血不能上荣于目有关。《灵枢·脉度》曰：“肝气通于目，肝和则目能辨五色矣。”《灵枢·大惑论》曰：“五脏六腑精气，皆上注与目而为之精。”李东垣《兰室秘藏·眼耳鼻门》云：“夫五脏六腑之精气，皆禀受于脾……故脾虚则五脏之精气皆失所司，不能归明于目矣。”脾主升清，《素问·阴阳应象大论》云：“清阳上出窍”，脾气上升，才能将精微物质升运于目，而视物清明;脾虚则五脏之精气皆失所养，不能归明于目[6]。脾为气血生化之源，目为肝之窍，目得血而视，故视疲劳与肝脾关系密切。 　　2 治疗方法 　　西医治疗视疲劳多以对症治疗为主，多采用滴眼液防止眼部干涩，达到润滑的效果，同时口服维生素A、B1、B12等可以调节眼部肌肉，缓解眼肌痉挛，从而减轻视疲劳的症状。另外视觉训练、棱镜矫正及外科手术治疗视疲劳疗效也获得肯定，但临床应用不广泛[3，6]。诸多治疗方法只能暂时缓解症状，并不能达到根治的目的。中医中药治疗本病具有悠久历史，益气聪明汤出自《东垣试效方》卷五，为李东垣弟子罗天益录辑而成，方由黄芪、人参、葛根、蔓荆子、白芍、黄柏、升麻、甘草组成，八药合用，共奏益气升阳、聪耳明目之功[7]。笔者临床上运用益气聪明汤加减治疗该病，从培补脾胃入手，充气血以滋目，使目窍气血充足，得血而视，取得较好的疗效。现将验案总结于下。 　　3 验案举隅 　　患者林某，女，24岁，2019年10月13日首诊，诉久视后视物模糊、干涩，伴双眼胀痛不适1年余。患者1年来因工作原因每次长时间使用电脑后出现暂时性双眼视力模糊，视近尤甚，眼部干涩，伴胀痛，偶有灼烧感、流泪不舒，双眼无明显痒感，分泌物无增多，工作繁累时上述症状加重，出现头晕头痛，平素饮食一般，夜寐欠安，偶有失眠多梦，口干喜热饮，大便稍干，小便可。舌淡红，苔白，脉细。专科检查：Vod 1.0+，Vos1.0，NCTod 15 mmHg，NCTos 17 mmHg，双结膜充血（+），双角膜透明，泪膜破裂时间短，KP无，双前房深，Tyndallsign：（-），双虹膜纹理清，双瞳孔等大等圆，直径3 mm，对光反射灵敏，双晶体在位，无混浊，核颜色透明，双眼底可见，视乳头色淡红，C/D=0.3，网膜面平伏，黄斑区亮点反光可。西医诊断：视疲劳（双眼）;中医诊断：肝劳（脾虚气弱证）。治疗予益气聪明汤加减，处方如下：黄芪20 g，黄柏10 g，人参10 g，升麻10 g，葛根10 g，芍药10 g，蔓荆子10 g，酸枣仁30 g，北沙参10 g，甘草10 g。7剂，日1剂。2019年10月21日二诊，患者自觉眼部干涩、灼烧感较前减轻，久视后暂时性视物模糊较前好转，头晕头痛，失眠多梦症状较前明显好转，无明显口干口渴，食纳可，二便正常。上方去酸枣仁，继服15剂。2019年11月8日三诊，患者诉久视后视物模糊症状较前明显好转，无眼胀眼痛，无干涩及烧灼感，无流泪不适，纳寐可，二便调。 　　按语：本案例中患者为青年女性，因工作需要长期使用电脑，致双眼不耐久视，胀痛、干涩不舒，严重时出现头晕头痛、失眠多梦症状，结合舌脉及全身症状可知患者因过度使用目力，导致目窍失养，不耐久视，长此以往伤及气血，精液不能上荣于目而使症状加重，治以补脾益气;升阳明目。方中人参、黄芪甘温，补脾益气，葛根、升麻升举阳气;蔓荆子轻扬升发，通利九窍;白芍酸甘敛阴和血，黄柏补肾生水，二者合用平肝滋肾;北沙参益气生津止渴;酸枣仁宁心安神;甘草和脾胃、调和诸药，全方共奏益气升阳、补脾明目之功。 　　4 小结 　　在日常生活中，长时间工作或学习时，用眼过度、眼睛未得到充分有效的休息，就容易产生视疲劳，患者往往会出现看近物疲劳或看远物疲劳、或两者都有的情况，不能保证清晰持久的阅读或视物。临床诊断标准除了不耐久视、暂时性视物模糊外，患者还会伴有眼部干涩、灼烧感、发痒、胀痛、流泪等症状，严重时会出现头痛、头晕、记忆力减退、失眠等全身及心理疾患[8]。国外学者Katsuyama等[9]经进行了相关实验研究，证实观察对象眼球长时间工作得不到充足休息时，会使眼外肌和睫状肌疲劳，眼球调节能力下降，尤其是睫状肌失调，就会导致视疲劳综合症。 　　《银海精微》记载：“脾属土曰肉轮，在眼为上下胞睑。”中医认为，五轮与五脏为标本关系，五脏为本，五轮为标，五脏有疾，在五轮的相应之轮部位就表现出症状。《灵枢·大惑论》曰：“肌肉之精为约束。”肉轮部位在眼睑，在脏属脾。所以脾胃虚弱，气血亏损，无以上荣于目，往往引起睫状肌力减弱、调节性视力疲劳[6]。脾为后天之本，气血生化之源，一旦饮食失节、劳耗过度，损及脾胃，气血生化乏源，可致五脏六腑精气亏虚，气血精液不能上行于目，目失濡养，久视疲乏、视物昏蒙。《素问·宣明五气论》曰：“久视伤血。”血为气之母，血不足则气不足，气血亏虚，目无血无所视，头目失养，见目昏、目干、胀痛、头晕头痛等，故应补脾益气、生血明目。五脏六腑气血充沛，目窍得荣，则精神过倍，明目得视。现代医家金寿山先生[10]依据“内伤脾胃，百病由生”及《灵枢·口问》之“上气不足，脑为之不满，耳为之苦鸣，头为之苦倾，目为之眩”理论，提出上气不足是气虚的一种表现，其多因中气不足、清气不升所致，临床上对于上气不足之头痛、耳鸣、眩晕等症常以益气聪明汤加减取效。陆绵绵[11]对视疲劳提出气虚、清阳不升证型，治以益气升阳，选用柴胡、升麻、黄芪、党参、白术、当归、蔓荆子、荆芥、防风、炙甘草;成药选用补中益气丸或益气聪明丸治疗本病。 　　益气聪明汤方由黄芪、人参、葛根、蔓荆子、白芍、黄柏、升麻、甘草组成，系金元四大家之一李东垣所创，由弟子罗天益录辑而成，收录在《东垣试效方》卷五，八药合用，共奏益气升阳、聪耳明目之功。李东垣曰：“医不理脾胃及养心安神，治标不治本，是不明理也。”益气聪明汤具有令目广大，久服无内外障，耳鸣耳聋之患，又令精神过倍，元气自益，身轻体健，耳目聪明的功效。主治饮食不节、劳役形体、脾胃不足、得内障、耳鸣或多年目暗、视物不能[12]。清代费伯雄著《医方论》[13]言：“此方重脾胃而兼治肝肾，立意最精。”益气聪明汤为五官九窍之病所设。方中黄芪性微温，补脾益气升阳;人参甘温，大补元气，补脾固脱，安神益智，两藥共为君药，增强益气补脾之功。葛根性甘凉，入脾胃经，可生津止渴、升阳止泻;升麻性甘微寒，升举阳气;蔓荆子疏风清热、清利头目;此三药为臣，可清扬升发，益气升阳，使清阳上行头目，则头目清利、耳聪目明，同时又能入阳明，鼓舞胃气，胃气足而气血足;白芍微寒补虚、调和肝脾，与甘草配伍，使筋脉濡养，阴血得补;黄柏可补肾生水，与白芍共为佐药，二者平肝滋肾，补益耳目;甘草为使，可补脾益气，调和诸药。诸药合用，补中气、益脾胃、升清阳、利头目、通五官九窍，使耳聪目明。 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[나랏빚 1천조 시대] 채무비율 40% 마지노선 외치던 나라…3년 새 50% 목전 코로나19 1차 추경으로 채무비율 41.2%…40%선 깨져 올해 국가채무 965조9000억원…채무비율 48.2% 껑충 내년 나랏빚 1091조2000억원…文정부서 1000조 돌파 손실보상제·전국민 위로금 지급시 재정건전성 더 악화 '나랏빚 1000조' 발등에 불…코로나로 증액된 사업 전면 재검토 '2022 예산안 편성 및 기금운용계획안 작성지침' 발표 소비쿠폰·고용사업 단계적 축소…재량지출 10% 감축 관행적 보조금·출연사업 정비…공무원 운영경비 절감 "재정준칙 입법화 노력"…중기 재정건전성 확보 총력 / 뉴시스 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 작은 봉지 화장실로 세상을 바꾼 '피푸 https://www.ilbe.com/view/11332872469?page=5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 與 운동권 특혜법에… 김영환 “부끄럽다, 민주화 유공자 반납” 조선일보 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2021년 3월 30일 누군지는 모르겠지만 국회 발언인데 재미있다. https://youtu.be/ncfdSD_6Hvc -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Why Times 정세분석 745] 중국의 대반격, ‘전쟁예고'에 '무력시위'까지(2021.03.28) https://youtu.be/9vSoY5Ha_JI --->블링큰 국무장관이 트럼프의 대중국 정책을 대체로 계승함으로써 미국과 중국은 충돌을 피할 수 없게 되었다. 한국에 불똥이 튈 수도 있다. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 미국, 중국 대만 침공시 마련해둔 강력한 군사적 대응책 밝혀지다 김영호 교수 https://youtu.be/hLlllTioV00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 이지성 페북 출판계에 정통한 누구와 10년만에 통화를 했는데 가만히 계셨으면 책도 더 잘 팔리고 좋았을 텐데 왜 유튜브로 그런? 이렇게 묻길래 잠시 지난 날을 돌아봤다. 사실 나도 가만히 있으려고 했다. 특히 도서 시장의 70~80%를 차지하는 진보 성향 독자들의 역린은 절대 건들고 싶지 않았다. 그런데 문재인 정부 들어서 내가 목숨 걸고 하는 탈북인 구출 사역에 심각한 적신호가 들어오기 시작했다. 우리 국민, 우리 민족, 우리 동포들이 목숨 걸고 탈북하고 있는데, 이들을 한국으로 데려오는 인권 단체들의 정부 지원금이 모조리 끊기고, 직간접적인 탄압이 들어오고... 결국 나는 작은 땅까지 팔아서 후원금을 냈는데 밑빠진 독에 물붓기라 결국 북한 암살조 때문에 절대로 노출되어서는 안 되는 수퍼맨 목사님까지 조선일보에 나와서 후원금 요청을 해야 하는 상황이 벌어졌다. 그리고 뉴스에도 여러 차례 보도되었듯이 우리가 죽을 힘을 다해 구출한 사람들이 정부의 비협조로 인해 다시 중국 등지로 되돌려지는 일들이 발생했다. 여기서 내 뇌속의 어떤 끈이 끊어졌다. 나는 문재인 정권 실세들이 사람 새끼가 아니라는 결론을 내렸고 그렇게 나의 저항은 시작되었다. 결국 나는 사람 때문에 사람을 위하여 종북친중좌파와 싸우기로 결단을 내렸던 것이다. 3대 세습 독재자 눈치 보느라 사람 목숨을 우습게 취급하는 사람 새끼가 아닌 것들은 국가와 민족과 인권의 이름으로 정리를 해야 한다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- H&M, 유니클로, 나이키 배척이 애국?/백악관은 재테크 본산, 드러난 그들의 기업, 월가 커넥션 박상후 문명개화 https://youtu.be/CrJCgHurzRY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 강남 한복판에 中共 선전선동부 전위조직이?! 신인균의 국방티비 https://youtu.be/ZlXam1yKjjU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 미세먼지 주범이 돈되는 물질로 변했다 GIST 최창혁 교수, 일산화질소를 섬유 원료로 변환/ 파이낸셜뉴스 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 쌀값 상승세 지속…가공식품 업체 일제히 ‘가격인상’ 2월 평균가격 20kg ‘5만 4,900원’ 2004년 이후 최고 즉석밥-막걸리 가격 인상 불가피…소비자 “자제해야”/ 농축유통신문 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (반중에 관심있다면 이영상 꼭봐라 ) 실제로 한국에서 일어나고있는 중국 문화침략 소프트파워 케이스들 ㄷㄷ 우주와접속하는아이 유재일 대구매일일보 기자 최홍민 이준석이 1주일마다 모여서 하는 시사토크방송인데 평소에는 ㅍㅌ 찍던 방송인데 저번주 주말방송은 정말 유재일이랑 이준석 지식정보 포텐 터트렸다 ㄷㄷㄷ 지금 중국금융세력과 자본세력 그리고 중국당간부세력들이 한국에 좌파세력들과 결탁해서 어떻게 한국에 중국자본을 침투하고있는지 전대깨문출신 유재일이 좌파출신답게 우파에서는 알기힘든 좌파들 만행들 그리고 현재진행중인 여러가진 사건들 내부정보들 쏟아냈다 ㄷㄷㄷ 진짜 처음들어본 사건들 지금 중국자본이 한국에서 저지르고 있는 여러 케이스들 종합선물세트처럼 유재일이 엄청많이 이야기해주더라 ㄷㄷ 라인/옵티머스/인국공사태의 본질 ( 비정규직의 정규직이 목적이 아니라 공항세관업무를 특정 좌파세력이 차지할려고 했었던 의혹들) / 제주도 중국자본점령사례 제주도 중국인여행객 최대 여행사가 중국인 운영 여행사인데 거기와 이스타항공이(친문이 대표였던곳) 카르텔로 연결되어있음 즉 제주도는 중국자본시스템이 점령했음 / 지방자치단체장 시의원 군의원도의원 선거에 외국인 거주자한테 선거권 허용한 이유 ( 외국인 거주자라고 해봤쟈 80프로가 조선족 출신들임 ㄷㄷ) 그리고 이낙연과 연관된 여러가지 의혹들 아시아나를 대한항공이 인수할수밖에 없던이유 ( 그과정에서 좌파세력 사모펀드가 개입한 정황) 지금 좌파세상인데 제2의 바다이야기 ( 모바일 불법스포츠 도박으로 변질된거 이야기해줌 좌파세력+ 중국자본이 그 불법스포츠 도박프로그램 다차지했고 천문학적 돈 조단위이상으로 벌고있는데 왜이리 잠잠할까 ?? 상황이 이런데도 추미애 법무장관되자마자 먼저한일이 검찰 금융수사부서 폐지 ㄷㄷ 중국자본과 좌파들의 스포츠도박 프로그램부터 사모펀드까지 금융범죄는 더늘었는데 수사인력은 오히려 폐지 과연 이게 우연일까 ?? 좌파들과 중국세력들이 불법도박으로 번 천문학적인 돈들이 사모펀드나 기업합병에 흘러들어간 정황들 ) 등등 엄청 다양하게 이야기해준다 가세연은 디테일한 정보전달보다는 그날 헤드라인 뉴스이슈 위주로 설명해주고 김용호는 연예이슈 위주라 아쉬운게 있었는데 유재일이 좌파출신이라서 그런가 좌파들과 현재 중국세력들이 한국에서 어떤짓하고 있는지 엄청 자세히 디테일하게 설명해주더라 ㄷㄷ 옆에서 유재일 이야기듣던 조국기자회견때 돌직구날렸던 최홍민 기자 경악해서 입을 벌리더라 ㅋㅋㅋ 내말 무슨말인지 영상 끝까지 보면 알수있다 나도 영상추천 잘안하는데 이영상은 정말 우파입장에서 본다면 귀중한 지식정보더라 꼭봐라 보지도 않고 시비걸지말고 일단보고 판단해라 https://youtu.be/MB_9Xag3JcY 프레스18라이브] 당연히 서울시장은 ㅂㅇㅅ이지/유재일, 이준석, 최훈민(2021 03 27) -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

고성 여행갔다가 꼭 알려달라고 전하는 상황 이봉규 티비 단̊̈맛ෆ̆̈ 강원도 고성 36사단 해체 글은 19년에 '지만원의시스템클럽' 퍼온글에 있네요. 해체하는 사단들이 있긴한가봐요.. https://youtu.be/4yXQgwO3d8s ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 홍석현·홍정도 뒤엔 그들 몸과 마음 지배하는 종북 목사 정기열 있다 - 조우석 칼럼 - [뉴스타운TV] https://youtu.be/3WDXikkFOYU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 신평 변호사 “사적인 이익을 도모하기 위해 국민에게서 ‘공정의 기회’를 훔친 것보다 더 큰 도둑이 어디 있겠는가” “허경영 후보의 플래카드에 적힌 말이 통렬하였다” “허 후보의 구호에 나타나는 그 도둑놈이 현 정부의 실세를 이루며 정책을 좌지우지해온 ‘진보귀족’들이라고 본다” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 문재인의 족보를 묻는다 [김경재] https://youtu.be/Wt5EXmvJMu4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 일본의 자유주의 학자 토시오 무라타, 지난 3월 21일 97세로 영면하다. 그는 1958 ~ 60년에 미제스 세미나에 참석했으며, 귀국 후에는 미제스의 저서 <인간 행동>과 <경제학의 핵심 기초 The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science>를 번역했다. Toshio Murata, R.I.P. David Gordon Professor Toshio Murata of the Yokohama College of Commerce died on March 12, 2021, at the venerable age of 97. During World War II, he was a staff officer responsible for economic planning in Shanghai, under the Japanese Occupation. He soon found out that central planning in a city of that size did not work, and, when his opinions become known to the central authorities, he was removed from his post. After the war, an American student sent him a copy of Human Action, and he was immediately convinced by Mises’s free market views. Through the assistance of a Japanese businessman who was a member of the Mont Pelerin Society, he was able to secure a one-year fellowship in the Graduate School of Business Administration at NYU from the William Volker Fund, and he attended Mises’s Seminar in 1959 and 1960. Upon his return to Japan, he became a leading proponent of Mises’s thought and translated Human Action and The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science into Japanese. He was also an authority on real estate marketing. Younger Japanese scholars interested in Austrian economics viewed him as a father figure. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

중국, 20대 비행기 동원 대만 침범, 서해5도와 대만해협에서 동시다발 국지전 벌어지나? 북한, 남한 군사 도발 임박 징후 김영호교수의세상읽기 https://youtu.be/U1Ez_OmHJmA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [단독] 문재인정부, 백신 구입에 '1조원' 웃돈 줬다… 그나마 90%는 언제 올지도 몰라 文정부, 백신 구매비 총 3조8067억… 백신 단가 최고가로 계산해도 총 2조8130억원 AZ 1회분 3~5달러, 화이자 19~20달러… 文정부, 1회분 평균 22.5달러 지급한 셈 웃돈도 문제지만… 의료계 "다른 나라 집단면역 때 우리는 마스크 쓰고 다녀야" / 뉴데일리 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 뉴스1 38노스 "北, 신형 SLBM용 잠수함 진수 준비하는 듯" --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선일보 ‘중국식 규제법안’ 쏟아내는 당정… 새벽배송·중고거래까지 막히나 rnjs**** 민주주의 탈을 쓴 독재정권=문재인과 더불어성추행당 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Menger to Mises In this plenary address from the 2021 Austrian Economic Research Conference, Samuel Bostaph, an economist and historian of economic though discusses how Ludwig von Mises preserved and developed the work of Carl Menger. https://mises.org/library/menger-mises ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

복지국가로 가는 유일한 길, '안심소득제'란 무엇인가? 김영호 교수의 세상읽기 https://youtu.be/b0iDmdWqImo ---->기본소득제와 유사한 또 다른 사이비 좌파 이론. 복지국가라는 개념 자체가 좌파적이다. 개인적으로 무직자이고 소득이 전혀 없는 사람들에게, 생존 자금으로 한달에 약 30만원 정도씩 줄 수는 있다고 생각한다. 하지만 그 외의 어떤 복지(건강보험, 연금, 보조금 등)도 없다는 전제에서 줄 수 있다. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "바이든씨, 중공과 그만 싸우시기를"/"국가안보는 30년 뒤를 상상해야" 박상후의 문명개화 미 바이든 행정부가 가장 마음대로 되지 않는 부분이 국제관계입니다. 다른나라와 관계된 외교분야는 방향을 완전히 틀기가 쉽지 않습니다. 국제관계 가운데서도 가장 일관성이 없이 갈팡질팡하고 있는 부분이 대중외교입니다. 트럼프 행정부의 대못이 워낙 많아 관성을 갑자기 줄이기가 쉽지 않습니다. 친중파인 미 민주당정권이 의외로 중공에 대해 굉장히 강경합니다. 이해가 잘 되지 않는 부분인데 결국 그들의 속성은 드러날 공산이 큽니다. 그런게 갑자기 뉴욕타임즈의 중공특파원 출신인 이안 존슨이 "바이든씨 이제 중공과 입씨름은 충분했으니 그만두라"는 제목의 사설을 게재했습니다. 이안 존슨은 베이징에서 20년동안 거주한 중공통으로 파룬궁 관련 취재로 퓰리처상도 수상한 적이 있는 저널리스트입니다. 공교롭게도 바이든 행정부의 대중외교가 꼬이고 있는 가운데 그가 민주당정권의 고민을 대신 해주면서 해결책을 제시하는 구체적인 방안들을 제시했습니다. 반중정서가 고조된 가운데 바이든 정권이 미처 말못하는 심정을 대변하는 것으로 분석됩니다. 이안 바이든의 논지는 오바마 행정부의 대중노선으로 회귀하라는 것입니다. 트럼프 행정부가 취한 거의 모든 제재를 해제하라고 요구하고 있습니다. 그가 제시한 방안들은 항복선언이나 다름없을 정도로 급진적입니다. 일개 기자의 사설이라고 보기에는 석연치 않습니다. 뉴욕타임즈는 미국의 대표적인 친중매체인데다 이안 존슨 개인도 상당히 중공친화적인 인물이기 때문입니다. 한편 일본에서는 올해 육상자위대 병력 전원인 14만이 투입되는 전국적인 군사훈련이 계획되고 있습니다. 센카쿠열도에서 있을 수도 있는 중공과의 무력충돌 대비차원입니다. 일본자위대는 정식군대가 아니라고는 하지만 그 전력이 막강합니다. 군비지출규모는 러시아를 능가하고 단순화력분야에서는 미, 러, 중, 인도에 이은 세계 5위를 자랑합니다. 스가 요시히데 총리는 방위대학 졸업식 훈시에서 국가안보는 30년뒤 국제정세와 안보환경을 변화까지 내다보고 준비해야 한다고 말했습니다. 또 미 바이든행정부와의 동맹도 강조했습니다. 오늘 방송은 바이든 정권의 속성에 따른 미중관계의 변화가능성과 일본을 둘러싼 군사정체를 심층 분석했습니다. https://youtu.be/71YUHajONIQ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [단독] 美국방 “성주 사드기지 방치, 동맹으로 용납 못할 일” 오스틴 美국방, 방한때 “동맹으로서 반드시 고쳐져야 한다” 항의 ---조선일보 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

