The housing situation you mentioned is exactly what is happening in Canada. Current government is trying to control everything aspect while the opposition wants to reduce costs and zoning issues. Guess which one made housing sky rocket
I loved the video. My suggestion is that sometimes one of you makes a mistake in interpretation, so that the other person corrects it. This way the dialogue will seem more natural and you will have the opportunity to correct fallacies or contrary arguments.
I agree with Hayek to a certain degree, however I do not think the problem is straight forward. For example, in Australia, government intervened into large sectors of our society, because it was unprofitable to develop large parts of the nation without government. Government was necessary to build roads, railways , electricity, hospitals, schools as many towns in outback Australia were less than 100 people, making them totally unviable for the private sector to develop. Ask yourself, how many highways in the USA were developed by the private sector and continue to be managed by the private sector? Who built the major turnpikes of the 1960s? To whose benefit? The key was that christianity and morals based on christianity played a major role in our society. Our leaders were well educated and there was relative harmony in society as there was an underlying sense of duty to others. Even if people didn't go to church there was a sense that God existed and that we were accountable to him. In the 1960s, the west began to turn away from its christian roots. creationism was abolished in favour of evolutionism and people began to seek their own desires in favour of serving others and their family. Moreover our leaders became more corruptable leading to societal decline. Large corporations replaced family run companies and in my mind they are worse than large government. The fat cats have taken over meaning that large portions of the community have been left behind, having to struggle to make a decent living. Rents are increase, the cost of food is increasing. These issues never happened when I was a child and the government controlled utilities. The point is that without God, society becomes corrupt.
Serfdom is an inalienable entitlement to land, qualified by the stipulation of owing a fixed amount of grain to the Liege House every harvest, and a few days of labor a year, where the Liege Lord has his serfs work on fence repair, irrigation or the roads, but it is days a year, not weeks or months. Really, compared to Free Peasants, the poorest of the poor, the Serfs were like, well, Independent Farmers but with Knightly Protection. Yes, during the big wars the promise of protection did break down, when their Lieges and Knights would be defeated in battle, and then, well, everybody had their problems. But, yes, that Serfdom was a crime that needed to be corrected by "liberating" the Serfs came about at the same time as the Aristocrats were using politics to ENCLOSE the Commons, that is, to steal the Commons away from the Collective for them to keep for themselves. They used LIBERATION to kick the Serfs off their Land, that they had held in their families since the Reign of Charlemagne, so they could then consolidate it and then rent it out to independent farmers for a better deal for themselves. The Serfs actually held the land at better conditions then those who subsequently rented the property, you know, like how the Slaves actually had better conditions then the later Share Croppers. When it is the Rich Ruling Class that argues for Change, you really need to pay attention to the details, and in the case of Serfs, it wasn;t the Serfs who were complaining, but the Aristocratic Liege Lordes who wanted to be freed from their Obligations. Thumbs Down to this stupid shit-talking.
Look at Russia, China, Kampuchea and North Korea. Tear Alexander freed the Russian serfs in 1865. People were now free to live where they chose, work where they chose, did not owe their life Lord a debt etc. Once the Bolsheviks came to power this was all reversed - they reintroduced Russian slavery! Peop l e had to live and work where they were told - state farm, factory, mine they etc. No freedom for them to choose!
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบ 8 ทีมสุดท้าย] - ช่วงเช้า](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bXFWzzy4UJw/mqdefault.jpg)
The housing situation you mentioned is exactly what is happening in Canada. Current government is trying to control everything aspect while the opposition wants to reduce costs and zoning issues.
Guess which one made housing sky rocket
I loved the video. My suggestion is that sometimes one of you makes a mistake in interpretation, so that the other person corrects it.
This way the dialogue will seem more natural and you will have the opportunity to correct fallacies or contrary arguments.
Great idea. Thank you !
I agree with Hayek to a certain degree, however I do not think the problem is straight forward. For example, in Australia, government intervened into large sectors of our society, because it was unprofitable to develop large parts of the nation without government. Government was necessary to build roads, railways , electricity, hospitals, schools as many towns in outback Australia were less than 100 people, making them totally unviable for the private sector to develop. Ask yourself, how many highways in the USA were developed by the private sector and continue to be managed by the private sector? Who built the major turnpikes of the 1960s? To whose benefit? The key was that christianity and morals based on christianity played a major role in our society. Our leaders were well educated and there was relative harmony in society as there was an underlying sense of duty to others. Even if people didn't go to church there was a sense that God existed and that we were accountable to him. In the 1960s, the west began to turn away from its christian roots. creationism was abolished in favour of evolutionism and people began to seek their own desires in favour of serving others and their family. Moreover our leaders became more corruptable leading to societal decline. Large corporations replaced family run companies and in my mind they are worse than large government. The fat cats have taken over meaning that large portions of the community have been left behind, having to struggle to make a decent living. Rents are increase, the cost of food is increasing. These issues never happened when I was a child and the government controlled utilities. The point is that without God, society becomes corrupt.
Serfdom is an inalienable entitlement to land, qualified by the stipulation of owing a fixed amount of grain to the Liege House every harvest, and a few days of labor a year, where the Liege Lord has his serfs work on fence repair, irrigation or the roads, but it is days a year, not weeks or months. Really, compared to Free Peasants, the poorest of the poor, the Serfs were like, well, Independent Farmers but with Knightly Protection. Yes, during the big wars the promise of protection did break down, when their Lieges and Knights would be defeated in battle, and then, well, everybody had their problems. But, yes, that Serfdom was a crime that needed to be corrected by "liberating" the Serfs came about at the same time as the Aristocrats were using politics to ENCLOSE the Commons, that is, to steal the Commons away from the Collective for them to keep for themselves. They used LIBERATION to kick the Serfs off their Land, that they had held in their families since the Reign of Charlemagne, so they could then consolidate it and then rent it out to independent farmers for a better deal for themselves. The Serfs actually held the land at better conditions then those who subsequently rented the property, you know, like how the Slaves actually had better conditions then the later Share Croppers. When it is the Rich Ruling Class that argues for Change, you really need to pay attention to the details, and in the case of Serfs, it wasn;t the Serfs who were complaining, but the Aristocratic Liege Lordes who wanted to be freed from their Obligations. Thumbs Down to this stupid shit-talking.
This book is not about historical serfdom; it explores how, even with good intentions, embracing socialist values can sometimes lead to dictatorships.
I cant figure out why in the pic there is a woman in underwear and a guy in a suit...
She is wearing a cocktail dress :) Not a underwear
This feels like AI.
Yes, of cause this is AI :)
Truth hurts?
This is so salesy
Hmm...just positive - I hope you at least got the key points! ;)
This is a bunch of phony-baloney.
Do you believe that socialism does not lead to dictatorship?
Look at Russia, China, Kampuchea and North Korea.
Tear Alexander freed the Russian serfs in 1865. People were now free to live where they chose, work where they chose, did not owe their life Lord a debt etc.
Once the Bolsheviks came to power this was all reversed - they reintroduced Russian slavery!
Peop l e had to live and work where they were told - state farm, factory, mine they etc. No freedom for them to choose!
The guy won a Nobel prize.
That is the liberal whitewashing of history making you think this is.