2023-2024 NC/LC THREAD

Appreciate your replies btw crazylond, not trying to pile on or anything

I support a full financial and emotional debt reset, meaning I support the government declaring the US dollar and all debts payable in it to be officially worthless. I feel as though they will become worthless anyway so by making an official declaration, we can avoid the headache of sending in worthless paper as payments. As I mentioned, the bankruptcy courts will be incapable of processing the demand.

Regarding emotional debts, I propose that imprisonment is cruel and inhumane and that if someone is truly too dangerous to exist in society that execution would be kinder than imprisonment for in my view, God's justice is more just than ours, and I do not believe it is a human's place to punish another human with violence or enslavement which imprisonment is. I also believe that any human that wishes to speak in defense of someone slated for execution should be free to do so.

If someone is not too dangerous to release into society with consideration to the fact that the free society I propose would have a charity that prevents slavery, trespassing, the construction of nuclear weapons, and indecent acts with a minor, then I believe they should be released and given a fresh slate in the sense that no one should seek to visit violence upon them. The structure we have lived under has rewarded cruelty and punished productivity while a free society will do the opposite. As a result, most people have pissed off at least some other people and I don't think it will be productive if vengeance for the crimes of this era is prioritized over the construction of a peaceful and productive society.

Not everyone has the same views I do regarding God's justice and a free market in justice is likely to motivate good behavior far better than the government monopoly in justice has.

A larger pool of potential trading partners offers an individual more advantageous trades than a smaller pool, so sanctions and border restrictions hurt domestic producers and consumers, and do so to a greater degree than they help the limited group such policies are designed to help. I believe both boycotts and border controls should be set at the individual/landowner level when they are willing to undertake the sacrifice involved, and not when a politician deems their welfare should be sacrificed for whatever political motive inspired the sanction or border.

Gold is a great diversifier
Sp500 since 1995 around 5x
Gold since 1995 around 6X

I guess those that don’t appreciate gold are mostly Americans because they have actually no idea the effect of a currency devaluation can do in real time …
that 2022-23 inflation is nothing on what a devaluation can be and many are still crying today on how inflation is bad in the US lol.

Ps: you doing fine crazylond, no worry .
Doing 5-6X with one of the lowest volatile assets there is in the last 25-30 years is a blessing to me imo.

How could a charity prevent any crimes? A huge government and legal system can't do that, but a charity would be able to?

I agree with you about execution being far kinder than imprisonment. If I were, even incorrectly, convicted of a capital crime, I would certainly prefer to be executed than imprisoned for life. Of course the screwed up US court system would probably make my death sentence automatically appealed, prolonging my unwanted captivity.

Centralized enforcement of property rights seems necessary to me because in the absence of such, I expect warlords to battle until the strongest wins. It seems inevitable to me that the biggest dog in the fight will inevitably come to control the land, so what I propose is for the biggest dog to only enforce the things I suggested.

I support gun ownership with the exception of nuclear weapons and believe that this, combined with the security force, can maintain a peaceful society. The security force is for the benefit of those without the resources to defend themselves but no one would be forced to use it if they favor a competing security company or charity, or their own arsenal.

By having it be a charity instead of a government funded by taxes, donors can withdraw their donations if it becomes corrupt or starts trying to enforce things beyond those minimum measures.

Month
June
Starting Year
1995
Ending Month
May
Ending Year
2024

Total S&P 500 Return: 868.329%
Annualized S&P 500 Return: 8.168%
Total S&P 500 Return (Dividends Reinvested): 1528.049%
Annualized S&P 500 Return (Dividends Reinvested): 10.129%

A 1528% return is 16.28x.

Yes sure , go all in on stocks , never sell (very hard to do when big crash or bubble occur btw) , and uses all the dividend included to buy more if u think it’s great .
THe pont is calling gold a bad investment when they closely following the stock market ex dividend is nonsense .
Gold is following around the same ratio as housing prices where houses bring no dividends either .
Doubt anyone here would call a house a bad investment because it doesn’t provide any cash flow ….