서울시장 선거 우울하네요. 반백년 사는 동안 국힘당 한번 찍어본적 없지만 이번에는 박영선 후보가 되는게 반갑지만은 않네요. 박시장님이 뿌린 것 중 공무원들이 치를 떠는 업무를 하고 있습니다. 시민단체들이 시청과 구청에 들어와서 일을 합니다. 협치라는 그럴듯한 이름입니다. 근데 너무 힘드네요. 진짜 죽고 싶을정도로요. 시민단체어서 온 사람들이 예산을 자기들 사비처럼 써댑니다. 문제 제기를 하면 협치에 대한 이해가 없다고 난리고요. 어떤 사람은 작년에 회의 수당만 300만원 정도 받아 갔습니다. 자격도 안되는 아는 업체 물어오는 거도 예사고요. 최근에는 시설 위탁을 맡겼는데, 위탁 받은 업체(단체)의 등기 이사가 그 사업계획을 심사하는 위원회에 여러명을 넣었습니다. 이번 심사 시에 이해당사자로 제척해야한다고 며칠을 싸우고 나서, 두고두고 머라고 시비를 걸고 있고요. 시민단체들 해도해도 너무 뻔뻔한 거 같아요. 그냥 밑에 직원들 안다치고 저도 무사히 시간이 가길 바라지만, 그럴 수 있을지 모르겠네요 박영선 후보가 돼야 되는데, 되면 제가 맡고 있는 업무의 변화가 거의 없을거 같고, 그렇다고 안철수나 오세훈이 되는 것도 싫고, 많이 우울하네요/ 출처 클리앙 --->협치라는 이름으로 시민단체 놈들이 들어가 시정을 엉망으로 만들고 자신들의 이권을 챙겼다는 폭로이다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- [칼럼] 망국적 현금살포, 재정위기 앞당긴다 오정근 객원 칼럼니스트 펜앤 2020.04.27 ---->작년에 쓴 글인데 점점 현실로 다가오는 듯하다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 415총선, 부정선거 맞다!!! 자유-공정 선거 의무 국제규범에 국제인권법까지 위반. 국제조사보고서 발표. 백두산 캠프 https://youtu.be/0fY-BirbYEg ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 원래 北京歡迎你(북경은 당신을 환영합니다)라는 노래가 있었는데 그것을 개사해 중국의 황사와 현실을 풍자했다. 《北京沙塵暴歡迎你》 迎接維尼新時代 帶來全新災難 領導改變沙塵不變 整個北京朦朧 我家大門常打開 盡情呼吸等你 呼吸過了有了肺病 你會離開這裡 不管遠近都是韭菜 請大力呼吸 享受中共的禮物 我們歡迎你 我家種著萬年樹 全面小康拉倒 樹木沒了失去保護 災害直搗黃龍 陌生熟悉都是韭菜 請不用拘禮 第幾次來沒關係 空氣還是差 北京歡迎你 維尼開天闢地 流動中的空氣充滿著致命 北京歡迎你 在太陽下呼吸霧霾 在北京城呼吸空氣 我家砍樹中門開 沙塵直接進來 歲月長了報應來了 迎接這個日期 天大地大都是沙塵 請不要呼吸 拍照不用開濾鏡 就有復古感 北京歡迎你 像維尼感動你 讓我聚沙成傻去超越自己 北京歡迎你 有夢想誰都了不起 小學生也能當主席 北京歡迎你 維尼開天闢地 流動中的空氣充滿著致命 北京歡迎你 在太陽下呼吸霧霾 在北京城呼吸空氣 北京歡迎你 像維尼感動你 讓我聚沙成傻去超越自己 北京歡迎你 有夢想誰都了不起 小學生也能當主席 2021北京歡迎你！《北京沙塵暴歡迎你》原：北京歡迎你 https://youtu.be/sGFDWOwOVbU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Grumpy Economist John Cochrane's blog Wednesday, March 24, 2021 Defining inequality so it can't be fixed In one of their series of excellent WSJ essays, Phil Gramm and John Early notice that conventional income inequality numbers report the distribution of income before taxes and transfers. After taxes and transfers, income inequality is flat or decreasing, depending on your starting point. 수입 불평등의 근거로 삼는 수치들은 납세 이전의 수치들이다. 세금을 제하고 나면 불평등은 그리 심하지 않거나 감소 중이다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Economic Prosperity Is a Prerequisite for All Other Kinds of Prosperity Brian Carus Both Ludwig von Mises and Abraham Maslow understood that unless we first secure the benefits of economic progress, it becomes impossible to pursue higher human wants and needs. 경제적 번영이 있어야만 인간의 더 높은 욕구를 추구할 수 있다. --->한국의 경우도 마찬가지다. 경제가 일단 무너지면, 우리가 자랑하던 문화(한류)도 와르르 모두 사상누각처럼 무너지고 만다. 그리고 기타 의료나 교육과 같은 사회의 모든 혜택들이 같이 사라지게 된다. https://mises.org/wire/economic-prosperity-prerequisite-all-other-kinds-prosperity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 재정적자가 문제가 되지 않는다면, 세금은 왜 걷으려 하나? 좌파들은 그들이 싫어하는 사람들을 벌주고, 그들의 동지들을 보상하며, 나아가 대중을 통제하기 위해 세금을 부과한다. 현대의 세금은 문명을 위한 댓가가 아니라 문명의 포식자가 되었다. If Deficits Don't Matter, Why Bother with Taxes? Peter St. Onge On March 18, Joe Wiesenthal of Bloomberg Markets had MMT economist Stephanie Kelton on the show. If you’re not familiar with modern monetary theory, they think governments should print more money because deficits aren’t a big deal. At one point in the show, Wiesenthal asked, “If we don’t need to worry about deficits, why do we have taxes?” Kelton’s response was illuminating. Now, the traditional excuse for taxes is, paraphrasing Oliver Wendell Holmes, that they are the “price of civilization.” Skeptics point out that, historically, societies with very low taxes were often far more civilized—think the Dutch Golden Age, Islamic Golden Age, Victorian England, the pejoratively named “Gilded Age” in American history—that thirty-year golden age when almost everything useful was invented. And, yet, throughout that period, federal receipts were one-fifth what they are today. Why so much civilization? Because much of what governments do today was done by charities or businesses competing for customer dollars instead of seizing their budget in taxes. When doctors, firefighters, and schools have to satisfy customers, things get quite civilized. Still, even if we accept a “night-watchman state” argument for, say, national defense or salaries for Supreme Court justices, it gets tricky if government can simply print up the fresh money to pay for all that civilization. Kelton’s answer? Taxes would still be needed, because they make us poor. And because they can punish people she doesn’t like. Specifically, Kelton likes that taxes “remove dollars from our hands, so we can’t spend them,” leaving more purchasing power for the government. So taxes make the people poor, and that’s a selling point to her, presumably because she thinks governments are really good at lifting people out of poverty. Anybody who’s spent time in America’s inner cities, where government money is pretty much the only money, might disagree. Ah, but it’s not just about spending our money more wisely than we ever could, Kelton adds two secondary reasons she loves taxes: to punish particular people by redistributing their money, and to punish people for doing things she doesn’t like. Such as failing to buy energy-efficient appliances (no, really). In other words, social engineering with carrots for your friends, sticks for your not-so-friends. Aside from the morality of preying on our neighbors, demanding they pay an ever-growing “fair share” that invariably exceeds what, say, a journalist or professor pays, using taxes for redistribution and punishing—“nudging,” in the fashionable parlance—carries enormous collateral damage. Because redistribution arranges society into hostile factions either trying to violently dispossess one another or defending against that dispossession. Moreover, redistribution isn’t simply innocently shuffling the chips; it is wholesale destruction. A paper coauthored by Christina Romer, former chair of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors, found that each dollar in government spending leads to between $2 and $3 in lost economic activity. A separate study by Harvard economist Martin Feldstein came to similar deadweight estimates that “may exceed $2 per $1 of revenue.” In other words, in order to move a dollar, you have to destroy at least two to three dollars. There is a similar mix of moral and practical costs to using predatory taxes for social engineering. It also breaks the social compact to live and let live, rendering our every decision subject to public vote, from what we eat, to where we vacation, to what kind of bag we use to carry our groceries. There is nothing outside the realm of the nudgers, no detail too small. Moreover, by mass imposition of what are effectively judicial fines for noncrimes, such taxes can achieve a level of control that would never be constitutional if written as law. For example, today in the United States, 90 percent of students attend public schools, despite the terrible quality of education. Why do they stay? Because each voter must pay for public schools whether or not they use them, but would have to shoulder $11,200 per child per year for opting out of the public system, while continuing to pay that $12,600 per year in taxes for the “free” public system. Especially for the working class, this penalty becomes prohibitive for all but the most committed. Pair these facts—no detail too small for the social engineers and their ability to achieve near-universal obedience via fines and subsidies—and we risk a totalitarian “permissioned” society where we are free on paper, but using that freedom comes with ruinous fines. If, indeed, the only remaining justification for taxes in an inflationary regime is to redistribute and punish—to erode social harmony in a fiscal war of all against all while impoverishing society and enabling a creeping totalitarianism—then it is much closer to the mark that modern taxes have become not the price of civilization, but the predator of civilization. Peter St. Onge blogs on economics at Profits of Chaos. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

한국경제 文 주사기 '바꿔치기' 음모론 확산…백신 접종 영상 보니 [속보] "현직 의사들도 문재앙 백신 접종 수상해함" -/일베 1보1월1일금연시작 요약 1. 주사기 바꿔치기 음모론 언급하며 종로구보건소, 질병관리청 경찰수사 드립침 2. 현직 의사들 "주사기 뚜껑 다시 씌우는건 납득 안돼" 3. 종로 보건소 "착시현상 일수도" 4. 현직의사 "리캡은 바늘사고의 원인이며, 3~4초 사이에 다시 뚜껑을 씌웠다는건 믿기 어렵다" ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 중앙일보 실거주하려고 집 샀는데 말 바꾼 세입자..法 "집주인, 입주 불가" mongdol 미친 정당이 만든 미친 법. --->사유재산권이 무너지면 자본주의도 무너진다. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 베이징 동계올림픽 최악의 시나리오/미-중 갈등, 최대의 승자는 러시아 박상후의 문명개화 마이크 폼페오 전 국무장관이 베이징 동계올림픽 최악의 시나리오를 경고했습니다. 미국과 서방의 선수나 기자가 위구르에 대해 언급할 경우 국가안전법 저촉으로 중공에 체포돼 구금될 수도 있다고 말했습니다. 폼페오는 베이징 동계옴림픽이 나치 독일의 1936년 올림픽처럼 독재자의 위상만 높여주는 결과가 된다면서 보이콧하는 편이 좋다는 의견을 밝힌 바 있습니다. 이번 방송에서는 알라스카 미중회담이후 양국관계가 최악이 되자 러시아가 어부지리를 보고 있는 상황들을 종합했습니다. https://youtu.be/5As-3RcosUo --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 요즘 사람들은 독기가 꽉 차있는듯함 NIS프로파일러 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11331588909 요즘 일어나는 사건 사고 보면 별것도 아닌 일로 사람 폭행하고 보복하고 죽이는 일이 아무렇지도 않게 일어나는듯함. 서로 "미안합니다" 한마디 하면 끝날일을 가지고 서로 니가 잘못했다고 우기면서 끝까지 사과안하거나 쌩까다가 SNS나 커뮤니티, 언론에 퍼지면서 인실좆 당하거나 순간적으로 욱해서 두들겨 패고 칼로 쑤시는 경우가 존나 많아짐. 가뜩이나 코로나로 취업도 안되고, 주변에선 비트코인이다 주식이다 부동산이다 하면서 돈 버는데 혼자서만 벼락거지 된거같고, 불안해서 대출 이빠이 땡겨서 잡코인, 잡주식 샀다가 상장폐지되거나 반토막나서 인생 좆된새끼들 존나 많음. 빈부격차는 날이 갈수록 심해지고, 수저 잘못물고 태어나서 온갖 개고생하다가 사회 밑바닥으로 떨어진 사람들이 혼자 죽기는 억울해서그런지는 몰라도 "한놈만 걸려라" 이런 생각 하고 있는거같음. 그리고 언론에서 조명을 안해서 그렇지 10년 전부터 사이버 모욕죄 발의되고 2013년에 성범죄 친고조항이 폐지되면서 별것도 아닌 명예훼손, 모욕죄로 전과자 되고, 이상한 년한테 잘못 걸려서 억울하게 성추행범 된 애들도 존나 많다. 취업실패, 투자실패, 빈곤, 전과 등 여러가지 사유로 인생 망했다고 생각하는 사람들이 많아져서 그런지는 몰라도 누가 도화선에 불만 붙여주면 존나 크게 터질거같은 시한폭탄 같은 사람들이 사회 곳곳에 암약해있음. 김성수, 장대호, 안인득 이런 사람들만 보더라도 평소에 당했던거 꾹꾹 쌓아두고 있다가 누가 시비 터는 순간 그걸 한번에 터트려서 사고친 케이스임. 10대 찐따들은 사회경험도 부족하고 짬이 덜 차서 무슨 일 생기면 옥상에서 뛰어내리거나 자퇴하고 히키코모리 되는걸로 끝나는데, 나이먹은 찐따들은 학교, 군대, 알바, 계약직 직장 등등에서 온갖 좆같은 꼴 다 당하고 내몰린 애들이라 분노가 외부로 표출되는게 문제임. 요즘같은 시대에는 내가 먼저 원인 제공하고 과실책임 있으면 바로 사과하고 그 자리에서 좋게좋게 끝내는게 답인듯. 실수해놓고도 괜히 가오잡는다고 사람 무시하는 발언하거나 쌩까고 지나가면 ㄹㅇ 칼맞아 죽을지도 모름. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 반전인가? … MSM 패소, 각하! … 아리조나, 미시간, 위스콘신 재검표! ... 이슈방담#.259 ... 2021.03.24. ... [박훈탁TV] 워싱턴 DC 연방 항소법원 Laurence Silberman 판사 … “New York Times와 Washington Post, Wall Street Journal 상당 부분, Los Angeles Times, Miami Herald, 그리고 Boston Globe는 민주당 기관지“라고 통렬하게 비판 … 연방 대법원, 페OOO의 항소 기각! 아리조나, 미시간에 이어 위스콘신에서도 2020년 선O 조사를 위한 결의안 통과! 이것은 매우 강력한 반전의 신호… https://youtu.be/oVtrpYBsT_s ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 불법 입국자와 HR-1으로 미국을 지우고 사회주의 독재를 꿈꾸는 민주당 Scott 인간과 자유이야기 https://youtu.be/r_NEsKyO3C4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 석창포는 이명, 이롱耳鸣耳聋 치료의 주약이다. 石菖蒲是治疗耳鸣耳聋的专药(转载) 耳鸣耳聋是听觉异常的一种病证。其中耳聋以听力减退甚或听觉丧失为其表现，耳鸣以自觉耳内鸣响（如蝉鸣、汽笛鸣响、海潮声）为其表现。 现代医学认为，耳鸣耳聋可由各种功能性或器质性病变引发。各种耳部（外耳、中耳和内耳）病变、一些全身性疾患（如高血压、脑供血不足及神经衰弱等）以及应用耳毒性药物等，均可引起耳鸣耳聋。本文所说之耳鸣耳聋主要指功能性病变所致者。 国医学认为，耳是清阳之气上通之处，为清窍之一。耳与肾、心、肝、脾、胆等脏腑的关系较为密切，与手少阳三焦经、足少阳胆经和手太阳小肠经等经络也有联系。 耳为肾之外窍，深受肾精濡养；如若肾精不足，髓海失养，则会导致耳鸣耳聋等病变的发生，如《灵枢·海论》说：“髓海不足，则脑转耳鸣。” 心寄窍于耳，《素问·金匮真言论》说,“南方赤色，入通于心，开窍于耳”。心属火，肾属水，水火互济互调，则耳目聪明；如若心肾失调，水火不济，也可导致听力失聪。 肝与胆互为表里，足少阳胆经循行耳之前后，并进入耳中。肝胆疏泄适度，则清阳得升，清窍得养；如若生发太过，则气机逆乱，壅塞耳窍，如《素问·脏气法时论》所说：“厥阴与少阳气逆，则头痛、耳目不聪。” 脾主运化，升举清阳之气。如若脾气不足，清阳不升，水谷精气不能上养耳窍，或脾虚失运湿聚生痰，痰蒙耳窍，也可影响听力，引起耳鸣耳聋。 引起耳鸣耳聋的病因虽多，但不外有内伤和外感之分。内伤病机多为恼怒化生风火，伤损少阳肝胆，风火循经上逆，以致耳窍闭阻；或惊恐伤肾，肾虚气弱，精气不能上养清窍，耳窍不利。外感病机多为风邪侵袭，壅遏清窍。 耳鸣耳聋有虚实之分。《景岳全书》说：“凡暴鸣而声大者多实，渐鸣而声细者多虚；少壮热盛者多实，质清脉细，素多劳倦者多虚。”《医贯》也说：“耳鸣以手按之而不鸣或减轻者，虚也；手按之而愈鸣者，实也。” 石菖蒲味辛苦、芳香，性温，归心胃经，具有化湿开胃、开窍豁痰、醒神益智的功能。其辛可制风，芳香能醒心神，辛温相加可上开清窍，苦可燥湿化痰，辛开苦降，能上能下，善治耳鸣耳聋之证，实乃开通耳窍之圣药，为历代治耳病之良药。所以《名医别录》谓其“聪耳明目，益心智”；唐代医药学家甄权在《药性论》也中称，石菖蒲主治“耳鸣”。因此，个人认为石菖蒲为开耳窍之佳品，可作为耳鸣耳聋的治疗专药。 笔者在以下所述辨证选方中，根据情况加入石菖蒲60--90g治疗耳鸣耳聋，明显优于不用石菖蒲者的疗效。 1，治疗外感型耳聋 外感邪气，循经上扰，邪干清窍，阻碍气机，则耳窍闭塞不通。石菖蒲辛香通气，开宣清窍；使邪气散，清气通，耳鸣耳聋自愈。 若耳鸣耳聋，伴见恶寒重、发热轻、无汗、头痛身痛、鼻塞流清涕、苔薄白、脉浮紧等症，证为外感风寒、蒙蔽耳窍所致；治当发散风寒，开通耳窍；方拟麻黄汤加减。 若伴见头痛目眩、口苦咽干、寒热往来、胸胁满闷、心烦欲呕、舌红苔黄白相杂、脉弦数等症，证为外感邪气、侵犯少阳、壅塞耳窍所致；治宜清解少阳，开窍聪耳；方拟小柴胡汤合栀子豉汤加减。 2，治疗痰湿型耳鸣耳聋 石菖蒲入心胃经，辛温芳香，善化湿浊，善开清窍，能使湿邪去，耳窍灵，故可治疗痰浊壅阻所致的耳鸣耳聋证。 痰湿上壅清窍，闭阻清窍，进而导致耳鸣耳聋。临证可见耳闷如塞、头晕头沉或头重如裹、胸脘满闷、呕恶痰多、苔白腻、脉濡滑等症，证为痰湿上蒙所致；治当健脾化湿，祛痰开窍；方拟温胆汤加减。 3，治疗瘀血型耳鸣耳聋 石菖蒲辛温善行，又入心经，故而李时珍在《本草纲目》中称，石菖蒲能“下血”活血，利气开窍。 脑中风恢复期患者经常并发耳鸣耳聋病证。其鸣或如蝉鸣或如鼓声或如风声等，伴见头痛如刺、舌质紫暗有瘀斑、脉细涩等症，实为瘀血阻滞耳窍脉络所致；治当活血化瘀，行气通窍；方用通窍活血汤（无麝香时可用白芷取代）加减，多能取效。 