Trending Content
| +84 | GF doesn’t care about her looks | 49 | 21h | |
| +56 | Affair with my Associate… In Desperate Need for Advice | 23 | 14h | |
| +48 | How to sound more eloquent? | 17 | 2h | |
| +39 | Insurance as High Finance? | 10 | 2d | |
| +38 | 400k/year in HVAC sales? | 26 | 1d | |
| +33 | Would you rather live alone in an outer borough or with roommates in Manhattan? | 23 | 2d | |
| +28 | WSO Ranking On Resume??? | 7 | 9s | |
| +27 | Why do people listen to Jim Cramer Investing Advice? | 10 | 17h | |
| +26 | Carnivore Diet | 9 | 16h | |
| +26 | Is my boss gaslighting me? | 3 | 15h |
Career Resources
I saw that. What is funny is all the comments from people who are so afraid of liberty. People really are sheep.
Personally comments are the only reason I even read news stories anymore.
this.
Funny thing is that the pioneer of Seasteading is Milton Friedman's son. I wonder if he's as genius as Milton was.. doubtful
Friedman is no genius compared to Mises and Hayek.
I read a Gartman letter a few weeks ago where he quoted those two plus Rothbard. I am pretty worried that retards like Gartman are going to water down the message and the average Boobus Americanus will eventually get it all terribly wrong.
The only reason why people remember Friedman over Mises and Hayek are his social skills. Apparently Mises was a real grouch, but my info for that is a friend of a friend.
there used to be a whole libertarian continent called america. nice while it lasted.
Liberty is scary for most people. It allows people to fail. Many people are fine with giving up freedom in exchange for not failing. These people are basically libertarian cancer.
This is so true. Apathetic, non-ambitious people are NEVER libertarians. I've met a lot of "alpha" personalities in my life, and they are ALWAYS libertarians. I've come to the conclusion that if you develop the personal mentality of a winner, you will become a libertarian naturally. What political ideology rewards winning more? That's right, none. So if you want to be alpha, start being more libertarian, lol.
They are very much on the same level. Friedman was the one who truly defined the UChicago school.
I feel like I'm living in Atlas Shrugged so much lately... These comments give me some hope though :)
Petri is Friedman's grandson, actually. And I stumbled across this a few years back, they haven't really gone much further with it. Not a big surprise, it'll be an extremely costly and risky project.
Come on folks. None of us are THAT naive here. I have no idea how such a society would function, but I think we can all agree on these sites potential as casinos/resorts and tax havens.
As for Friedman: unlike Hayek & Mises, he had actual influence. As someone young enough to still have a heart, but also having taken basic economics, I'd really like to see someone implement his negative income tax (in place of traditional "welfare").
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax
[quote=charmander]Come on folks. None of us are THAT naive here. I have no idea how such a society would function, but I think we can all agree on these sites potential as casinos/resorts and tax havens.
As for Friedman: unlike Hayek & Mises, he had actual influence. As someone young enough to still have a heart, but also having taken basic economics, I'd really like to see someone implement his negative income tax (in place of traditional "welfare").
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax[/quote]
...Hayek won the Nobel prize and The Road to Serfdom has to be amongst the most read books on the subject ever...he was and is influencial.
Yeah this quite obviously will not work. They are specifically making it in international waters as to be free from any laws so good luck to them when the first group of raiders decide to pillage.
Why in the world do you think they would go out there without protection? Libertarians are big fans of the 2nd Amendment, if you hadn't noticed. I'm pretty sure they will be more than capable of defending themselves.
Yeah, they're going to spend hundreds of millions if not billions and neglect to buy a gun or two...
So, when are the underwater cities buing built?
DId anyone else read this story and think of Bioshock?
WHO IS PETER THIEL?
Paypal, Clarium, Facebook.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_shrugged
The real question is who is Andrew Ryan?
lol, are they gonna name the place Rapture too?
If they could buy an island and reform it it would be fine. Why would a billionaire want to live on a terraformed oil derrick? I like the idea of a new country founded on libertarianism, but this seems dumb.
i was recently at a conference in SF where Peter Thiel was the keynote speaker... when it came time for questions some lady gets up and says "nice to meet you, John Galt"
My guess is these islands pull a Clarium. Start off hot and end up getting crushed, probably by some pirates.
pirates lead by some guy named Ragnar?
I guarantee these islands will have more than enough protection. I'm talking like mounted 50 caliber machine guns and SAM missiles just in case they need to defend themselves against any hostile threat. If I was a pirate, i'd be very wary of trying to take on this island. It's going to start out as a bunch of rich ppl that will do whatever it takes to ensure their safety. I promise those guys aren't stupid, they'll be ready when it happens
How are they going to afford machine guns and missiles without taxes? Or is each business and resident on the island goign to buy their own missiles?
I'd be game for a well-fortified property (if I had the bones). If Aphex Twin decided to live on the island, there would at least be a sub that could be outfitted with torpedoes.
Edit: Grammar.
