설마했는데...정부, 중국에 나라 팔고 있었다! 신인균의 국방 티비 https://youtu.be/xo3dUjwAo9A ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (속보) 미, 흑인 폭동 직전 문재앙_깜빵_가자 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11337261657 https://www.foxnews.com/us/live-updates-chauvin-trial-closing-arguments 미니애폴리스 경찰 Derek Chauvin의 흑인 Flyod 살인혐의 재판이 모두 끝남 이제 배심원 평의 들어감 재판 내용을 보면 무죄가 분명함 그러나 배심원들이 무죄 평결하면 보복 살해당할 위험이 있음 그래서 유죄 평결 내릴 확률도 있음 미니애폴리스에는 이 시간 3천명의 주방위군이 무장하고 대기하고 있고 흑인들이 하나둘 폭동을 위해 모여들고 있는 상황임 다른 도시들도 흑인들의 폭동이 예상되고 있어 주방위군이 무장 동원되었음 오늘 무죄 평결나면, 미국은 거의 내란 수준의 폭동과 총격전이 벌어질 분위기임 흑인들은 이미 총을 쏘고 난리임 엊그제 좌빨 민주당 하원의원 흑인 할망구 Maxine Waters는 무죄 평결을 예견하고 흑인들은 거리로 뛰쳐나와 경찰/군대에 맞서 싸우라고 폭동-내란 선동 발언을 함 전국적으로 흑인이 날튀고 만약의 유혈사태를 대비해 도시마다 주방위군 동원령을 내림 판사는 Maxine Waters의 발언이 배심원 결정에 영향을 끼칠 수 있는 위법 행위였다고 발언 경찰 변호한 변호사도 배심원들이 Waters의 발언에 죽음의 위협을 느꼈을 것이고 무죄 판결이 부담스러울 것임을 지적. (요약) 배심원이 무죄 평결 내리는 게 맞겠지만, 만약 유죄 평결 내리면, 폭동 사주한 Maxine Waters때문에 판사가 자기 권한으로 평결 무효화 할 가능성이 높은 상황임 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 성인지예산 35조원 체감짤. 박근혜횽 여목 댓글 아직도 몰랏구나. 저 35조중 33조는 재앙이 병신새끼 통치자금이다. 기업들 후원 안하지. 종북좌파들 흙 퍼먹고 장사 하겠냐. 좌파는 돈이 있어야 굴러간다. 좃만한 대한민국에 1년 예산이 500조이상 들어갈 일이 뭐 있겠냐. 이 500조 중 최소 100조 이상은 북한 개정은이 아가리에 들어간다. 피 같은 우리 세금으로 문재앙이 여기저기 삥 뜯기고 있다. 이 얼마나 좃같은 상황이냐. 국내에 있는 수백 수천개의 이적단체들 무슨 돈으로 지랄 염병 떨겠냐. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stanford Study Results: Facemasks are Ineffective to Block Transmission of COVID-19 and Actually Can Cause Health Deterioration and Premature Death By Joe Hoft Published April 19, 2021 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 모든 자산 소유자의 머리 위에 매달린 다모클레스의 칼 기업의 자산은 이름만 기업의 자산일 뿐, 실제로는 국가에 의해 자산의 지위를 부여받아야만 존재할 수 있는 세상이 되었다. 현재의 세계 상황에서 자산은 그 어느 때보다 더 피아트(법정, fiat) 자산이다. 국가는 이제 어떤 기업이 성공할지 실패할지 결정할 뿐만 아니라, 어떤 기업이 성공의 기회를 가질지를 결정한다. The Sword of Damocles Hangs over Every Property Owner Connor Mortell Cicero wrote of a king by the name of Damocles. He served in the court of Dionysus, and after acknowledging his envy of Dionysus’s lifestyle, Dionysus challenged him to try taking on the lifestyle for himself. At first, Damocles is taken by the royal lifestyle; however, during one of his feasts, Dionysus hung a sword above Damocles that was held by a single horsehair. The stress that this thin hair would eventually succumb to the weight of the sword and it would fall and kill him became too much, and as a result Damocles begged Dionysus to remove him from this position. This has gone on to be used as an expression for the feeling of everything you have being lost because of some overarching threat, feeling like there is a sword hanging over your head. Hoppe on Fiat Property This very same expression was used by Hans-Hermann Hoppe in his book The Great Fiction: Property, Economy, Society, and the Politics of Decline. But before he gets into the sword of Damocles, Hoppe must first address what fiat property means. The term “fiat” gets thrown around very regularly in the discussion of money, fiat money being money which has obtained some legal status; however, it is much rarer to discuss the concept of fiat property, but no less important. In Hoppe’s chapter entitled “Entrepreneurship with Fiat Property and Fiat Money,” he begins by first addressing fiat property: We can make two interrelated predictions as to the effect of a state on the business of business. First, and most fundamentally, under statist conditions real property will be called fiat property. From here he goes on to explain what fiat property is and what it has to do with our proverbial sword: The state cannot increase the quality and quantity of real property. But it can redistribute it as it sees fit. It can reduce the real property at the disposal of businessmen or it can limit the range of control that they are allowed over their property; and it can thereby increase its own property (or that of its allies) and increase its own range of control over existing physical things. The businessmen’s property, then, is their property in name only. It is granted to them by the state, and it exists only as long as the state does not decide otherwise. Constantly, the sword of Damocles is hanging over the heads of businessmen. The execution of their business plans is based on their assumption of the existence, at their disposal, of certain physical resources and their physical capabilities, and all their value speculations are based on this physical basis being a given. But these assumptions about the physical basis can be rendered incorrect at any time—and their value calculations vitiated as well—if the state merely decides to change its current legislation and regulation. This once theoretical threat that the state could—on a