4，治疗虚证型耳鸣耳聋 肾开窍于耳，心寄窍于耳，心肾精气不足，耳因之不聪。《神农本草经》称，石菖蒲“开心孔，补五脏，通九窍，明耳目，出音声。”《名医别录》也认为，石菖蒲“主耳聋”，“聪耳目，益心智”。可见，石菖蒲尚有补益五脏精气的作用，能补虚开窍，尚能治疗虚证耳鸣耳聋证。 若证见耳聋耳鸣、头晕目眩、气短神疲、声音低怯、倦怠乏力、食少便溏、舌淡白、脉细弱等症；证为中气下陷、耳窍失养所致；方拟益气聪明汤加减。 若证见耳鸣不休、头晕目眩、腰膝酸软无力、失眠健忘、手足心热、舌红少苔、脉细数等症；证为肾虚精气不足、耳窍失濡所致；治当补肾填精，补下开上；方拟耳聋左慈丸加减。 若证见耳鸣耳聋、头晕头胀、面色红赤、五心烦热、腰膝酸软、潮热盗汗、舌质红少苔、脉弦细数等症，证为阴虚阳亢、上扰耳窍所致；治当滋阴潜阳，清热开窍；方拟天麻钩藤饮加减。 医案举例 张某，男，46岁，2010年5月11日初诊。自诉右耳听力下降2个月。患者因与邻里不和，长期郁怒不解，于2个月前出现右耳鸣响症状，到最后出现充耳不闻等症状。到县医院耳科就诊，经相关检查发现“右耳重度听力损伤”，诊断为神经性耳聋。经用血栓通、葛根素等治疗10余天不效，进而又用针灸及中药治疗也未能获得显著疗效。 患者伴有头晕头胀、面色红赤、五心烦热、腰膝酸软、潮热盗汗、舌质红少苔、脉弦细数等症，证为阴虚阳亢、上扰耳窍所致；方拟天麻钩藤饮加减；药用 天麻10g，栀子10g，黄芩15g，杜仲20g，益母草30g，桑寄生15g，夜交藤60g，朱茯神10g，川牛膝15g，钩藤 15g（后下），石决明30g（先煎），生地黄30g。水煎服，每日1剂。当患者服用至第7日时，伴随症状有所减轻，但是耳聋症状却不见疗效。 拟上方加石菖蒲60g，再服7剂。7日后耳聋减轻，听力有所恢复。照2诊方又用药14剂后，伴随症状基本消失，听力进一步好转，经耳科相关检查后认定为“右耳轻度听力损伤”。嘱患者改服镇脑宁和知柏地黄丸等中成药，以巩固疗效。（2015年4月19日） --------百草居论坛 吴建华 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[긴급][3개 공산당법 반대][3/10~3/24] (적극참여!)(초고속 공유!) 주민자치 기본법은 공산화의 깃발 (현재4,500명) 레몬jjang http://www.ilbe.com/view/11331534096 #[긴급][공산당법반대][3개] #지방분권반대! #총칼없는.이념전쟁 #(현재4,500명) #(~3/24) #(각각.만명이상되야_막습니다) ■ 반대!! 대한민국을 공산국가 만드는 법안이 발의됨. 북한 공산화의 기초가 '인민위원회'조직이었습니다 [2108620] 주민자치회 설립 및 운영에 관한 법률안 (김두관의원등46인) (2021-03-10 ~ 2021-03-24까지) https://pal.assembly.go.kr/law/readView.do?lgsltpaId=PRC_U2V1B0B2I2M3B1T3X4F8E0M4H7R3K9 [2108632] 주민자치회 설치 및 운영에 관한 법률안 (김철민의원등13인) (2021-03-10 ~ 2021-03-24까지) https://pal.assembly.go.kr/law/readView.do?lgsltpaId=PRC_Y2D1N0J2O2A6J1D6H2M5G3U5E9O0Y7#a [2108636] 주민조례발안에 관한 법률안 (김철민의원 등 14인) (2021-03-10 ~ 2021-03-24까지) https://pal.assembly.go.kr/law/readView.do?lgsltpaId=PRC_K2F1Y0X2S2N6J1J6B3B0M4O8D1F4A7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 바이든, 이번엔 3300조원 `인프라 패키지`…법인세·부자증세 검토 한경 티비 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Niall Ferguson "An emboldened Chinese leadership understands that the greatest ideological weapon it now holds ... is the gleeful enthusiasm for self-destruction that characterizes so much of elite opinion in the U.S." Excellent by @gerardtbaker 미국 엘리트의 자기 파괴 열정, 그것을 이용하는 중국 당국 Opinion | Western Culture Elites Are Giving Away Lenin’s Rope / 레닌의 밧줄을 주고 있는 서구 엘리트들 How can a nation prevail in an ideological struggle when its leaders believe its values are evil? 한 나라의 지도자들이 그들의 가치가 사악하다고 믿는다면, 그들은 이데올로기 전쟁에서 이길 수 없다. 자본가들은 그들의 목을 조를 밧줄이라도 우리에게 팔 것이다. ‘The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”---레닌 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 자유주의는 왜 쇠퇴했나 자유주의가 쇠퇴하게 된 가장 중요한 원인은, 사회가 자유주의를 계속해서 수용하고 완성시킬 거라는 환상 때문이었다. 미제스는 사상(ideas)이 모든 사회 활동이 일어나는 바탕과 같다고 강조했다. 그는 또 자유주의가 타협하지 말아야 하고, 자유주의의 우수성을 시민들에게 설복해야 한다고 주장했다. 자유주의가 몰락한 것은 이익 집단에 영합하는 정당이 출현했기 때문이다. 미제스는 자유주의란 특혜의 폐기라고 믿었다. 이해의 충돌이 일어나는 이유는, 정부의 개입주의 정책으로 인해, 소유자가 생산수단의 자유로운 처분을 규제받기 때문이다. 억압적인 권력과 정부의 개입이 이해의 충돌이 일어나는 유일한 원인이다. 리카르도가 경제학에서 이윤, 임대료, 임금의 3가지 수입의 갈등이 언급한 뒤에, 1830, 40년대에는 영국의 저자들이 자본가와 지주와 임금 노동자의 화해할 수 없는 적대감을 언급했는데, 후에 마르크스가 이를 이용했다. 자본론 제3권의 <계급> 편에서 마르크스는 몇 줄 쓰다가 글을 멈췄는데, 나중에 수많은 책을 썼지만, 죽을 때까지도 “계급”이 무엇인지 설명하지 못했다. 자유주의는 자본가들을 변호하는 사상이 아니다. 자유주의는 특별한 이권을 대변하지 않는다. 자본주의가 계속되면 자본가들이 계속해서 그들의 부를 소유할 수 있다는 생각은 자본주의의 본질을 오해한 것이다. 자본주의 체제에서 무능한 자본가들은 계속해서 유능한 자본가들에 의해 퇴출당한다. 의무 교육은 개인들의 자아 결정권을 위반하는 것이다. 미제스는 제국주의의 기원은 보호된 수출 시장을 확보하려는 데 있다고 보았다. The Anti-imperialism of Mises Leonard P. Liggio The death of Ludwig von Mises has brought forth numerous essays on his contribution to economics. It is equally in order to discuss his work in the historical sciences, as he called them. Having had the honor and pleasure of attending Mises’ graduate seminar during the years in which he wrote Theory and History and devoted his seminar to that subject, I had the rare opportunity of participating in the final formulation of his long-considered concepts of the historical sciences. But, before discussing that part of his contribution in another article, I shall indicate some of the substantive historical analyses which Mises made. Faced with the rise of classical liberalism in the 19th century and its collapse since the first world war, Mises had very special motives for examining contemporary history. Mises emphasized that ideas are the base on which all social activity takes place. It is in the realm of ideas that the battle for civilization and progress takes place. Mises emphasized the fact and the necessity that classical liberalism had to be obstinate and uncompromising. Success of liberal ideas required the enlightenment of people who studied ideas who would convince the citizenry of their correctness. Mises advocated a revolution in ideas as the necessary step to the revolution of the practice of freedom. However, the advocates of classical liberalism in the 19th century were not obstinate and uncompromising. The English utilitarians, especially Ricardo, had incomplete and compromised notions leading succeeding liberals not to correct and complete them but to turn away to more compromises as in the case of John Stuart Mill. One of the important causes of the decline of liberalism, Mises believed, was the illusion that society would necessarily continue to accept and perfect its ideas. Mises believed that as classical liberalism came closer to realization, it was necessary for its advocates not to rest, but to increase their activity and perfect the theoretical base of classical liberalism. Instead, liberalism was swept away by the emergence of parties speaking to special interests. For Mises liberalism meant the abolition of special privileges. In discussing class conflict, Mises emphasized: “Conflicts of interests can occur only in so far as restrictions on the owners’ free disposal of the means of production are imposed by the interventionist policy of the government or by interference on the part of other social forces armed with coercive power.” Coercive power and government intervention are the sole causes of war between interests. For Mises, the supporters of feudalism, privilege and status were clearly defeated by classical liberalism. The rise of the new challenge to classical liberalism came from within itself, from the failures of utilitarian economists. Mises said: But in Ricardo’s system of catallactics one may find the point of departure for a new theory of the conflict of interests within the capitalist system. Ricardo believed that he could show how, in the course of progressive economic development, a shift takes place in the relations among the three forms of income in his system, viz., profit, rent, and wages. It was this that impelled a few English writers in the third and fourth decades of the nineteenth century to speak of the three classes of capitalists, landowners, and wage-laborers and to maintain that an irreconcilable antagonism exists among these groups. This line of thought was later taken up by Marx. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx still did not distinguish between caste and class. Only later, when he became acquainted in London with the writings of the forgotten pamphleteers of the twenties and thirties and, under their influence, began the study of Ricardo’s system, did he realize that the problem in this case was to show that even in a society without caste distinctions and privileges irreconcilable conflicts still exist. This antagonism of interests he deduced from Ricardo’s system by distinguishing among the three classes of capitalists, landowners, and workers…. At no time, however, did Marx or any one of his many followers attempt in any way to define the concept and nature of classes. It is significant that the chapter entitled “The Classes” in the third volume of Capital breaks off after a few sentences. More than a generation elapsed from the appearance of the Communist Manifesto, in which Marx first makes class antagonism and class war the keystone of his entire doctrine, to the time of his death. During this entire period Marx wrote volume after volume, but he never came to the point of explaining what is to be understood by a “class.” (Mises, The Free and Prosperous Commonwealth (trans. by Ralph Raico; ed. by Arthur Goddard), Princeton, Van Nostrand Series in the Humane Studies, 1962, pp. 163–64) However, the wedge of Ricardian concepts of disharmony of interests in a perfect capitalist society, and the existence of special interest political parties in societies claiming to be capitalist, permitted the socialists to appear the champions of the abolition of privilege, of classless society resulting from the withering away of the state. Mises emphasized that in the absence of an uncompromisingly presented liberalism, socialism appeals to people who think more clearly and seek a serious solution to government by special interests. Through the dominant position socialism gained at the Universities, it was able, in Mises’ view, to gain the sincere, honest, and best minds among the youth. In many ways, the success of socialism was due to its ability to appear to be what liberalism actually is. Mises described the many ways that the parties of the special interest state have prevented the presentation and success of liberal ideas and, thus permitted the success of socialism. Mises insisted that liberals must emphasize the fact that since liberalism serves no special interest there is “no class that could champion liberalism for its own selfish interests.” For Mises liberalism could not be the special party of capitalists. Historical reality has demonstrated that the wealthy tend to support any other party except the liberals. Indeed, for capitalists to support liberalism, it is necessary for them to rise above their self-interest to the level of general principles. Mises noted: The “have’s” do not have any more reason to support the institution of private ownership of the means of production than do the “have-not’s.” If their immediate special interests come into question, they are scarcely liberal. The notion that, if only capitalism is preserved, the propertied classes could remain forever in possession of their wealth stems from a misunderstanding of the nature of the capitalist economy, in which property is continually being shifted from the less efficient to the more efficient businessman. In a capitalist society one can hold on to one’s fortune only if one perpetually acquires it anew by investing it wisely. The rich, who are already in possession of wealth, have no special reason to desire the preservation of a system of unhampered competition open to all…. They do have a special interest in interventionism, which always has a tendency to preserve the existing division of wealth among those in possession of it. But they cannot hope for any special treatment from liberalism, a system in which no heed is paid to the time-honored claims of tradition advanced by the vested interests of established wealth. (Ibid., p. 186) Mises deduced from history that all governments inherently recognize no limitations on power. Complete domination over property is the goal of all governments, and if they accept limitations it is merely tactical since the admission of any government control over property implies total control. Mises concluded: Thus, there has never been a political power that voluntarily desisted from impeding the free development and operation of the institution of private property of the means of production. Governments tolerate private property when they are compelled to do so, but they do not acknowledge it voluntarily in recognition of its necessity. Even liberal politicians, on gaining power, have usually relegated their principles more or less to the background…. A liberal government is a contradictio in adjecto. (Ibid., p. 68) Mises