Fun fact: The government doesn’t actually need to use taxes to pay for things. The amount of currency in the market isn’t fixed, and so the government actually is fully capable of “printing more money” however, this has the potential to cause rapid inflation. So, taxes are a way of reducing inflation, rather than paying for government services.
That’s assuming printing money is the default solution. Taxes have existed for longer than that. The earliest taxes were literally a portion of a farmers harvest. You can’t just print more food, or gold, or whatever else. Printing money to fund government was never really an option, so positioning taxes as a solution to inflation just doesn’t make sense. It’s like saying that instead of eating at a restaurant, you could eat roadkill, which you aren’t going to do because of disease, and therefore restaurants are a way of reducing disease rather than providing food.
That’s assuming printing money is the default solution.
I’m not operating with a model of solutions being “default” or not, so no it absolutely does not. What I’m doing is intentionally ignoring the historical context of how these systems developed to observe how they work in the present moment. Doing so allows me to understand the flaws of the model where money is viewed as a resource, rather than a pure social construct that exists in the minds of those who use it. Resources are limited by physical reality, whereas money flows like a clockwork river who’s source is infinite and who’s sink has infinite capacity. Changing the ammount of money available too much, too quickly, or in particular ways has negative consequences but it is possible. Resources don’t do that.
Resteraunts are a way of reducing disease instead of providing food
I’d say they have more to do with entertainment, but they do all of those, yes. It’s just a matter of perspective.
There is a Planet Money (podcast) episode about this. It’s a fairly new economic theory, but actual PhD level economists have said this. Government prints money, and to bring down inflation they need to get taxes to reduce the amount of money in circulation, to control inflation. The epidsode was in the 2019 timeframe, I think.
Something that absolutely works in the abstract, but kinda hard to fit into my current model of reality.
You have to look at it from the perspective of mathematics, like systems control theory and balance / equilibriums. Money flow is comparable to energy flow. Mathematical equivalence principles allows for multiple descriptions of the same phenomenon because every externally visible system behavior can be implemented in many different ways.
So even if that’s not how the underlying implementation looks like, you can switch the system to work like that without changing anything about how you interact with it. And that allows you to analyze the system in different ways that might not work in the current system
I’m a mathematician, so yes; I can confirm. 😂 I was trying to avoid that comparison, but I did use the same techniques I use to compare algebras when my sister and I stumbled on this way of thinking about the economy. I’ve never heard of systems control theory, though.
It’s not really abstract, it’s pretty close to how advanced economies already work in practice. Fiat currency is the proxy by which goods and services are valued and exchanged. It is the underlying goods and services themselves which actually have intrinsic value, and printing money doesn’t actually change that. Deficits are inflationary and surpluses are deflationary. Growth is deflationary and recessions are inflationary. Governments in these economies will always run deficits because you can’t have both growth and a surplus at the same time. At the end of the day macroeconomics isn’t balancing a spreadsheet as much as it is about balancing the money supply and economic activity.
This is also why something resembling capitalism is pretty much inevitable in an advanced economy where scarcity is a factor governing economic behavior. If you are using a fiat proxy to mediate economic inputs and outputs, you will end up with market forces. Pretending you can centrally plan around that is naive, which is why harm reduction is the right strategy.
“printing more money” however, this has the potential to cause rapid inflation.
That only happens if you put all that money into circulation - if you were to, say, just give it away as a handout to the military or Israel… no inflation. Which is… exactly how they give handouts to the military and Israel.
To think… they could just as easily spend that thumb-suck money on healthcare - but that won’t murder brown people, so they don’t do it.
Since the USD is considered the world reserve currency, the government is capable of doing wacky shenanigans like that. Inflation, so long as the American people are insulated from it, could theoretically be used as a way to extract wealth from other nations. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that they’re actually already doing exactly that.
How do you give a handout to the “military” without putting that money into circulation?
That’s the beauty of “trickle-down” economics - it doesn’t. Give it to the military and the parts of it that doesn’t get hoarded by MIC billionaires gets spent on things such as R&D and asset/infrastructure development and maintenance - there’s not a lot of that money “trickling” down and circulating amongst the general population.
If you were to spend it on health infrastructure and development, the money will still not be “trickling” down - but the benefits will. A bunch of F-35s means next-to-zero benefits for people - but a functional hospital does.
Taxation is a big part of the reason why fiat money has any value at all. By demanding to be payed with its own currency, a government can ensure that the bills it issues will always have demand (because people will need it to pay taxes) and therefore will always have value.
My econ 101 professor once said “what are the things that even the most anti-government people say the government needs to do? Emergency services.” Then these dense motherfuckers came along to outdo even that.
Internet libertarians & off-the-rails conservatives unironically say EMS and Fire Departments should be privatized. Ancaps go one step further and say police and sometimes even military should be private. It makes me lose hope in voters, until I remember that I was 15 before too and most people surely grow out of that phase. But there’s a few people who are fully adult-aged who still believe that which is kind of sad for them I guess
They tried this with firefighters before way back when, and then realized that fire doesn’t seem to care who’s subscribed or not lol. Can you imagine? “The fire and EMS lobby” would be powerfully pushing for reduced safety and maybe even starting fires themselves LOL.
