Saturday, December 24, 2016

Dear Tom Woods' Elite

Upon conversation with various Elite members, it became apparent that my intentionally imprecise language in my original post caused needless conflict as they did not reflect my actual, more nuanced views.

As an apology, I clarified my original post below. I had a certain image in my mind of who I was talking to originally and I unfairly broad-stroked those who took my message as speaking to them personally:



Stop being ashamed for being White and surrendering to greater Tyranny from the importation of individuals who self-identify with Collectivist-leaning tribes.

Not all cultures are created equal. Liberty-leaning tribes should be preferred.

If it so happens that individuals who identify with Liberty-leaning tribes disproportionately (ie. 94%) have less concentration of melanin in their skin (derisively called "White" by SJWs), then it is simply a coincidence.


If you self identify with the above (despite my attempts to make it clear it doesn't apply to you), please comment before and we can schedule a broadcasted debate.

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

White Race vs White Culture: Does it Even Matter?



I know many of you don't like to think in terms of race, religion, or identity groups.


Do you realize that EVERY OTHER RACE does though?


They are Collectivist in culture, thus they see things in group identity (race, religion, etc.)


THEY see you as WHITE, and have no desire for "integration." Just look at all the "ethnic enclaves" they create in your cities. Look at their mono-racial countries. Try walking through through them and you will be stared at. Try marrying their daughters and see the reaction.


You're not privy to the private conversations they have about WHITEY.


To them, you will ALWAYS be an outsider.


If I had to pick an enclave to be in, it would be one made up of WHITES. There is no close second.


Please stop committing cultural suicide. Liberty's ONLY bastion is with WHITES. Sure, correlation doesn't mean causation, but when the correlation is so strong, the distinction becomes irrelevant.


If they don't disavow their collectivist roots, don't let them in.

Sunday, December 18, 2016

Consider What You'll LOSE for Thinking Differently

I'm starting to feel sympathy for those who maintain their hallucinations. They simply cannot control it and to believe otherwise would result in their destruction (from their perspective).

It's not about REASON. It's about SELF-INTEREST to pass on one's genes.

If you happen to perceive yourself to potentially lose the following by dissenting from the Collective, can you necessarily blame their minds from protecting them from utter, genetic destruction?

You might as well be asking them to put a gun to their head and pull the trigger.

I have friends (in Los Angeles & Seattle) that for merely holding Trump sympathetic views have essentially risked all five of the below. They remain silent about it, but they talk to me to vent.

1) Sexual partner
2) Friends & family
3) Job
4) Hopes
5) Past

I imagine being in the situation my friends are in, trapped from being able to truly express who they are. Their only option is to flee the insanity and enter an area where they won't be punished. Where they can have a chance to procreate.

Otherwise, the mind must self-sabotage. Stop the questioning. They must convince themselves to agree with the Collective. Or they will go insane.

It is the mind's mercy to shut down free-thought.

REASON is overrated.


And if you consider that you have a family to raise, that's an even greater incentive for you to shut your mind down. Much more evil things, than entertaining different views, have occurred for the "sake of the children."

Hope for The Future of Autonomous Cars & Private Road Systems


Imagine Automated Cars become a reality and they are networked to one another providing optimal traffic management and eliminating car accidents.

Cars are now perceived more as a service than outright ownership. Imagine Uber, but with automated cars instead of human drivers. The costs could theoretically drop down to essentially be at cost. The wait for these cars could be within a couple minutes.

With how quick technology improves, it wouldn't make much sense to buy a car. It would be quickly outdated every 3 - 4 years as we see with cell phones & computers today. There would be exceptions to those who need full ownership, such as those who have very large families, businesses, government, etc.

The biggest danger to these automated cars are manually controlled human drivers not plugged into the Network. You can't exactly BAN these manually controlled cars since everyone has mixed reasons to have them. Perhaps there's a phaseout period of 10-20 years.