insisted that the concept of self-determination was the most logical derivation from liberalism. Self-determination made sense not as a collective concept, but as an individualist concept. “If it were in any way possible to grant this right of self-determination to every individual person, it would have to be done.” But, Mises considered individual self-determination to be technically impractical; however, as a matter of principle it was irrefutable that the individual must have the right to individual self-determination. In foreign policy, Mises applied this concept to self-determination consistently. The right of individual self-determination was clearly applicable in the area of education. For Mises, compulsory education in any circumstances was a violation of this right. Compulsory education is a clearly political act. “There is, in fact, only one solution: the state, the government, the laws must not in any way concern themselves with schooling or education. Public funds must not be used for such purposes. The rearing and instruction of youth must be left entirely to parents and to private associations and institutions.” Mises made an important, if often unrecognized, analysis of imperialism, which is another aspect of the negation of the right of self-determination. Mises indicated that the origins of imperialism can be found in the desire of states to create protected export “markets.” A desire to avoid the effects of competition, Mises said, led states to the adoption of the policy of using import duties to protect domestic production operating under less favorable conditions against the superior competition of foreign industry, in the hope of thereby making the emigration of workers unnecessary. Indeed, in order to expand the protected market as far as possible, efforts are made to acquire even more territories that are not regarded as suitable for European settlement. We may date the beginning of modern imperialism from the late seventies of the last century, when the industrial countries of Europe started to abandon the policy of free trade and to engage in the race for colonial “markets” in Africa and Asia … The basic idea of colonial policy was to take advantage of the military superiority of the white race over the members of other races. The Europeans set out, equipped with all the weapons and contrivances that their civilization placed at their disposal, to subjugate weaker peoples, to rob them of their property, and to enslave them. Attempts have been made to extenuate and gloss over the true motive of colonial policy with the excuse that its sole object was to make it possible for primitive peoples to share in the blessings of European civilization…. If, as we believe, European civilization really is superior to that of the primitive tribes of Africa or to the civilizations of Asia—estimable though the latter may be in their own way—it should be able to prove its superiority by inspiring these peoples to adopt it of their own accord. Could there be a more doleful proof of the sterility of European civilization than that it can be spread by no other means than fire and sword? (Ibid., pp. 123, 25) Mises countered the argument that the liberal solution—immediate withdrawal of government (European colonial) and leaving the inhabitants alone—might lead to chaos or oppression. Since Europe exported the worst of its civilization under imperialism, it is not the fault of the natives that they may adopt all the evils taught them by the Europeans. Since imperialism is the negation of liberalism, there was no possibility for non-Europeans to come into contact with liberal concepts and practices. Imperialism itself was one of the means by which European politicians sought to escape from the logical necessity of completing the liberal revolution in Europe. Just as mercantilism was the overseas extension of feudalism, so imperialism was the overseas extension of neo-mercantilism. For Mises none of the arguments in support of imperialism could have any basis in liberalism. Abolition of all forms of imperialism was alone consistent with liberalism. Mises felt that the evil consequences of imperialism would become evident only after the withdrawal of European troops and bureaucrats because only then would the full extent of the impact of European illiberalism flower. The longer the Europeans remained the more poisonous the blossoms. Thus, the immediate end of imperialism would reduce the effects, and its prolongation “in the interests of the natives” would intensify it. Mises added: If all that can be adduced in favor of the maintenance of European rule in the colonies is the supposed interest of the natives, then one must say that it would be better if this rule were brought to an end completely. No one has a right to thrust himself into the affairs of others in order to further their interest, and no one ought, when he has his own interests in view, to pretend that he is acting selflessly only in the interest of others. (Ibid., p. 127) Mises’s total commitment to classical liberalism, pure and uncompromised, made him an heir in history to the great 19th-century classical liberals who dealt with history generally, such as Acton, or with contemporary history, such as Cobden and Bright. Mises was fearless, as were Acton, Cobden and Bright, in attacking the state in all its aspects, not the least in its more recent manifestation, imperialism. The individual and the state are irreconcilable. History confirms what reason teaches us, that the state is the negation of the individual and his extension, private property, just as where the individual and his property rightfully exist, that the state be abolished. It was because of the failure to pursue and achieve that freedom by 19th-century liberals, that the current struggle is necessary. Mises has emphasized that it is by study of that failure that the lessons will be learned to achieve liberty. Those who dare not study history will be bound to repeat it. [This originally appeared as “Mises and History,” in the January 1974 edition of the Libertarian Forum.] Leonard Liggio was a classical liberal author, research professor of law at George Mason University, and executive vice president of the Atlas Network in Fairfax, Virginia, US. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

꼭 봐야할 이제봉교수 명강의. 박대통령 사기탄핵 진짜 원인? 대한민국 전복세력 뿌리와 실체? BJ톨 https://youtu.be/smUJrLFQ-_c ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LA 시사논평 / 미국, 한국과 중공 강력히 비판. 중공은 불투명 반인권 나약하다 / 한국은 성추문 부패 반인권 (생방송 3. 22. 2021) https://youtu.be/9Q0qEAmjZW0 --->이재용이 특혜 논란이 있을까봐 고통을 참고 버티다가 맹장염 수술을 받았다고 한다. 그가 삼성을 지키기 위해 얼마나 인내하고 있는지 알 수 있는 사건이다. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 북유럽 복지천국 선동의 실체, Nordic, Scandinavia를 말한다 박상후의 문명개화 아이슬랜드, 덴마크, 스칸디나비아 3국을 포괄하는 Nordic국가들은 그저 복지천국이라는 이미지로 비쳐지고 있습니다. 사회주의를 실시하는 국가들이 많은데 미국 좌파들은 이들 국가가 이상적 모델이라고 선전하고 있습니다. 복지혜택이 풍부한 만큼 세금과세도 무거운 국가로 알려져 있습니다. 그러나 이들 국가들이 정작 번영을 구가한 것은 19세기로 세기가 바뀌어서는 성장동력이 약해졌습니다. Nordic과 Scandinavia국가들의 번영과 사회주의와는 하등의 관계가 없습니다. 사회주의 정책 실시 이전에 부유했던 국가들입니다. 이는 스웨덴의 작가 Nima Sanandaji가 여러 저서에서 명쾌하게 밝힌 바 있습니다. Nordic, Scandinavia 국가들은 오히려 최근들어서는 복지로 인한 경제부담을 줄이기 위해 상당히 친시장적인 정책을 취하고 있습니다. 북유럽국가에 대한 한국인의 상식은 현실과는 상당히 동떨어져 있습니다. 이번 방송에서는 Nordic, Scandinavia의 환상과 실상을 분석했습니다. 또 덴마크에서 비서구권 이민자들을 어떻게 자국 시민으로 동화하려는 노력을 하고 있는지도 소개했습니다. https://youtu.be/PIaYwOuPJ2o -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From Nixon-Kissinger to Biden-Blinken, the U.S. has had countless issues with China. But for Beijing, the one that really matters is Taiwan, writes @nfergus 미국은 중국과 다양한 문제를 가지고 있지만, 중국 당국이 유일하게 신경 쓰는 문제는 대만일 뿐이다. 수에즈 운하 사건이 대영제국의 종말을 알린 사건이듯이, 실패한 대만 위기 대처 역시 수퍼파워 미국의 종말을 상징하는 사건이 될 것이다. 미국은 다양한 관심을 가진 여우지만, 중국은 한가지 큰 일에만 관심을 두는 고슴도치이고, 그것은 바로 대만과의 통일이다. The Suez Crisis marked the end of the British Empire, and a botched Taiwan Crisis could do the same for America, This is a very sharp essay — “Perhaps Taiwan will turn out to be to the American empire what Suez was to the British Empire in 1956: the moment when the imperial lion is exposed as a paper tiger.” ------------------------ A Taiwan Crisis May Mark the End of the American Empire America is a diplomatic fox, while Beijing is a hedgehog fixated on the big idea of reunification. By Niall Ferguson ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Religion, Violence, Tolerance & Progress: Nothing to do with Theology 나심 탈레브 I explained in Skin in the Game that dietary laws act as social barriers: those who eat together bind together. The onerous Jewish dietary laws helped create separate diasporas which allowed for survival, and prevented social dilution. Now consider the following: there is nothing particularly strong in Islam’s holy text against drinking alcohol, just a rather vague recommendation of avoidance of intoxication while facing the creator. But it made sense for social habits to interpret such a law as a firm interdict to avoid socialization with Christians and Zoroastrians in Bagdad when it was the capital of the Califate and Arabs were in the minority. It was the mentality that found theological backing, rather than the reverse. 이슬람의 경전에 음주를 금하는 강력한 경고는 없었다. 즉 금주는 경전에서 나온 게 아니라 당대의 이슬람 인들의 정신상태에 나왔고, 단지 그 근거를 경전에서 가져왔을 뿐이다. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 방증상대론 方证相对论 장중경은 이윤의 탕액경汤液经을 따랐고, 이윤은 신농본초경을 따랐다. 따라서 장중경은 신농학파의 계승자였다. （学习笔记）方证相对论 刘渡舟 学习《伤寒论》需要讲求方法，然后得其门而入，才能做到登堂入室，事半而功倍。因此，对学习来讲，就有远近之分，难易之别了。记得子贡说过：“夫子之墙数仞 （注：仞是一个单位，相当于周尺八尺或七尺。数仞，指很多仞），不得其门而入，不见宗庙之美，百官之富。” 《伤寒论》这堵墙很厚，怎样才能穿入？这是一个至关重要的问题。我不遗余力的为之上下求索。有一次看到晋•皇甫谧的《甲乙经•序》，才得到了答案。 序文说：“伊尹以元圣之才，撰用《神农本草》以为《汤液》，近世太医令王叔和撰次仲景遗论甚精，皆可施用。是仲景本伊尹之法，伊尹本神农之经，得不谓祖述大圣人之意乎？” 我从“仲景本伊尹之法”、“伊尹本神农之经”，两个“本”字中悟出了中医是有学派之分的，张仲景是“神农学派”的传人，所以，要想穿入《伤寒论》这堵墙，必须从方证的大门而入。 为此，我要先讲一讲《伤寒论》的方证大义。《伤寒论》的方，叫做“经方”，来源于伊尹的《汤液经》，而被西汉的太仓公淳于意和东汉的长沙太守张仲景继承而流传至今。经方的特点，药少而精，出神入化，起死回生，校如桴鼓，为方书之祖。 《伤寒论》的证，又叫“证候”，用以反映疾病的客观“验证”。有规律性，又有自己的特殊性，可供分析研究、综合归纳等诸多妙用。“证”不是捏造出来的，他是生理病理的客观产物，它同病可以分开，又不能绝对地分开。所以证之于病，如形随影，从“取证”的意义来讲，它优于近代医学之上。由于病不能离开证孑然独存，所以，我不承认辨证与辨病的距离有天渊之别。 “证”的精微之处，古人称为“机”，凡事物初露的苗头都有机义。昔张仲景见侍中王仲宣，是年二十余，谓曰：君有病，四十当眉落，眉落半年而死，服五石汤可免。仲宣嫌其言忤，又“贯且长也”，受汤勿服。居三日，见仲宣，谓曰：服汤否？曰：已服。仲景曰：色候固非服汤之诊，君何轻命也？仲宣犹不言。后二十年，果眉落，后一百八十七日而死，终如其言。以上的记载，反映了张仲景预知生死可谓神乎其神，但是他说出了：“色候固非服汤之诊”，还是通过色脉之诊而知其必然的。 古人说的“月晕而风，础润而雨”等见微知著的本领，似乎发在机先，令人难于揣摩，如果以中医的理论衡量，是不能离开“证”的存在与反映，故机之发也不能无证。古之医家，能通天地，决死生而百发百中，皆善于“识证知机”，辨证之学，岂可轻视哉？ 中医学以辨证为先，惟《伤寒论》一书，祖述歧黄之学，发明汤液之旨，对于辨证论治，独领风骚，高出人表，而为中医之魂。《伤寒论》总结了六经辨证的规律，又厘定了主证、兼证、变证、和夹杂证四个层次。 临床辨证，应先“抓主证”。证，是决定全局而占主导地位的，所以主证是纲，纲举而目张，故附于主证的兼证、变证、夹杂证就可迎刃而解。如：太阳病中风的桂枝汤主证，以汗出、恶风为主；伤寒的麻黄汤主证，以无汗、恶寒、身痛为主；少阳病的柴胡汤主证，以胸胁苦满、口苦、喜呕为主。阳明病的白虎汤主证，以烦渴欲饮、身热汗出、脉洪大为主；大承气汤的主证，以四肢厥冷，下利清谷为主；厥阴病乌梅丸主证，以消渴、气上撞心、心中疼热、呕吐、下利、吐蛔为主。 →主证是辨证的核心，只有抓定主证，才能突出辩证的重点。 →兼证，是指附于主证的兼见证，比如说在桂枝汤主证前提下而出现的“喘”、“项背强几几”等证。 →变证，是指误治后，原来的主证变成另外一个证候，如误发少阳汗而变生的谵语，误下太阳而变生的下利。 →夹杂证来源有二：一是人的体质不同，感邪虽一，发病则异；二是先有宿疾，后感伤寒，导致老病与新病，标病与本病，表病与里病交叉出现。 以上介绍的《伤寒论》证候之学，千姿百态，丰富多彩。说明证候的出现是无穷的，古人辨证的东西是有限的，所以就有一个继承与发展 创新与开拓的问题摆在我们面前。仲景以后，后世医家在六经辨证的基础之上，涌现出脏腑辨证、三焦辨证，卫气营血辨证等许多的辩证方法，蔚成了辩证学的大观。扩大了辩证的范围，补充了六经辨证不逮之处。 应当指出的是，中医的辩证方法并不是照本宣科，墨守成规，死气沉沉而毫无生意。古人说“医者意也”，这个“意”字，就跳出了教条的框框，赋予了医人的独立思考，运用思维、理论、经验、调查、研究获得的材料，建立自己的“辩证观”，用自己的才智进行辨证论治，则天马行空，独来独往，纵观历代的医学家多有这种人物。 总的来说，认识疾病在于“证”，治疗疾病在于“方”。 方与证乃是伤寒学的关键，而为历代医家所重视，所以，“方证相对论”的提出，起到了非凡的积极作用。然而最早提出“方证相对论”的，既不是明清的“错简派”医家，也不是日本江户时代的“古方派”医家，乃是公元682年唐朝的伟大医学家孙思邈提出来的。 孙思邈在他著的《千金翼方•卷九》一篇序文中说：“论曰：伤寒热病，自古有之，明贤睿哲，多所防御，至于仲景，特有神功，寻思旨趣，莫测其致，所以医人未能钻仰。尝见太医疗伤寒，惟大青、知母诸冷物投之，极与仲景本意相反。汤药虽行，百无一效，伤其如此，遂披伤寒大论。鸠集要妙，以为其方，行之以来，未有不验。旧法方证，意义幽隐，乃令近智所迷，览之者造次难悟；中庸之士，绝而不思。故使闾里之中，岁至夭枉之痛，远想令人慨然无已。今以方证同条，比类相附，须有检讨，仓卒易知。夫寻方之大意，不过三种：一则桂枝，二则麻黄，三则青龙。此三方，凡疗伤寒不出之也”。 根据孙氏以上之言分析，他重点讲述了以下三个问题。 1“方证相对论”的提出 经王叔和撰次的《伤寒论》条文，证与方没有上下相连，也就是“证”的下边没有“方”的衔接。这种格局不利用学习《伤寒论》和临床实践应用。有鉴于方证相离，不能一气呵成，孙氏提出“旧法方证，意义幽隐，览之者造次难悟”，所以他主张“方证同条，比类相附”，改为在证之下载其方，方随证立，证随方呈，方证由不相顺接，而变为“方证互相对应”，扭在一起，互不分离。 这种改进为伤寒学带来三大好处： ①突出了方证的重点和优势； ②促进了方证的集合和归纳； ③加强了辨证论治的速度，打开了通向《伤寒论》的大门。 自从孙思邈提出“方证相对论”的改革方法后，又上升为学习方法与捷径，它被认为是唐代伤寒学一大发明。 2严厉批判了伤寒误用凉药的错误 《伤寒论》第一张方子是桂枝汤，第二张方子是麻黄汤，显示了伤寒者，乃风寒之邪伤人也。《阴阳大论》云：“从霜降以后，至春分之前，凡有触冒霜露，体中寒即病者，谓之伤寒也。” 但是人们对伤寒的认识，在寒温之间，游移不定，节外生枝，概念混淆不清，反而违背了仲景著书本意。因此，以寒训温，指鹿为马的问题不时发生，以凉药治疗风寒则习然不查。 今人学习《伤寒论》，我认为有三个难题：用经络学说一难也；用气化学说二难也；用麻桂治疗伤寒三难也。 孙思邈痛心疾首地指出：“太医疗伤寒，为大青、知母诸冷物投之，极与仲景本意相反，汤药虽行，百无一效”。对用寒凉之药治疗风寒之误，铿锵有力，说得淋漓尽致。陶渊明有“今是昨非”的惊句，喜用寒凉，诋毁温药，“矫枉过正者”，应引以为戒。 3建立治疗风寒三方 孙思邈对《伤寒论》从众多方证之中，提挈纲领，经过认真筛选后，他说：“夫寻方之大意，不过三种：一则桂枝，二则麻黄，三则青龙”。并且具体地写出“太阳病，用桂枝汤法第一”（五十七证，方五首）；“太阳病，用麻黄汤法第二”（一十六证，方四首）；“太阳病，用青龙汤法第三”（四证，方二首）。由此可见，太阳病治疗风寒之方，皆为“正对之法”，至于柴胡等诸方，皆属汗吐下后不解之事，则非正对之法。太阳病确立桂枝、麻黄、青龙三方，按类立阵，如大将建旗鼓，望之各归麾下，方证对应井然不紊，“凡疗伤寒不出之也”。 日本江户时期的古方派医家吉益东洞所著的《类聚方》是在孙思邈的“方证相对论”启发之下而形成的，这本书的质量较高，尤以临床价值不容忽视。国内医家多以为“方证相对”始于东洞之手，乃有“吾道东矣”的说法，在此为之更正，以免讹误。 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