None of this explains how a charity could prevent crimes.

You specifically mention sexual abuse of children. You seem to be saying that pedophiles wouldn't need to be imprisoned because a charity could prevent them from offending. How would they do that?

Prisons are violent, therefore the only crime should be execution?

There are other options to make prisons less violent than complete abolition. Look at the scandinavian model. It doesn’t even have to be as unrestrictive as that.

If someone is keeping slaves or trespassing, they send in whatever force is necessary to free the slaves or expel the trespassers.

There are several ways to punish people who behave in unwanted ways. Some may be inclined to kill people. Others may be inclined to harm their bodies. Others may be inclined to boycott or strike.

I expect boycotts and strikes will be the primary mechanism by which good behavior comes to be enforced in a free society because when people use violence, they invite the wrath of those who care about their victims, and with the threat of free market justice, people will want to avoid violent feuds.

When political power is up for grabs, wealth is rewarded largely for gaining control of that power or otherwise being a beneficiary of it. In a free market, wealth will be rewarded for producing something that is in demand at a higher quality or lower cost than anyone else. As the wealth of society increases, consumers can better position themselves to participate in boycotts so over time, I expect the moral standards of society to increase.

That's not really prevention, is it?

And you ignored the particular crime I asked about, child molestation. You're fine with releasing convicted child molesters into the general public because a charity will somehow prevent them from reoffending?

No, I think execution would be preferable.

I am confident that with a free market in justice, child molesters will be dealt with promptly. With any luck, the punishments will be severe enough that others who would consider it will be deterred.

Yes, prevention can only occur up to the point that deterrence is a motive, which will be provided by both the big security force and other security and justice forces. People can still be violent if they choose to, but the consequences will be harsh and my expectation is that once sufficient examples are made, few will choose to be.

Even the risk of capital punishment do not stop people .
But keep wishing an utopia I suppose about your free market .

Then the capital punishment itself will.

I mean I just approach this from the perspective of… when in history has this actually been tried and what have the results been?

It hasn't been, otherwise people would have figured out how awesome it is and that's what we'd have.

A free market in criminal justice is one of the most bizarre ideas I have ever heard. Thinking it could have good results seems even less likely than the idea that real communism should ever work. It seems to rely even more of the belief that human nature is to be completely unselfish.

+1
It’s an utopia .
It’s not pragmatic.
And it’s under the concept that everyone should accept that value order which is far far more complicated to achieve .

FWIW free market means everyone , populism .
I’m Not sure stuff like justice should be in the hands where a vast amount of people aren’t very smart …..

Come on, man, you can live in a house and save on rent or rent it out, and the rent acts as a dividend. You can't live in gold bars nor rent them out. Gold prices follow stocks if you don't count the dividends, which stocks have and gold doesn't. Why would anyone not count the dividends? You people understand some aspects of poker strategy but make basic first level errors of financial understanding.

Housing is in a massive bubble due to the low interest rates and Fed purchases of mortgage-backed securities that have motivated buying and construction since the market tried to collapse in 2008 but the Fed decided it would be better to delay the day of reckoning and create a bigger bubble. Once government benefits, government jobs, and companies that only exist because of government subsidies and/or cheap credit collapse, many homeowners will be forced to sell as they migrate to find available labor in a real economy. Housing is one place people can cut expenses by adding roommates or becoming homeless, and people will do whatever they can to cut expenses as food, and thus survival, continues to get more expensive.

Because I’m not sure everyone just take 100% of dividends and reinvested all of it in stocks .
Like I said u can go all in and just invest stock if u think it’s right .
I certainly wouldn’t .

As for houses, yes u save rent but u spend a lot of that rent money saved to sustain your house health .
The difference in the end is usually just the cash u bought the house with (and the added appreciation or should I say the depreciation of the value of cash).

Now if u speak about a Plex it’s a different matter .

You can wear investment grade gold around your neck or wrist to increase your credibility and visual appeal.

As well as your likeliness to be robbed or worse.