Yes, because libertarians don't believe in any taxes whatsoever... (saracasm)
Beat me to it Alex. Very common misconception about Libertarians.
Can I buy a timeshare on the island and be free for two weeks a year?
I love how people simply hate the idea of liberty. Pretty sad that in America so many people would be against it.
The problem with Americans is that we have never felt the boot of an oppressor on our throat. We've gotten lazy and complacent. The founding fathers would puke and renounce this place if they were still alive.
Liberty needs to be maximized, not minimized. I say bravo to these true patriots for attempting this.
Holy shit, we agree on one thing ANT. Thank god it's more important than all the bullshit we disagree on
Sorry ANT, but you think this is a problem??
Come on man.
First off, we made it through 200+ years without oppression, and we managed to achieve a level of economic growth and military power never seen before in the history of the world. Not once did we have the "boot of an oppressor on our throat", and we did pretty well.
If you really want to look at what has changed, it is the abandonment of the social stigma of not complying with the American morality over the last 30 years.
Read the book A Renegade History of the USA and you will see that American morality was the primary driver of economic growth for the first two centuries of our existence. It was also the prime hindrance to pure social freedom. In other words, the American values of abstinence, hard-work, frugality and sobriety may have led to an economically productive society, but they stigmatized certain behaviors that today we love to enjoy.
Sometimes suffering and oppression makes people appreciate things. You think we would of established this country and fought and died for freedom if the British were super nice and understanding?
We've grown fat and lazy. When I look around I don't see America in the face of Americans, I see it in recent immigrants who know how great economic and political freedom is.
Come on dude, its still a bit out there to say that our problem is that we have never been oppressed by a tyrannical government. If you think that our problem is ignorance or a lack of appreciation of our economic and political freedom, than say that, but don't claim that our problem is that we have never been subject to tyrannical rule before.
Better education about our political freedoms can help us appreciate them more. Through thorough education, we can be just as appreciative, if not more, of our political freedoms, than if we were to live under a dictator for a few years. So our problem isn't that we haven't lived under a dictator, but we (at least, from your perspective) have failed to educate the populace about the true extent of their political freedoms.
Also, keep in mind this quote, from John Adams:
"A government of the people, would make the people disciplined, stern, hard working, and joyless. A monarchy, on the other hand, would let them have too much fun, and paradoxically, allow them too much liberty"
The American Revolution was just as much about the Founding Fathers desire to impose a puritanical morality upon the American colonists as it was about their to desire to gain political freedom.
@Rothyman
This is part of my point. We have abandoned the puritanical morality that was socially imposed on us for over 200 years. Some of us now feel free to have sex before marriage, to enjoy dancing, to get drunk in the streets, to waste money on frivolous items, etc. We are abandoning our moral fiber (note I don't really care either way, I'm just making the observation). So it is certainly possible that we are deliberately exchanging the political and economic freedoms associated with democracy to a centralized government in exchange for leniency when it comes to moral issues.
Perhaps the American people don't really care if they surrender some political freedom. Perhaps we are abandoning certain aspects of democracy. Perhaps the people want to enjoy the wealth we have created, and they want to enjoy the pleasures of life which stem from great wealth. Whether or not some of us want this, it doesn't matter. I think their is a long term trend in America to abandon the virtues of industry which have made us great, and instead to enjoy the pleasure of our wealth in the here and now.
Remember, the free man in American before the civil war worked 12-16 hours a day doing hard, physical labor. He had sex to procreate, he never danced, he wore plain clothes, he didn't watch tv or do any other sort of recreational activities. Is this a life anyone on here really wants for himself? Is this the morality we wish to return to? Technology has allowed us to produce a great amount of products/services in less time. Should we not take advantage of this and enjoy the fruits of our labor, something which the American worker never did until after the second world war?
@Libor
You're right about morals. And yet we are letting bad morals infiltrate the highest levels of our government. Now we're seeing the blowback and destruction of of our wealth because of greedy individuals with bad morals.
Greed is only a good thing in a free system in which the government has a limited role because incentives drives profits. Unfortunately we've allowed our government to grow so big that we must 'rely' on them now the same exact things that are making us bankrupt. Now we are brainwashed into thinking that social security & entitlements are the only way to live. In a sense, they have made us dependent on them. In the end, that is a form of oppression.
People are always so blind.
When your parents pay for your car, can you do whatever you want? No, they always use it as a bargaining chip. They hold it over you and threaten to take it away.
Entitlements are a form of control. Those who think otherwise are kidding themselves.
This. I scratch your back so you can scratch mine harder...... no homo. Welcome to the world of Entitlements.
Wow, liberty and freedom exchanged for an LCD and a cold beer. Sounds like a decent trade. I mean millions of Americans died for something given up so easily.
I am not endorsing it, I'm just pointing it out.
Anyway, my original point is that our problem isn't that we haven't lived under a dictator, but that we have failed to educate ourselves enough about our political freedoms in order to truly appreciate and understand them.
Ok, I will agree with you. Being free required continued diligence. Once you start taking it for granted it is done with.