[단독] 바닥 드러낸 정부 비상금…재난지원금에 다 퍼줬다 7조 목적예비비 8천억 남아 재난지원금에 절반이상 소진 태풍 등 재해 때 추경 불가피/ 매경 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 주한미군, 미 본토에 긴급지원요청! 이러다가 中에 먹힌다고? 신인균의 국방 티비 https://youtu.be/iDdWSBS9Yls ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 한국경제 [단독] 文정부 3년, 풀타임 일자리 195만개 사라졌다 giga*** 사대강 22조로 일자리 백만개 만든다고 호언장담하시더니 정작 집권하는동안 백조이상 일자리 예산이라고 쏟아부어서 일자리 195만개 없앤 문재인 당신은 조선의 타노스 입니까? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 민주주의와 국가정보원 / '김병기 법'이 뒤흔든 국가정보체계, 어떻게 바로 잡을 것인가? [이정훈TV] https://youtu.be/XwJd8z91f2g --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MKM Abdul Hmm my takeaway from the Incerto by @nntaleb is not so much that “life is random” but that there is a lot of randomness in life that doesn’t look like randomness — take care to not be fooled by them. 탈레브가 한말은 우리의 삶이 우연으로 이뤄졌다는 게 아니라, 우리 삶의 많은 우연이 우연처럼 보이지 않는다는 것이고, 그런 현상에 속아서는 안된다는 것이다. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 현대 사회를 파괴하는 7가지 죄악 The Sinful State Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. Hardly anyone talks of the table of virtues and vices anymore — which includes the Seven Deadly Sins — but in reviewing them, we find that they nicely sum up the foundation of bourgeois ethics, and provide a solid moral critique of the modern state. Now, libertarians don't often talk about virtues and vices, mainly because we agree with Lysander Spooner that vices are not crimes, and that the law ought only to address the latter. At the same time, we do need to observe that vices and virtues — and our conception of what constitutes proper behavior and culture generally — have a strong bearing on the rise and decline of freedom. Let me illustrate. A speaker at a Mises Institute conference two years ago was explaining how problems of welfare, charity, and support for the poor could be handled through voluntary means — that is, through philanthropy. His explanation was brilliant, but a hand shot up. A student from India had a question. What if, he said, one lives in a society in which the religion says that a person's lot in life is dictated by God, and thus it would be sin to change it in any way. The poor, in this view, are supposed to be poor, and to help them would violate God's will. In fact, a charitable person is committing a crime against God. The speaker stood there in stunned silence. The students around the room looked at the questioner with their mouths open. We were all amazed to confront a reality too often ignored; namely, that the ethics undergirding our culture, which we so often take for granted, are essential to the functioning of what we call the good society, based on the dignity of the individual, and the possibility of progress, freedom, and prosperity. In our country and in our times, a productive free-market economy, one supported by a strong sense of personal responsibility and a moral commitment to the security of property rights, has one great enemy: the interventionist state. It is the state that taxes, regulates, and inflates, distorting a system that would otherwise operate smoothly, productively, and to the great benefit of all, generating wealth, security, and peace, and creating the conditions necessary for the flourishing of everything we call civilization. The name that Karl Marx gave to this system was capitalism, because he believed that the free market was the system that empowered the owners of capital — the bourgeoisie — at the expense of the workers and peasants of the proletarian class. The name capitalism is somewhat misleading, because free enterprise is not, in fact, a system of economics organized for the sole benefit of the property-owning classes. And yet, the advocates of free markets have not been entirely unhappy with having to use the term capitalism, precisely because capital ownership and accumulation is indeed the engine that drives the operation of a productive free market. While the system works not to the sole benefit of the capitalists, it is certainly true that private ownership of the means of production, and the creation of this class of citizens, are crucial for us to enjoy all the glories of a productive economy to bestow themselves on society. Along with the creation of this class comes the formation of what are called bourgeois ethics — a term used derisively to describe the habitual ways of the business class. Hard-core Marxists still use the phrase as if it described the exploiter class. More commonly, it is used by intellectuals to identify a kind of white-bread sameness and predictability that lacks an appreciation for the avant-garde. Usually it is used to describe people who have an affection for hometown, faith, and family, and a suspicion of lifestyle experiments and behaviors that skirt commonly accepted cultural norms. But those who use the term derisively are not generally appreciative of the extent to which bourgeois ethics make possible the lifestyle of all classes, including the intellectual class. The bourgeoisie is a class of savers and contract keepers, people who are concerned for the future more than the present, people with an attachment to family. This class of people cares more for their children's welfare, and for work and productivity, than for leisure and personal indulgence. The virtues of the bourgeoisie are the traditional virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude. Each has an economic component — many economic components in fact. Prudence supports the institution of saving, the desire to get a good education to prepare for the future, and the hope to pass on an inheritance to our children. With justice comes the desire to keep contracts, to tell the truth in business dealings, and to provide compensation to those who have been wronged. With temperance comes the desire to restrain oneself, to work before play, which shows that prosperity and freedom are ultimately supported by an internal discipline. With fortitude comes the entrepreneurial impulse to set aside inordinate fear and to forge ahead when faced with life's uncertainties. These virtues are the foundation of the bourgeoisie, and the basis of great civilizations. But the mirror image of these virtues shows how the virtuous mode of human behavior finds its opposite in public policies employed by the modern state. The state sets itself against bourgeois ethics and undermines them, and the decline of bourgeois ethics allows the state to expand at the expense of both freedom and virtue. In the Western religious tradition, the Seven Deadly Sins are not the only ones. They are called the deadly ones because in traditional teaching, they result in spiritual death. Let's take each one in turn. Vainglory This is also called pride, or, more precisely, excessive or disproportionate pride. We know what it means for a person to be excessively vainglorious or prideful. It means that he puts his interests before that of anyone else, even if doing so may cause harm to another. It is the overestimation of the worth of oneself and one's interests and entitlements at the expense of others. In public policy, we can think of many pressure groups who believe their interests are more important than anyone else's. In fact, this trait of vainglory describes the appalling clamor for all sorts of new rights. We have disability lobbyists who believe they are entitled to violate everyone else's property rights and freedom for their own sake. The same is true of many groups identified by various racial and sexual categories. They are convinced by their own pride to believe that they are owed special privileges. The rule of law and its equal application becomes distorted by the demands of the few against the many. This is hardly the route to long-term social peace. Consider the issue of discrimination in hiring. Why anyone would want to work for an employer who does not really want to hire him is beyond me. In a competitive market, employers are permitted to discriminate, but the costs of discriminatory hiring are wholly born by the employer, whose success or failure is determined by the consumer. Because employers are in competition with each other, everyone can find a place for himself within the vast network of the division of labor. The pride that leads to short-circuiting this process is not in the long-term interests of society. The same is true of nations. There is nothing wrong with having a natural and normal pride in one's nation. But to be vainglorious and to overestimate the merit of one's nation can have bad economic effects. Among these bad effects may be chauvinism and belligerence in foreign affairs, as well as mercantilism in international trade policy. If, for example, we are so convinced that American steel is so much better than foreign steel that we must punish any foreigner who would attempt to sell us steel, we are guilty of vainglory. We are also doing ourselves economic harm by forcing consumers of steel — at all stages of production — to pay higher prices for lesser quality steel than would prevail in a free market. This is an unsustainable state of affairs. Any industry that is protected from competition becomes ever less efficient. The nation that comes to practice this form of mercantilism can end up producing all sorts of things inefficiently, and displacing new lines of production that would be efficient but are not being undertaken. Pride in public policy can result in a failure to use critical intelligence in assessing our system of government. We might say, for example, that the United states is the greatest nation on earth. But does that mean that our tax and regulatory polices are what they should be, and that to criticize them is somehow anti-American? Not by any means. To say so is to be guilty of vainglory. The truth is that the US system of government is gravely flawed and woefully contrary to most of what the founders hoped to bring about when they set up a new government. The framers never imagined such a thing as the monstrous Department of Homeland Security, or an income tax, or a Federal Reserve, or a far-flung military empire that spends more than most of the world's other nations combined. These institutions and the change of public-policy culture generally have created the most vainglorious state in the history of the world, especially under the leadership of the current president, whose speeches and statements give new meaning to the word messianic. Anger Western civilization over the last 2,000 years has regarded anger as a grave vice because it leads to destruction rather than peace and productivity. Thus the institution of courts in domestic affairs and