What if the automated car companies united to create their own private roads?

Google, Uber, Tesla, Apple, Volvo, Bosch, nuTonomy, Ford, BMW, Baidu, and FiveAI could unite to create their own road networks restricted from Public use.

They could set their own speed limits, and charge users based on actual usage. This could easily be tracked since all the cars are networked, including with GPS. I'd imagine insurance rates for these cars would drop drastically as well. Perhaps even the typical safety features on cars could decrease due to the drastically lower accident rates.

Perhaps once the phaseout of manual cars on Public roads occurs, the argument for publicly financed roads will be eliminated. Or perhaps the billing model for these roads will change to be toward actual usage such as electricity & water.


I think the cost to add extra, private roads would be prohibitive in dense City Centers. But it'd be different for suburbs further out. Areas like Houston already have toll based system highways.

Assuming you can remove the speed limit, and traffic congestion, you could theoretically travel by Automated Cars as a service at 3-4 times the speed as the congested Public road systems. It may very well be worth it to consumers to pay the premium.

Now "commute" time will be no excuse to living further out from the City Center. This could lower the cost of housing as well, increase sprawl, and increase the overall quality of life.

Today, it may take 2 hours to make a certain commute to your job. With automated cars on private road systems, that commute could lower to 30 minutes, while you sit back, and watch your favorite show or do some work.

Uber also has ride sharing. I can imagine a "cheaper" option where automated cars are used locally to pick up individuals, then ferry them to a central hub, perhaps right off an on ramp, where they board an automated bus equipped to travel high speeds. There would be another "hub" at the city center where they can get off the bus and hop onto an individual vehicle toward their final destination. Costs could be combined with scale to lower the cost even more.

Also, due to scale, these automated buses could be optimized to minimize wait time due to GPS coordination in a centralized system.

An even crazier idea could be that the individual automated cars would be tiny enough to simply drive onto a larger platform that is the actual vehicle to travel on these high speed highways. So the smaller automated cars (better to call them "pods" with the removal of all that added weight) have a top speed of perhaps 45 MPH , and the larger vehicles up to 200 MPH or more.

This way, you'll never have to leave the vehicle at all!


Another possibility is that, just as entire towns existed around railroads, you could have entire housing developments specialized and optimized to these automated transport networks. I know of some subdivisions that exist around a light rail stop into the City.

You could also have a subscription system of car usage, as we do today with cell phones and minute usage. Unlimited plans could exist, but they would most likely be very expensive, and perhaps their coverage isn't that great, similar to T-Mobile.

The possibilities are as endless as the mind can imagine (and where the profits can exist).

I haven't even considered cross-country travel. These automated-only super highways, privately owned, could revolutionize travel, logistics, and so much more.

That is, if Government gets out of the way to let these geniuses compete to offer the best services at the cheapest prices possible. It's not one-size-fits-all. There will be niches and different tiers of service at different costs.


I had a side thought of airplanes being replaced for shorter distances. I'm thinking of Los Angeles to Las Vegas & San Francisco. I then thought of these Pod-loaders that travel at very high speeds. I suppose there's a possibility of a terrorist bringing a bomb onto one of these pod-loaders.

I hope it's simply private security that screens these pods for explosive material and not the TSA. What a potential nightmare like we see today. Perhaps you can have the entire pod screened through an X-ray machine automatically as they loaded onto the Loader.

It'd still probably be faster than the airport.

When you try to do a good thing...

I'm reminded of the time I posted on Craigslist FREE Furniture when we renovated our hotel.


Talk about ENTITLED. People were renting U-Hauls and rental trucks and then were PISSED when all the units were taken before they got there. People were driving two hours out. There were lines of cars and just a frenzy with people trying to pick up furniture.

Imagine Black Friday in your parking lot.



Friday, December 16, 2016

President Trump, Master Persuader, and the Bubble Economy

What does Austrian Economics say about Trump making people believe in Magic?


