I think that kind of thing would be more common under a non-fiat system. There's another thread recently discussing this.
Discussion
lesserin is in my blocklist lol she almost never has helpful takes
case in point
homesteading a product of fiat my ass
I think in a certain way, she is correct. The push to homestead is coming from the insecurity people are experiencing in cities. Most of that stems from fiat influence. If there was no fiat, there would be much less pressure on people, abd therefore would the less people interested in going back to the land, as it were.
in a certain way, she is correct is the worst kind of incorrect
she is the ultimate shitposter
you'll waste hours trying to clarify what the hell she's ACTUALLY saying and then realize she either said nothing, created a strawman, lied, or stated as fact her opinion
also super bitter against other women 🤷♂️
Yes.
I I can get her to clarify by asking her if I'm confused about anything.
She's frustrated with non-hyper-logical women since that's what she is. It's not hate, it's exasperation at not understanding anything that's said and why it's being said that way.
🤷♂️
We get along. She's fun and funny to me. That's fine if you don't. I get along with most people.
she's not hyper-logical, whatever that means. like most women, across all cultures, she has vague premises that she defends with vehemence and incredibly convoluted arguments, because EVERYTHING is connected to EVERYTHING ELSE.
most women, across all cultures, also have the uncanny ability to be nice and sweet and kind to whomever they want, and absolute witches to those they dislike. seems like you've benefited from this, ha ha.
I don’t agree. Having food security and not being a wage slave are both dynamics that can absolutely improve quality of life. Also, if you raise your own livestock or grow your own food you can be sure of how it’s done and reduce exposure to pollutants and malfeasance.
Those pollutants and malfeasance are only able to proliferate through fiat policies and the interferance of the state in collusion with those monied people or companies that receive the first corrupted fruits of money printing. Without those, there would be much less need and therfore much less push for people to take back control over what they eat, drink, and ingest otherwise
I don’t think sound money will stop human greed and bad behavior. It’ll change incentives and get rid of a lot of fiat problems but there will still be shortcuts taken to seek more profit and general malfeasance.
Yes. But... It is limited to a great extent than being able to print an infinite amount of money and use that to gather more "real" things with your fake money.
When a king has to grovel to other king to borrow gold to wage war...
When a country cannot finance a standing army all the time for years on end to wage a war by selling bonds...
When a corporation cannot get access to the first flush of another round of freshly coined fiat at below market rate interest...
The harm done to people at large is minimized. Not eliminated, but minimized.
Minimize, yes. Which I expressed a similar sentiment in my reply. I am a sound money and free market advocate. Free markets and sound money ensure consequences.
Unfortunately there will still be bad actors in life and that’s just how it is. But in an honest system the bad actors face consequences instead of being able to capture regulators and/or buying leniency.
Yes, but those bad actors simply can't operate at a national or international level for very long if all you've got is sound/hard money. It lowers the impact the farther up you go, ideally simply because you have to fool more and more people to part with their money. It's possible, but lies are unsustainable.