diplomacy in foreign affairs. But in our own country, the taboo against anger in public affairs came to be violated, in particular by the war crimes of federal armies during the civil war. Civilians were deliberately targeted. Homes were looted, crops were burned, livestock killed. This was an expression of anger. The institutionalization of anger has persisted ever since, in massacres of civilians in the Philippines, in the hunger blockade of World War I, in the bombing of cities in World War II, in the destruction of churches in the war on Serbia, and in the war on Iraq, 11 years running. When officials say they are angry and plan to unleash Hell on some foreign country, they are partaking in this deadly vice, which also has cultural effects. The man who was behind the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building developed his taste for violent anger during the first Gulf War. Many of the killers who have shot up public schools were later revealed to be obsessed with military means and wars. What lesson is the current generation learning from the speeches and attitudes of the current ruling class and its taste for blood? I shudder to think. The modern military arsenal, combined with a shredding of all restraints on what is permissible and impermissible in warfare, has unleashed the angry state on the world. Its relentless mode in foreign policy is vengeance, and its main product is human suffering and death. Envy Again, this is a word hardly heard anymore. Envy is not the same as jealousy. Jealousy is merely wishing that you enjoyed the same property and status as another. Envy means the desire to harm someone else solely because he enjoys some quality, virtue, or possession, and you do not. It is the desire to destroy the success or good fortune of another. In the current round of corporation bashing, I fear the unleashing of envy against people because of their personal accomplishments. And we see the work of envy in the redistributionist welfare state. Some people say that what matters most is not that the welfare state helps the poor but rather that it hurts the rich. So too with the inheritance tax, which collects relatively little revenue, but does grave damage to would-be family dynasties. How many Congressional speeches against the business class and the rich are driven by this deadly sin? All too many. Antitrust policy that seeks to smash a business solely because it is big and successful is a working out of envy. I recall an article by Michael Kinsley several years ago in Slate magazine that honestly asked the question: what is wrong with envy? Nothing, he concluded. In fact, he rightly observed, it is the foundation of much modern public policy. Even so, it is a deadly sin. It is one that will destroy society if it is fully unleashed. And nowhere is it more relentlessly unleashed than within the culture of the state itself, which attacks success in business and private life in every way. A century ago, many private dynasties had more wealth at their disposal than the federal government. Would the modern Envy State tolerate such a thing? Not likely. All wealth apart from the state's own is up for grabs, but particularly dynastic wealth. Covetousness The related sin of desiring to grasp what belongs to another, through whatever means one can assemble, is also socially harmful. Through taxation and welfare programs, the state is effectively blessing the sin of covetousness. Now, let us be clear. To covet something is not the same as an innocent desire to improve one's lot in life. This is a good impulse, one that drives people to succeed. Covetousness is different because it cares nothing for the means used to achieve one's goals. Instead of productive exchange, covetousness resorts to theft, whether private theft or public theft that uses the government. We saw covetousness turn to a public clamor after the collapse in stock prices in 2000 and following, when the public demanded that the Fed do something to stop their investments from going belly-up. Here again, we see the desire for money outstrip the moral consideration of how precisely this money is to be acquired. And the more the state feeds the sin of covetousness, the more of it we are likely to see, and the more bourgeois ethics fall into disuse. The modern state is nothing if not covetous. It has its gaze constantly fixed on our liberty, privacy, wealth, and independence, and desires to take through any means possible. In the covetous state, liberty is always declining, the percentage of wealth subject to taxation always growing, and the ability for institutions and individuals to thrive apart from government blessing always in doubt. Gluttony We think of gluttony as solely related to eating. But it can also mean the excessive desire for comfort, luxury, and leisure at the expense of work and productivity. Senior citizens' lobbies, when they demand that the public provide comfy living for all septuagenarians at the expense of young workers, are playing into the deadly sin of gluttony. The problem doesn't only afflict seniors. It is a problem among the poor, who have been conditioned by the welfare state to believe they are entitled to live well without earning their money. Interestingly, rates of obesity among the poor far outstrip those among the bourgeoisie. The pervasiveness of gluttony also shows up in the appalling consumer debt load. This implies a desire to consume now regardless of the later consequences. The gluttonous consumer cares nothing about the long term, only that his appetite is satisfied today. The Federal Reserve encourages this deadly sin through loose credit policies and bailouts, which create the illusion that there is no downside to living for the present at the expense of the future. So too with the policy of inflation, which encourages us to spend money today because it will have less buying power tomorrow. Inflation institutionalizes the sin of gluttony and makes it appear rational. It only takes a quick look at a detailed map of Washington, DC, to see the ultimate display of gluttony, for land, money, and power. From the point of view of the state, it never has enough land, money, and power. It eats and eats, grows ever fatter, and you take a risk in merely pointing this out. Sloth The story of how the welfare state has created a slothful class is an old one, hardly disputed anymore, but no less true. The promise of something for nothing at others' expense has corrupted the poor, but also the aged and another group as well: students between the ages of 18 and 25. On the aged, it is pathetic to see how a class of people that should be leading society with wisdom and through experience, to the highest ideals, has become a grasping group of vacationers with ever more time on their hands. Let us be clear: in a free society, there is no right to retirement, and certainly no right to a comfortable retirement. The concept itself was invented by the late New Deal. Before then, sloth was something to be purchased with one's own money. Now, one can enjoy it via the tax state. As for students, our school system has socialized them into believing that the more official credentials one earns, the more one has the right to extract from society, a payment in return for blessing the world with one's mere presence. Talk to anyone who is in the hiring business these days. He will tell you that it is extremely rare to find a young person who understands that employment is not a tribute paid but an exchange of work for wages. All these trends are worse in Europe, where school welfare is more generous — but we are catching up. The subsidization of sloth creates a vicious circle. The more the state rewards not working, the less people have by way of personal and financial resources to live independently from the state. The slothful are naturally inclined to develop dependencies, which is exactly the way the state likes it. Meanwhile, consider the slothfulness of the state itself. There is no more risk-averse class than the bureaucratic one. Whether it is in the FDA process of approving drugs or the loan-application department at HUD, getting bureaucrats to work is like getting hogs to run a race. Some years ago, a federal bureaucrat sent us the following article, to which he refused to attach his name. It noted, What draws people to government work? What keeps them there for a lifetime? It's simple: overcompensation, huge benefits, and great working conditions. It's attractive to sign up and nearly impossible to leave…. What would I lose if I left the government? The short work week would be out the window…. Right now, I can spend 8.7 percent of my work time on vacation. That's six weeks per year in perpetuity…. I could also forget about the unofficial "bennies": for example, I take an hour-long jog every day, followed by a shower and a leisurely lunch. It keeps me in tip-top condition for my vacations. And shopping excursions during work are always possible. What about stress? If relaxation lengthened life, bureaucrats would live to be 150 years old. And yet, in this one area, perhaps we should be grateful. The only thing worse than the slothful state is an energized one that awakes early to take away our liberty. Lust This is thought of as a personal problem only. But we see its destructiveness at work in any government policy that fails to appreciate the family as the foundation of bourgeois society. In public life today, we pretend as if the family is dispensable, when it is the essential bulwark between the individual and the state. Thoughtful economists like Ludwig von Mises and Joseph Schumpeter saw that the family is the training ground for the ethics of capitalism. It is here where we learn about the evil of theft and to respect others' property, to save and to plan for the future, to keep our word. It is no accident that Marxists have long sought to smash the family as an institution, and reduce all of society to atomistic individuals who lack the resources to provide security for themselves and who inevitably turn to the state, instead of parents and kin, for help. These are the Seven Deadly Sins, and in each case, and in a hundred ways I have not mentioned, current government policy encourages them at the expense of bourgeois ethics, which are the ethics of a free market, of a society that is productive, peaceful, and secure from arbitrary power. Why do we hear so little of the Seven Deadly Sins? Perhaps because no institution is more gluttonous, covetous, prideful, or angry than the state itself. In the private sector, market institutions correct these abuses over time. In the state, with no market test and no check on unethical behavior, these deadly sins thrive with a vengeance. I am by no means despairing of the future of the bourgeoisie. If there were a danger that this class could be destroyed, 60 or so years of government policy designed to kill it would have accomplished its goal by now. And yet, we should not become complacent. To the same degree that so many current political struggles are reduced to a conflict of cultures, our best means of fighting back is to live and practice bourgeois ethics in our homes, communities, and businesses. Let us instead recall the four great bourgeois virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude, and, in doing so, do our part to build freedom and prosperity, even in our times. May we never take these cultural foundations of our civilization for granted. [This article is based on a talk delivered for Thomas Dorman, M.D., in Federal Way, Washington, on November 26, 2002.] