Did you read Mises and Hayek?
Discussion
stop it, I don't like your "I know it better than you" way of speaking.
If you want to have a dialogue accept that i don't read books coming from the western propaganda academy
So you recommend me to read about communism (which I did) but refuse to read Mises and Hayek?
Interesting 🧐
I actually don't like to read books, I am a free thinker. I like manuals, coding languages. So does that make me not eligible to express my opinions?
I didn’t say that. You are welcome to express your opinions, I am just not interested in them if your opinions are not based on facts and knowledge.
However, telling me to read more about communism while you haven’t read a single book of the best economists on the other side of the spectrum is a bit weird.
Just saying 🤷♂️
I’m not sure I agree.
I haven’t read any books on economics or communism, but as a former public company CEO, investor and a mentor, I teach startup founders on economics, along with how to form and run companies. I would hope you wouldn’t dismiss my opinions or suggestions.
Books are a great source of information, but they have been augmented and somewhat surpassed by the Internet which I helped make public in the 1980’s.
Let’s be nice on here. Communists are as welcome as capitalists on a platform dedicated to free speech.
I said I am not interested in opinions which are not based on facts on knowledge. That doesn’t mean you can acquire this only via books.
You have clearly knowledge on your expertise (running a company and investing in a fiat standard), so I would definitely be interested in your opinion in those fields.
However, the discussion between capitalism and communism is nothing new. The greatest minds of the last two centuries thought this and thought every argument from start to the end.
I read both sides arguments. I cannot image a functioning brain reading e.g. Human Action and still think socialism can work.
And I am not interested in someone’s opinion on this without having done a deep dive on both sides. It’s exhausting to go into discussion with such people. They come up with arguments which are destroyed by Mises and Hayek, but it’s not my job to repeat those arguments which are written over multiple pages on a social network.
If you have read them and still think socialism is a good idea, then I am here to discuss
Holy shit I need to proof read long notes.
What I meant summarized:
All the best arguments on both sides were already made. If you want to discuss it further then please deep dive first into these.
After a deep dive and a functioning brain I can not imagine to still think socialism is a good idea.
I am not here to express an opinion on socialism, capitalism or communism, but I have them and they are based on first principles. They somewhat disagree with existing doctrine, or at least view it in a unique way. My views have played a small part in aiding some of my success.
I would give you one piece of advice. You are certain that every view on political doctrine has been discussed ad-infinitum within existing scripture.
This type of view is common, but those that hold it are always surpassed and ultimately replaced by those that think for themselves.
To use your phrasing, the greatest minds agreed that rockets could never be re-used or that currency could not be created outside of government or that the millennium bug was the end of our civilisation, or that God exists, or that God doesn’t exist.
The brain is mightier than the book.
Hubris is humans greatest enemy.
I agree with you, not everything is written in stone just because it has been discussed ad-infinitum. However, if you want to join a discussion on a complex topic, it’s useful to deep dive into the best arguments up to date about this topic and only then join. Otherwise the possibility is very high that you come up with many arguments which already have been made many times before and annoy this way your discussion partner.
That’s why I said: If you do a deep dive on this topic and still think socialism is a good idea, I am here to discuss.
I think that signals my openness to new arguments. Doesn’t it?
Anyway, not talking about you. I am talking about the guy above. You just joined because you did not agree that knowledge can be acquired only by books, which I never said.
Agreed.
Ok I will butt out.
Enjoy your political discourse.
Appreciate formulating an advice to which I agree. Maybe I should work on my wording, if hubris is used to describe me 😅
It’s just that I have been sucked in way too many discussion about capitalism vs socialism and every time I only hear arguments which are old and have been destroyed by Mises an d Hayek. Then I ask them to read one of them and come back to discuss further but then they usually keep on bashing onto capitalism even harder, which is very annoying. It wastes my time, since I do not see any point in repeating what has already been written.
Side note: I don’t think that I am a super brain, but I certainly think Mises was. Human Action is a masterpiece.