I have realized that there is essentially no difference in the way people think regardless of how smart you are. For example this thread dissolved into a discussion about the island being able to defend it self. Which is exactly the same thing the yahoo story came to. The only difference this thread is populated by smart kids and the yahoo story is populated by mindless idiots.
Defense of the island wouldn't even be a question. It would be handled through a free market insurance policy and the island would probably be defended by Blackwater or a similar band of well-equipped mercenaries.
I'd be more concerned about a Lord of the Flies scenario, lol.
For real. I'd move to that island just so I could get a hold of all of the arms and ordinance that you can't get in the states. The most logical business there is to start a private defense company. :D
^ yeah, I was just wondering if anyone has read "Utopia" but that's probably closer to the reality of how it would play out.
By the way, this idea seems pretty dumb.
First off, loose building codes on an oil-rig like city is absurd. The last thing I want when I am on a floating platform is to have buildings that are not up to any sort of code, whatsoever. If my neighbors electric systems were not installed correctly, it could start a fire which would basically engulf the entire island.
Second, the system has no moral code. No where in the libertarian literature is their any stipulation that a libertarian government needs to abandon a moral code. If anything, libertarian requires a firm ethical foundation, in order to encourage its citizens to engage in rational behavior. Once again, a bunch of armed, morally loose men and women on a floating island seems like a recipe for disaster.
Finally, the economics of the entire project seem absurd. They will be importing food and energy, and will need to find a competitive advantage in order to trade for that food. Who will own the imported food?
I appreciate the spirit of this idea, but I just can't picture it working. I think projects like the Free State Project will be much more attractive to Libertarian idealists.
FSP is attractive. And why are you assuming that these people will have no moral code? Just because it isn't written into law doesn't mean we all suddenly turn into savages and lose our personal beliefs. Also, depending on what project you look at, some of these are meant to be self-sustaining, meaning they grow or capture their own food and create their own energy. The food source will obviously be fish-heavy, but there'd still be the ability to grow it on board. Energy will be fairly easy as you can create water based energy facilities.
Of course it'll be difficult and cost a helluva lot of money, but it's doable
Libertarianism works until one guy fucks the others wife.
Does no one seem to understand the building code delima? It has nothing to do with the structual stability codes. They are simply refering to HOA like laws that dont allow you to build what you want, what color you want it ect ect. Also they are talking about getting rid of the endless amount of codes that have no purpose but to infringe on peoples rights a liberties. Also libertians pay taxes they just dont like to pay taxes for shit they feel the government should not be doing, like taking care of peopls kids.
Well then it really isn't libertarian if they are going to enforce stability codes for structures.
And the article specifically mentions that they will not have to abide by a moral code.
So, why couldn't you just go into some gay African country and build a city there with large city walls and a mercenary army armed to the teeth? Why build in the middle of an ocean? There are a multitude of lawless nations in the world that I'm sure a mercenary army could be easily used to set up shop.
That's the stupidest thing I've read in my entire life, and I've read a lot.
Being a libertarian does not mean no rules or no regulation. People love to try and use this as a way to argue against it, but it simply is not true.
Maximizing liberty is ideal and good.
How exactly is that stupid? Half of Africa is lawless. A mercenary army could go in with 2500 people and carve out thousands of acres in un-used, undeveloped farm lands in rich territories. I don't see how that would be any more expensive than building a city on the ocean.
Odio occaecati ut in consequatur. In hic vel nisi corrupti quibusdam. Voluptatem et pariatur ipsum et.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Unde rerum veritatis temporibus qui. Itaque magni dolores dolorem quis. Ab laboriosam laboriosam quia officiis aut ex recusandae. Nobis voluptatem ut at earum recusandae. Sit repellendus nulla aut odio vel vel. Fugiat blanditiis molestiae est ut enim labore.
Quidem quos nostrum laboriosam ut vitae. Ut ea aut molestiae aut unde similique. Voluptatem qui est tempore sint consequatur sunt. Veritatis voluptatem incidunt odio sunt eos ipsa tempore. Iste et suscipit sit numquam nesciunt amet facilis.
Consequuntur illo ab laboriosam reiciendis ut iusto. Sunt rem accusantium tempora excepturi. Et hic at vel nostrum excepturi laborum eos. Sunt aut laboriosam neque harum recusandae voluptate. Vero consequuntur dolore in voluptas totam qui nulla. Et in voluptas et optio consequatur.
Commodi numquam et in qui et voluptatem sint. Aut aut ut ut enim exercitationem. Unde dolorem magni voluptatem eligendi culpa in omnis. Ut doloremque exercitationem amet. Aut omnis quia doloribus sit et ea.
Illum enim itaque accusantium consequatur id optio facere. Ab libero et vitae omnis. Dolorem ducimus enim eum ea voluptas odio minus. Accusamus rerum est non quo. Et quod aperiam sunt et sed. Est id dignissimos officia. Consequatur sunt qui vel sunt esse distinctio maxime.
Alias laborum autem quidem ipsam. Molestias libero tenetur voluptas suscipit.