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 좌파의 유명 경제학자들이 판치는 세상 피케티는 장기적으로 세습 자본주의만이 유일하게 남게 된다고 했지만, 1987년 포브스지의 400대 부자 중에 327명이 2014년에는 명단에서 사라져버렸다. 그리고 나머지 73명은 자수성가한 사업가거나 투자가였다. 피케티는 유럽의 연방화가 문제 해결의 유일한 해법이라고 하지만, 만일 그가 자신의 말처럼 개인의 자유를 존중한다면, 권력을 분권화해서, 지역에 더 많은 자율권을 주어야 한다. 피케티는 부의 불평등이 문제가 아니라, 극심한 불평등이 문제라고 한다. 그런데 “부유하다”는 것은 과연 무슨 뜻일까? Debunking Piketty and the Left's Celebrity Economists Shane J. Coules If you were to browse the economics section of the majority of bookstores here in my home city, Dublin, you would find something of an odd phenomenon: these businesses which essentially exist because of free enterprise and voluntary exchange—i.e., because of capitalism—stock very few books by promarket/procapitalism economists. To be sure, when looking through the shelves, the most frequently encountered names include Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, Paul Krugman, and David McWilliams (the latter being Ireland’s most famous economist—a fellow at the Sanders Institute who believes housing and education should be free). Having paid close attention to this over the past few years when in these bookstores, I can say with absolute honesty that I have never seen books by F.A. Hayek, Thomas Sowell, James M. Buchanan, Murray N. Rothbard, Walter E. Williams, Ludwig von Mises, or even one of the best-known and least radical, relatively promarket economists, Milton Friedman. And I have rarely seen them in independent or secondhand bookstores here, too. Why this is, we can only theorize. One reason might be because in the West today, the dominant culture in major institutions, mainstream media, and corporations is centered around leftism, and the bookstore owners themselves are merely responding to consumer demand; if criticism of capitalism (rightism) is in vogue—and it is—more people may be likely to read anticapitalist books and authors. One of the economists on the left whose works regularly reside in these bookstores is, of course, one of the most popular and bestselling living economists—Thomas Piketty, who has seen an incredible rise in popularity in recent years. I decided to pick up one of his works from one of those promarket-starved bookshelves: Chronicles, a collection of his writings since the 2008 financial crisis. I also took to reading more articles about, and interviews with the man who says the world is ripe for “participatory socialism.” Here are some of the problems with Piketty and his book. Patrimonial Capitalism and the Once Poor Billionaires It doesn’t take long to encounter problematic and easily disprovable statements by the French economist who has been referred to as “the modern Marx.” In the preface of Chronicles, Piketty opines that “in the long run, patrimonial capitalism is the only kind that can exist.” You may be thinking, What is patrimonial capitalism? It essentially means that throughout history the economic elite attain their fortunes through inheritance, not through innovation or entrepreneurship. This claim does not stand up under the least bit of scrutiny. For example, 327 of the people on the 1987 Forbes 400 (a list of the richest Americans) had dropped off the list by 2014. The remaining 73 were mostly self-made entrepreneurs and investors. Also, Steve Kaplan of Chicago Booth and Joshua Ruah of Stanford found that 32 percent of the Forbes 400 in 2011 came from very rich families, down from 60 percent in 1982. Indeed, it would suffice to look to the fact that a large number of billionaires in recent years came from poverty to confidently dump the theory of patrimonial capitalism into the bin. Corporate Tax Rates and the Health of Nations In many of the essays featured in Chronicles (with intriguing titles like “Europe against the Markets”) the man from Clichy criticizes the supposed lack of sufficient taxation of the superrich and corporations. Indeed, Piketty regularly calls for countries to increase their corporate tax rate. But the corporate tax rate and general taxation do not tell the entire story of a country’s fortunes. Bosnia and Herzegovina has a lower corporate tax rate (9 percent) than the very wealthy Ireland (12.5 percent). The low rate has attracted some of the biggest companies on the planet, creating an abundance of jobs and economic growth. Bosnia and Herzegovina is one of the poorest nations in Europe. Of course, these are two very different countries, with the former having recently suffered through years of war. So, let us compare two prosperous European nations: Italy’s corporate tax rate stands at 28 percent (including municipal taxes), while Switzerland’s is 16.5 percent, yet Switzerland was recently ranked second in the world for quality of life, while Italy was fifteenth. Outside of Europe, Venezuela is blessed with an abundance of natural resources and has one of the world’s highest corporate tax rates (34 percent), yet it is the poorest country in South America based on GDP. Singapore—relatively resource poor—has a corporate tax rate of 17 percent and its personal income tax rates are some of the lowest on the planet, yet it has regularly taken the top spot for quality of living in Asia. A nation’s corporate tax rate, and indeed tax rates in general, are only one of the factors in how that nation functions and prospers—or doesn’t. Not only does Piketty recommend enforcing an “entirely European corporate tax rate” with a “minimum rate of 25% in each country,” but he has also gone on record as saying that under his tax plan, billionaires would be taxed out of existence. Personal Freedom and EU Federalism In an interview with the Economic Times, Piketty stated that one of the core differences between his work and that of Marx is that Piketty believes in private property and markets, because “these are also a condition of our personal freedom.” For someone seemingly concerned with personal freedom, Piketty appears to have no issue with centralized EU command dictating to sovereign nations what their corporate tax rate should be. Nor does he seem to see any conflict between personal freedom and even greater European centralization. In Chronicles, he writes, “[T]he number one priority is to create a European authority capable of fighting the markets on equal terms. If that means submitting national budget bills to the European institutions, starting with the European Parliament, well then, let’s go ahead.” For Piketty, European federalism is “The Only Solution,” to quote one of the titles in his collection of essays. That is, the transformation of the European Union from an informal union of sovereign states into a single federal state with a central government is what the economist desires. If Mr. Piketty were genuinely concerned about personal freedom, one would hope that he would prefer to see a decentralization of power and more control at the local level, rather than even more power for EU bureaucrats—the same EU that “bullied Ireland into bailing out the banks” with the taxpayer footing the bill. When it came to personal freedom, Irish citizens did not have much of a say in that one. Inequality and Government Action Inequality in and of itself is not bad. Rather, it is a natural consequence of a free society. To be fair, Piketty has said that “inequality is not a problem per se.” It is his opinion that extreme inequality is the problem. Thus, his target for fixing the ills of nations is, seemingly, always the wealthy and corporations. But who decides what constitutes “wealthy”’? We could argue that the entire Western world is wealthy compared to the poorest countries on the planet. Should we increase taxes on every Western citizen and redirect money to these countries in a bid to reduce clearly extreme inequality? Or do the problems facing nations—including the world’s poorest—run deeper than money, as explained by the economist Angus Deaton? And what of the role of government when it comes to the “wealth gap”? Could it be that government policies like overregulation and high taxes on lower and middle earners are often counterproductive, burdensome, and serve special interests? As Prince Michael of Lichtenstein says, “[A] huge industry of advisors, international organizations, and bureaucrats make gigantic profits from creating excessive regulations and then monitoring compliance with them.” We can also look to the draconian government-imposed lockdowns that have occurred over the past twelve months, which have hit those on low incomes hardest, while the ten richest billionaires in the world increased their wealth by $319 billion in 2020. Contradictions and an Abundance of Praise Despite all of this, Piketty has been and still is one of the most popular economists in the West. Go to any bookstore here in Ireland, at least, and you will see his titles on display, replete with quotes of glowing praise. Keynesian economist Paul Krugman has been one of those to gush with acclamation, despite many of Piketty’s claims being debunked or disproved (see, for example, Indian economist Swaminathan Aiyar’s rebuttal of the French economist’s claims about India). Of course, Piketty shares this “popularity” trait with many other hugely influential and regularly praised economists of the Left, like Keynes, Krugman and, of course, Marx. But perhaps the admiration for these economists makes sense: they talk about things like poverty, inequality, peace, and injustice—issues people care about. After all, what has economic freedom and voluntary exchange—capitalism—ever done for all of that? ------------------------------------------------------------------

썩은 조선보다 더 썩은 후기조선시대를 체험하고 있다 이러온디넝니엊이 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11330837313 탐관오리에 정권을 잡은 당파가 온갖 부패를 시리즈로 즐기는 자기편은 무죄 남의 편은 먼지까지 터는.... 무능력하면서 잔혹하고 탐욕스럽고 색정에 몰두하는 썩은 조선의 DNA가 후기조선으로 드러난 것 같은 대한민국 국민은 한번도 경험해보지 못한 체험의 시간 끝내지 못하면 체험이 아니라 뿌리박혀 뽑지도 못하느 현실이 된다 후기조선 하니이/ 댓글 지금 한반도는 이씨조선보다도 더열악한 시대을 살고 있다. 북조선을 보면 이씨왕조보다도 더 폭악스런 감씨왕조가 인민을 노예로 부리고 있다. 남한을 보자 어렵게 부모세대가 피눈물을 흘리고 이른 단군이래 가장 자유롭고 풍요한시대을 만들었지만 지금 집권세력은 기존 질서을 파괴하고 새로운 전제국가을 만들고 있다. 이얼마나 민족적인 수치이고 불행스런 만행인지 이제는 국민이 깨닫기 시작하였으니 그나마 다행이다. 자유민주주의을 세우는 일은 인간이 살아가는 가장 중요한 이념이고 기본적인 책무이다. --->실체가 없는 관념으로 국민들을 현혹하고, 정권을 빼앗은 다음에는 이권 추구에 미친 듯이 싸돌아다니는 모습이 조선 시대를 닮아 있다. 국민이 어리석으면 역사의 시간은 언제라도 뒤로 돌아간다. 이란, 아프간도 지난 70년대에는 근대적인 도시들과 주민들이 있었지만, 지금은 이슬람의 율법에 묶인 노예들이 되고 말았다. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NL(민족 해방)계열 운동권 출신 민경우 “조국, 말에 어울리는 책임을 져온 사람 아냐” http://www.ilbe.com/view/11330838530 신동아 인터뷰 “문재인 정권, 과대평가된 운동권을 과잉 기용” “386 이데올로기 탓에 청년들이 세상을 음모론으로 봐” “‘사랑도 명예도 이름도 남김없이’ 싸운 사람 문재인 정권에 없어” “운동권에 느슨히 묶여 있던 교수들, 관념적으로 과격” “문 대통령은 386에 의해 발탁된 사람” “데모할 때 안철수·김택진·이해진이 공부해 산업화 일궈” “운동권, 편 가르기로 세상 몰아와” 세줄 요약 1. 586 문재인정부는 반일정서, 반기업정서 등을 부추켜 자기 일신만을 도모하는 도덕성이 엷은 집단 2. 586=똥86 실력 없이 자본론도 읽어보지도 않고 자본론 서론 프롤레타리아혁명 부분만 빼가는 자들 3. 안철수, 이해진, 김택진 같은 테크노크라트가 사회를 이끌어가야 하는 시대다 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 김**** 2021-03-20 16:09:59 선거조작 하기 위해서 분위기 띄우네.. 425총선 전에 유시민이가 18석 얻는다고 여언하더만..ㅋ ..조작한 걸 알고 그런 말을 했지.. 이번에도 조작을 작심하고 있나? [출처: 중앙일보] 이해찬 "선거 거의 이긴듯"…박영선 "지지율 하락 맛도 있어야" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 코로나 아스트라제네카 백신 부작용 혈전 원인 발견...독일연구진 "치료도 가능" 기사입력 2021.03.20. 오전 7:55 독일 연구진이 아스트라제네카(AZ)의 코로나19 백신 접종 이후 희귀사례 뇌혈전증이 발생하는 원인을 발견한 것으로 전해졌다. 치료 가능성도 나와 주목된다. 전조 증상이 나타날 경우 정맥주사로 다량의 면역글로불린을 주입하면 증상을 멈출 수 있다는 게 연구진의 조언이다./ 디지털타임스 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 조선일보 [터치! 코리아] “꼬우면 너도 하든가” 그 조롱을 4년 내내 들었다 조롱글 주인 찾겠다며 정권이 길길이 날뛰지만 국민은 더한 조롱을 지난 4년간 견뎌야 했다 최규민 기자 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 경보 울린 문재인의 세금독재 / 국토부+국세청 쌍끌이 증세 비법 [이정훈TV] 이정훈TV 올해 전국 공동주택 공시가격 19.08% 상승. “역대급” 지난해 (5.98%) 보다 세배 이상 크다. 