whim—demonstrate that the businessman does not truly own his or her property has become more real than ever this last year. Threats like eminent domain were always present to show the evils of which the state is capable; however, even with such options existing, never could one have claimed the degree to which the state would really utilize fiat property upon popular discussion of covid-19. This last year, the single horsehair that was holding up the sword finally snapped. While some states are finally limiting governors on their ability to destroy lives at the stroke of a pen, it is still immediately obvious by looking at all the states that have yet to do so that in our current fearful world, property is more fiat than it ever has been. The state is now the determinant not just of which businesses succeed and fail, but which businesses even get an attempt to do so—no longer the market. As the Austrian readers of Mises Wire know, entrepreneurs making malinvestment decisions because they are guided by state signals rather than market signals is incredibly dangerous. However, this is not intended as a negative message, but rather as a call to action. While in The Great Fiction Hoppe was too early to address just how fiat our property would become, he still ends his chapter with a positive note that holds just as true today: A businessman can choose the honorable but at the same time also the most difficult path. This businessman is aware of the nature of the state. He knows that the state and its operators are out to get him and bully him, to confiscate his property and money and, even worse, that they are arrogant, self-righteous, haughty, and full of themselves. Based on such understanding, this very different breed of businessman then tries his best to anticipate and adjust to the state’s every evil move. But he does not join the gang. He does not pay bribes to secure contracts or privileges from the state. Instead, he tries as well as he can to defend whatever is still left of his property and property rights and make as large profits as possible in doing so. While in this year we’ve seen any shred of property rights be shriveled to the most fiat of fiat property, that is no reason to give up. That is the very reason to take this passage to heart. We as Austrians are called to go forward and act as this very different breed of businessmen. We are called to not join the gang but instead to defend what is left. Most simply, we are called to tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito. tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito. --라틴어, 불행에 굴복하지 말고 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://frankspeech.com/라는 사이트가 만들어졌다. 트럼프의 측근인 Mike Lindell에 의해 제작되었다고 하는데, 우파적이고 자유주의적인 글들이 올라올 듯하다. 아래는 그중 하나. What the Welfare State Has Done to America 복지 국가정책은 미국에 무엇을 가져왔나? By Jeremy Ryan Slate, 19 April, 2021 The welfare state again. In a recent article, Patrick J. Buchanan asks the Question “Did ‘the Great Society’ Ruin society?”[1] He is onto something with this approach; he cites that almost half of all Americans are receiving some form of government assistance. America since the New Deal are evidence of just how ruined America has become. Though I don’t agree with Michael Savage in terms of disenfranchisement, I do think he is right that welfare controls the American vote.[2] Voters have learned to vote for whatever politician will give them the most; they’ve ‘learned to give themselves a raise.’ Americans have really bought into the campaign promises of America politicians, many of which will never be followed through with, or if they are will have huge caveats never mentioned in the campaign. Citizens have no longer want smaller government as presented by civil libertarians, because they have become What the upon the support, which they receive, in the countless social programs the government provides. Americans no longer understand what real poverty is, and besides that they no longer understand what it means to persevere. Yes, there is poverty in America, but it is nowhere near as prevalent as it is in Europe or even during America’s greatest generation. Voters no longer will vote for a politician, which will cut social security or Medicare or even the Department of Education. It is important to remember, the Department of Education, as well as the Department of Energy did not exist until the Carter administration, and America got along just fine without them.