EDIT: Link went to NYT because it was top result, but screw that lol. Fixed.
I can see it now though…
Privatized emergency services be like:
“Thank you for calling 9-1-1, this is Janeanniesomebody, can I have your 14-digit emergency insurance number, date of birth, and mother’s maiden name please. Okay thank you, one moment while I verify that…” (Click)
"Your call is very important to us. Want to skip the line when it matters most? Did you know, for only $49.97 a month, you can get Emergency-Services-Plus+! Whether you want help fast, or to regret being covered for the rest of your life, we have a plan right for YOU!
“Remember, emergency insurance means you can have peace of mind that, when you’re in mortal danger, we’re only a phone call and 45-minutes-to-1-business-day away! Not signed up yet? Press 1, and we can help!”
((Trendy upbeat hold music))
“Did you know? We’re always hiring!”
(Receiver pickup) “Thank you for calling this is Devaidengregjimmothy, dispatch specialist, how can I help you today? Hello?..Hello?..”
Cassius from the tail end of the roman republic famously was the richest man in Rome and owned the “fire brigade”. When a fire broke out he would only put it out after the owner agreed to sell the place for next to nothing.
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted, that’s the account. It probably didn’t happen, but it made a great story. The greediest, richest man in Rome bought an army and was made to drink what he craved most when he failed. Poetic justice.
Side note, Crassus was an experienced military man who fought under Sulla, and put down Spartacus’ rebellion. But he was no general, treated legionnaires under his command with brutal discipline, even using the mostly outdated decimation (if a unit failed, or dishonored themselves, they were forced to beat every tenth man in the unit to death as punishment. )
The only reason he invaded Parthia was that he was envious of Pompey and Caesar’s respect amongst the plebes (common citizens, i.e. peasants.) Military conquests were a sure way to gain respect in Roman culture, and to amass fortunes in slaves and booty.
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted, that’s the account. It probably didn’t happen, but it made a great story. The greediest, richest man in Rome bought an army and was made to drink what he craved most when he failed. Poetic justice.
Yes, I know ; there are a few stories of his death, some mutually exclusive. The most popular is the version that he was beheaded, “gold-fed” and his head used instead of cabbage in a theatrical play, the place is disputed too, most likely Ecbatana or Susa, but there’s also a version of that happening in Artaxata (matches the premise where it’s said that he didn’t listen to Artavazd’s warning out of his pride, and then Artavazd decided to “betray” Crassus by remaining loyal to Parthia).
I think I’ve heard a version of him being overfed with meat and fat and made drink cold water, thus dying ; well, I don’t know if it’s even a working way to execute someone.
Firefighters were literally private companies before we collectively decided it was a bad idea. Firefighters would just sit and watch a place burn if nobody payed up. Sometimes rival firefighters would even get in brawls over who gets the contract while the house was burning down beside them.
They’re municipally operated here and we actually had a case a few years back where a small town that couldn’t reasonably afford to operate their own fire department needed to make arrangements with a nearby larger town to have fire emergency response services cover them.
The larger town said sure, $50 per year per home. Small town had 63 people, but some refused to pay. Fire department said they weren’t going to keep track of which houses were and were not covered, so they had to all be on board or none of them would be.
Naturally a home later caught fire and burned to the ground. Thankfully no one was inside at the time.
if memory serves, the first fire fighters were in Rome and owned by rich people. If you didn’t pay them to put out the fire, their boss would buy the ashes from you afterwards.
Somewhat predictably they also started the first public firefighting force after a large part of the city burned down, again. Apparently prevention is just not profitable if you’re only paying people to extinguish fire.
Didn’t prevent what is now known as the Great Fire of Rome though.
You are most likely not able to reason why ancap ideology is bad or why your own ideology is good. Which is why you should show more respect to people who are trying to reason in either direction. Their opinion, no matter which direction specifically that is, is worth something.
Specifically ancap ideology is attractive for me exactly because it requires one to imagine very specific architectures of how things would work, so - to reason their position. I’ve been following one ancom channel in TG, because they were posting many interesting articles about tackling the same problems ancaps want to tackle. And as you may know, ancaps and ancoms don’t like each other.
Both ancap and ancom ideologies are simply better than all the rest, because they don’t ignore the problem of compromised institutions.
Once again, your opinion is worth as much as you personally can support it with logic. Being part of a crowd doesn’t mean attaining the intelligence or the authority of somebody else in that crowd. These things don’t transfer. So your tone makes only you personally look immature and stupid.
I mean I am basically a feudal lady but even I know this whole capitalistic mess is toxic for mind, soul and environment. How you want that but dialled to 11 is beyond me.
It would end in actual feudalism as in few people amassing goods, land, resources and ruling over the masses as kings with their monopolies and monetising air you breathe or the like. Killing you for disobedience in some private execution using private justice system keeping u in check with private militia.
The only thing between that reality and current is government with its anti monopoly laws, taxes, protection of basic amenities and wealth redistribution. Of course countries vary here.