Since all fiat currency operates under FAITH, suppose Trump truly is the Master Persuader as Scott Adams says.


Suppose Trump PERSUADES those in the US and those outside to have even more irrational FAITH in the US.


Business as usual. 0% interest rates. Bubble keeps getting bigger.


Are people underestimating just how powerful a salesman Trump is to sell America?


After all, didn't Trump just BEND reality by getting elected? Didn't all the "logic" get thrown out the window?


Between Peter Schiff & Donald Trump, I think all us "logical" people are underestimating how effective the Master Persuader will be to keep this US Bubble, Hype Train going.


The group hallucination is simply too powerful.


And yes, afterwards, it's going to be even worse.


Trump has bent reality, & if people are as susceptible to influence as we mock them to be, then I think Austrians need to seriously consider Trump, the puppet master, into the equation.


Way too many people bet against Trump before getting elected. It was only logical, right?


I'm not going to bet against his Persuasion skills.

Saturday, December 10, 2016

Homeless People and Anarcho-Capitalist Values on Personal Property

Mixed emotions about this one in regards to Personal Property rights.

1) Infringement on City owned streets has its own contradictions, though I'm fairly certain on Privately owned roads and sidewalks, vagrancy would not be allowed. In that situation, these homes would've been rightfully removed.

2) Assuming it's a communal road by an HOA (which is acceptable for AnCaps?), vagrants would not be allowed either.

3) My interactions with numerous homeless and going through my share of horrible employees, I have no sympathy for homeless people in that area. There are rare exceptions, but much of the time it has to do with mental illness and substance addiction. Sure, you can make the intellectual argument that $10/hour minimum wage makes it difficult to find work, but I'm quite familiar with numerous restaurants that pay under the table with staff that simply can't speak English. Most of the homeless portrayed CAN speak English.

If any of these homeless, speaking fluent English, could easily replace one of these illegal immigrants who can't speak English in these restaurants, then why aren't the homeless willing to at least work those jobs?

I have numerous housekeepers and maintenance staff that can't speak any English. The reality is that none of these homeless people would be able to keep the job due to their own deficiencies. Whether the homeless have control over their own deficiencies or not is a separate question.

4) Illegal immigrants manage to not be homeless in the same area. What is the difference between the illegals and the homeless who can work in the US legally?

5) The interview of the homeless man who loves children, and was once a mechanical engineer. He says there are no jobs, and shows that some kid would like the toy he found in a dumpster dive. That's someone who doesn't understand Human Capital.


Somehow, I believe Reason is attempting to portray these homeless people somehow as victims to State Tyranny. I agree that the optics make it SEEM as though something is off, but this seems more like mistaken perception of "the oppressed" vs "oppressor" that SJWs love to use.

From the Rothbardian perspective on violations of Property Rights, I'm not seeing the problem.


This brings up a separate question on how many homeless people there would be in an AnCap society. This video hints that $1,200 homes are sufficient for the homeless and they call it "home." Based on this definition, and without Government thugs that call these structures "unsafe for habitation," these homeless would be able to support a standard of life they find acceptable at a much lower cost. You could imagine entire neighborhoods filled with $1,200 homes and lots on private property. Most likely they would not be in the City since you can't make much profit from that, but there would most likely be entire towns that support that kind of lifestyle. Thus, by definition, they would no longer be "homeless."

There's nothing wrong with having the ambitions for a simpler lifestyle. By many accounts, living in a $1,200 home is most likely still better than how most humans live on the planet. They would still be ABOVE AVERAGE. And if you were to look at the Quality of Life in relation toward the existence of humans in the last 500 years, the Quality of Life doesn't look so bad.

As a single college student, I was quite content sharing a small bedroom with all my personal belongings. Of course, that's seen as being okay because it's portrayed as simply being temporary. With different priorities in my life, I could imagine maintaining such a lifestyle and being content.