[3] It is cutting the fat that most Americans are opposed to, voters want a better economy while still enjoying all the welfare money they receive. Here in lies the problem, Americans cannot have their cake and eat it too. If welfare programs, so-called entitlement programs are not cut or at least amended to a lower level, then the economy will not survive, nor will capitalism live. America is moving further towards the state capitalism of China, though most Keynesians want to deny it, the Fed is helping to further such social control. People do not realize that through government control they are giving up more freedom, because if an individual accepts money, then they have to keep voting for those that will continue its flow, and in that they are not truly free. It is amazing that under the Obama administration, an individual can receive unemployment for up to three years. Many recipients are seeing this as a time to take a vacation, not work, while they are receiving government goodies (Social security was only ever intended to be a supplement, not a retirement plan; Unemployment was intended to help those in the case they suddenly lose their job, not to facilitate a vacation). They see no need to really look for a job because they are living pretty comfortably by not doing anything at all. These recipients will vote for whomever will keep the money coming, because though some really have fallen upon hard times, are really enjoying their time off. The problem is those that are just lazy or are taught by the system to be lazy, are using social programs improperly; the lazy are taking money from those that really need it to survive. Its those that take the program as a last resort, or are too proud to accept it at all that will make due by working the two jobs or cutting their lifestyle for a while until they are able to get better employment in order to facilitate the “American Dream”. In a recent speech to autoworkers, president Obama described the “New American Dream”, which is apparently “working hard and living in their means.”[4] When growing up, my parents raised me on a different “American Dream”, and its still a dream open to everyone. The “American Dream” that I was raised upon is that we are all created equal by our creator, and we all have a shot to become rich, through our own hard work and innovation. However, recently the administration has engaged in much class warfare. Politicians on both sides of the aisle, as well as the occupy movement have latched onto several phrases, including: paying their fair share, millionaires, billionaires and the richest one percent. Though they do not realize it, the populous is being conditioned on the highest level for socialism. In such a system, the government is repeatedly trying to put the citizenry on equal footing, but their distribution is more equal to a modern day Robin Hood.[5] They look to the government to loot for them for the success they do not have and do not want to put in the effort to achieve. The looters will have to learn to survive on their own if they no longer receive a government hand out. If they cannot learn to make do on their own, then it is their own fault that they will fail in survival. This might seem cold, but there is other ways to help those that really cannot help themselves. Hard economics should be seen as a survival of the fittest, but there is a way to still have some humanity for those that cannot help themselves: Charity. Charity is not government mandated as the welfare system is, and it takes true goodness of heart in order to help a person out of charity. Not making charity compulsory really makes it a truly good gesture, rather than being a requirement it is made an act of love for humanity. It is this type of “good” that Plato reaches for in his “Allegory of the Cave.” America cannot cut the social umbilical cord unless the voting populace truly wants that change. They have to truly understand that the situation cannot get better unless some growing pains are endured. Americans live the most comfortable life style in the world, and in order to help this life style endure, voters have to learn that they need to pick themselves up by their boot straps, give up a little bit of comfort, to hopefully achieve more comfort later on. Cutting welfare programs will cause taxes to lower, profits to go up and will help to cut into the national debt which is now up to 110% of GDP.[6] Reagan called such an economic situation the “trickle down effect,” and it is very true of what cutting at the government level can do to help the private sector.[7] If America continues to spend at its current rate, then it will quickly reach its Weimar moment. When that moment is reached, then a wheelbarrow full of one hundred dollar bills will not buy enough bread to feed a family of three. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------