왜 좌파 정권은 공시지가를 올리려 하나? 서울의 부동산 가격 상승. 그런데 과거의 기준은 유지하니, 중산층들이 종부세 대상으로 진입. 국세청은 세법과 세율을 고치지 않는 것으로 증세에 일조. 국가가 발전하면 그에 따라 세법과 세율도 바꿔야지. 국토교통부와 기획재정부 사이트는 코로나 극복 등 온갖 미사여구 써놓고 현실에서는 증세 쌍끌이 . 이제 와서 부동산 적폐 청산하자고 하니 “이 똥은 누가 치우나 https://youtu.be/xEz8pJKHhFg ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Enduring Tension: Capitalism and the Moral Order Hardcover – January 26, 2021 by Donald J. Devine (Author) Western civilization fashioned a capitalism that created a worldwide cornucopia but produced few grateful beneficiaries. Indeed, the market’s creative destruction and individualist autonomy have become a challenge to capitalism’s legitimacy. Even a sensitive person like Pope Francis called capitalism’s “limitless” freedom a “fundamental terrorism against all humanity.” The sympathetic economic historian Joseph Schumpeter had identified capitalism’s “crumbling walls” a half-century earlier and predicted approaching civilizational collapse. Capitalism only survives today in what Schumpeter’s classic Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy called a “fettered” form, harnessed by bureaucratic regulations that impede productivity, compound the problems they were designed to fix, and dissolve the moral structure that underlay capitalist civilization’s creativity and moral legitimacy. A response to these challenges must begin with capitalism’s defining author Karl Marx accurately setting capitalism’s roots in feudalism and the implications of that historical inheritance, predominantly what Walter Lippmann identified as Rousseau’s “Christian heresy.” That revolution converted heavenly perfection into impossible to fulfill demands on earth, culminating in what F.A. Hayek considered the “superstition” that science could rationalize markets to achieve social perfection. To unravel this capitalist enigma, we identify the historical roots of the confusion, review the alternative rationalized solutions, and provide a pluralist John Locke-inspired legitimizing-synthesis to fuse a freedom and tradition moral scaffolding sufficient to hold the walls and preserve the best of capitalist civilization. Review "Why does history record prosperity for the mass of ordinary people only within Western civilization and in the context of free markets? Donald Devine's exploration of the enduring tension between capitalism and the moral order is the best answer to this question since Adam Smith's. Like Smith, Devine shows the mutually sustaining nature of morality and economic freedom, and provides a much needed clearing away of the confusion with which recent authors have befogged this essential relationship."--Angelo M. Codevilla, Professor Emeritus, Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

나라안보가 등불 앞인데 조선놈들은 태연하구나. 아스빠리 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11330699617 중공의 해양세력확장을 저지할 목적으로 미국이 제안한 쿼드를 정의용이 사실상 거부했고, 북한 비핵화'도 문정권은 외면했다고 한다. 나라안보를 거들낼 놈들이다. 그런데도 조선놈들은 태연하다. 참......기이하다. ------------------------------------------------------------------ 文출생의혹] 文의 탯줄할머니 추경순도 가짜 가능성 - 조우석 칼럼 2021.03.18 [뉴스타운TV] https://youtu.be/-5WPxjsugmc ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LA 시사논평 / 미국 작심 발언, 문재인 헛소리 / 윤석열이 촛불반란 탄핵의 칼잽이가 된 이유 / 쥴리를 아시나요? (생방송 3. 19. 2021) https://youtu.be/Je8hKW7C2Vs ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Why Times 정세분석 728] 美 ‘중국제조 2025’ 융단폭격. “더 세게, 더 깊숙히” (2021.3.18) https://youtu.be/yYWRj0At1xA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [팩트] '가방이 중고차 가격'…명품백 들고 출석한 윤석열 장모 최모 씨 장모 최은순이라는 여자가 문제적 여자인 듯하다. 그리고 그녀의 유전자를 물려받은 윤석열의 처 김건희라는 여자도 자신의 어머니와 유사한 여자인 듯하다. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 라구람 라잔이 쓴 놀라운 책 IMF의 수석 경제학자인 그가 쓴 책은 세계 정부의 확대를 요구하는 게 아니라, 지역 사회의 강화를 주장하고 있다. 기술관료에 의한 통치보다 국가적 주권이 더 낫다면, 지역 사회는 그보다 더 낫다 그가 보기에 시장과 국가, 그리고 지역 사회 사회에는 균형이 있어야 하고, 만일 셋 중에 하나만이 득세하게 되면 위험한 상황이 초래될 수도 있다. 그는 막스의 경제학은 배격하지만, 그를 근대의 가장 위대한 사회 사상가 중의 한 명이라고 믿는다. 막스의 도그마를 이어받은 그는 시장을 통제하려면 강력한 국가가 필요하다고 믿는다. 보편적 기본소득은 대부분의 사람들이 실업자가 될 거라는 가정을 바탕으로 하고 있다. 그는 대학 교육이 과대 평가되어 있으며, 의무교육이 줄어들면 아이들에게는 더 좋은 일이라고 주장한다. Community and Civil Society over State David Gordon Raghuram Rajan has written a surprising book. Now teaching finance at the University of Chicago, he is an international bureaucrat in good standing, and not a minor one at that; he was chief economist of the International Monetary Fund. Yet far from calling for an increase in “global governance,” as one might expect from someone with his background, he wants to strengthen the local, “proximate,” community. “If more powers are delegated from the state to the local community level,” he tells us, “a community can shape its own future better, and will have more control over it. Some communities will have a specific ethnic concentration, and community culture will gravitate toward that ethnic group’s culture…. A strong local community could satisfy people’s need to live in a cohesive social structure with others of the same culture or religion…. None of this implies exclusion [but]—having monocultures that satisfy the tastes of those who want monocultures is as important as having multicultures.” The problem with “populist nationalism,” then, is not that its advocates prefer national sovereignty to control by internationally minded elites. They are right to do so, given human nature as it is, and the leaders of the European Union neglected this truth to their cost. “The problem was that no one asked their people how much more Europe they wanted, and how much sovereignty they were willing to give up…. The process of integration was, therefore, profoundly undemocratic…. Ultimately, though, integration succeeds only when there is deep social empathy between people.” But if national sovereignty is better than rule by technocrats, still better is the local community. Rajan’s defense of the local community is part of the ambitious theory of history suggested by his book’s subtitle. As he sees it, there must be a balance among the market, the state, and the local community. Each is dangerous if unchecked by the other two. In fact, though, the alleged dangers of the market stem largely, if not entirely, from “crony capitalism,” the partnership of the state and business interests to exploit consumers. Why not drastically limit the power of the state to block this unholy alliance rather than trust a strong state to limit the market? The author’s failure to support the free market fully stems from an assumption that emerges in his history of capitalism in Europe and America. That account is well worth studying, and Rajan’s discussions of the end of feudalism and the rise of the gentry are especially good, though our confidence is a bit shaken by his calling Henri Pirenne, the greatest of all Belgian historians, French. But matters take a turn for the worse when he reaches the rise of capitalism itself, and here, I regret to say, he has taken on board a controversial Marxist dogma. He rejects Marxist economics, which he calls “mostly wrong,” but he calls Marx “one of the greatest social thinkers of modern times.” It is a particular dogma that he has taken over from Marx and also, in his telling, from Adam Smith, that leads him to advocate a state strong enough to rein in the market. “The inexorable political tendency of a free, unfettered, unregulated market was for the producers, after experiencing the rigors of competition, to attempt cartelization.” He cites as an example John D. Rockefeller’s control of oil refining in the United States through his Standard Oil Company and deems justified the suit against the company under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, but he omits any discussion of the revisionist scholarship that indicates Rockefeller often got the worst of battles with competing refineries and that the lawsuit was not a measure to promote competition but rather an attempt to advance the interests of J.P. Morgan and his associates against their rivals. Of this, interested readers will find a full account in Murray Rothbard’s The Progressive Era. It would seem the better part of wisdom not to rely on the state to fight alleged monopolies on grounds of efficiency but instead to curtail the power of the state so that “crony capitalism” cannot gain a foothold. Despite his wrong path on this issue, though, the book on the whole is excellent and Rajan makes many useful points. We hear much today about the danger that automation will drive massive numbers of people out of work. Rajan is appropriately skeptical. Automation, like past innovations, can bring some jobs to an end, but this frees up labor to go elsewhere. “Routine jobs have been automated out of existence for decades now, regardless of whether the jobs required skills or not. Banks had hundreds of thousands of cashiers taking in and paying out cash, as well as counting it at the end of the day…. Automated teller machines (ATMs) and cash-counting machines displaced them…. Yet, if anything, employment in banking has gone up as more, cheaper, bank branches are opened, and tellers morph into relationship managers advising retail customers on their loan options and their investment portfolios.” Some of those most fearful of automation, and others as well, have proposed a universal basic income (UBI) that would free people of the need to work by grants of sufficient money to live a life of leisure. Rajan raises against this proposal a devastating objection: “UBI is an all-or-nothing scheme, and as such, suffers from the traditional difficulties associated with such a scheme. UBI essentially assumes that most people will not have a job, and there will be no point in them searching for one or attempting to retrain themselves since no new jobs will be possible. It is a counsel of despair not just for job seekers but also for job creators, because after UBI is implemented, any new job will have to be more attractive in pay and responsibilities than paid leisure, a difficult line to cross.” Another important discussion in the book returns us to the local community. Some have objected on egalitarian grounds to programs that stress community control. Given the commanding importance for one’s future income and social status of going to the “right” university, with the Ivy League schools at the top, won’t people who are fairly well off but who cannot afford the top private schools move to neighborhoods with “good” public schools? By doing so, it is claimed, they give their children an unfair advantage over children from poor families, because these families cannot afford housing in the expensive neighborhoods. Rajan, who is not without egalitarian sympathies, for the most part takes this to be a genuine problem that he is at pains to mitigate. But in one place, he challenges directly one of the key myths of our time. University education is vastly overrated, and many children would do better with less compulsory schooling: “Companies seem to be rating jobs as requiring higher credentials simply because schools are not teaching basic skills well…. International assessments seem to verify the low average quality of US schooling…. The harm done is worse than simply too much time spent by students who do not need degrees acquiring them at great expense, firms over-paying for qualifications they do not need, and a higher-education system that consumes enormous resources. It causes professions to inflate their own minimum credential requirements as they try to gain in prestige….” Rajan does not pursue the full implications of this challenge, but that he mentions the issue at all is a testament to the wisdom of his book. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------