Ancapitalism is probably one of the most stupid systems you can invent as it basically deconstructs itself as one individual amasses so much wealth they become a de facto king ruling over everything with absolute power destroying the system that helped them amass such power.
It is sad to see someone crazy enough to advocate for such system that isn’t even possible to exist long term and leads to feudalism very fast.
Not many people are insane enough to want RUST game irl unironically
Sorry, I see no value in this text because it wrongly assumes that ancap is about abolishing rules.
Ancap is about determining a specific functional set of rules and functional architecture to support it.
It’s about evaluating forces and feedbacks in human societies and economies and designing a system where people are impeded in using power to enforce their vision upon other people.
That is why central authority and state are a problem - there are never backup mechanisms that you can switch to once the main one stops working correctly, and many people want this, because they want to capture that mechanism and enforce their will upon others. So even attempts to create backup mechanisms are met with resistance by crowds of fools who think that their favorite faction is the closest to capturing the main one and making others do something, and by people with power, who, of course, exist just as well despite that being ideologically inconvenient for you.
The problem of someone eventually amassing too much power is not being solved by existing states any better than in ancap.
Thus ancaps are trying to design systems as decentralized as possible for human societies. So that there always would be backup mechanisms to run away to.
EDIT: If this is too abstract, that’s because ancap as an ideology is defined by these criteria and not by specific solutions. And that’s right, if an ideology puts its set of solutions above the goals, then it’s a religious cult.
People like this are always talking about how things should be without understanding that the world doesn’t run on ‘should’ and most people don’t want what they’re selling.
OK, the other comment was bored, lazy and not very sincere.
Ancapitalism is probably one of the most stupid systems you can invent as it basically deconstructs itself as one individual amasses so much wealth they become a de facto king ruling over everything with absolute power destroying the system that helped them amass such power.
No. To learn about ancap, go to ancaps and not to non-ancaps writing about ancaps.
It would end in actual feudalism as in few people amassing goods, land, resources and ruling over the masses as kings with their monopolies and monetising air you breathe or the like. Killing you for disobedience in some private execution using private justice system keeping u in check with private militia.
No, because ancap is not the same as anarchy by Hobbes.
Your reading comprehension must suck because you completely incorrectly read the sentence you’re obsessing over. There are so many of you ancaps (almost entirely clueless teenagers) online that it becomes tiring to debunk your stupid ideology over and over again. If you can’t see why a system based around capital – where you vote with your capital and people with more capital have more votes, where resources are distributed based on capital and capital itself is a resource – is inherently flawed, then that’s completely on you. If you want leftists to educate you, then you can support the education reforms they’re advocating for, not go on Lemmy and beg for them to personally tutor you. But I guess you’re still in high school so that’s not exactly something you’re old enough to do.
Ancaps are pathetic, there is no reason to seriously engage every single one you see. They live in a fantasy world where charity replaces taxes and systematic discrimination & deepseated cultural biases are solved by the “free market”, and pollution & climate change (if you even think it’s an issue) are solved by future techbros which will totally invent stuff to completely unfuck the planet asap (or something something they’ll totally be stopped when people realize it violates the NAP). They also live in a fantasy world where capital isn’t used to “compromise the institutions” as you say you’re worried about. You can try to slither your way into anarchist discourse all you like and try to gain their acceptance, but it is not happening.
No. You may imagine you’ve defeated someone or debunked something. Bye
EDIT: “If you want leftists to educate you” - definitely not. “Ancaps are …” - you are not qualified to talk about ancaps instead of ancaps themselves.
The fact that your resolve immediately crumbles when you have to think about the logic of your ideology even a tiny bit says a lot about the number of years you have left until you graduate from high school
And yet almost no one wants to live in the world those people have presented to everyone. Should they be forced to?
You responded:
If I can be forced to live in the world you like more
Clearly you can be forced to live in that world because you are forced to live in that world.
then yes
So I asked you how you would force everyone to live like that and you suddenly turned around and said this wasn’t about everyone, just you and your friends.
My entire job is using Scala, Rust, and Haskell, and I can guarantee that you have no fuckin idea what you’re on about. Like what even is that supposed to mean lmfao, you think monads will save your capitalism? Will you utilize lazy iterators to destroy the left wing? Did you just want to sound intellectual by using a random math term?
Well, I didn’t see which exact insult you wrote to be deleted by mods (I value their support emotionally, but frankly would prefer to replace all “deleted by mod” cases with “hidden by mod” to see what’s been posted if I want), but laziness in functional programming is not limited to lazy iterators. I meant lazy evaluations, as in Lisp. If that still doesn’t make sense to you, please postpone answering by 8-10 hours.
Actually whatever lemmy.world admins use to auto-ban malfunctioned and was banning a bunch of users for “URL Blacklist” coincidentally when I posted the comment. I’m glad that you thought it was a long ban though and that I wouldn’t be able to respond because now I can point and laugh at what you just said
but laziness in functional programming is not limited to lazy iterators. I meant lazy evaluations, as in Lisp.
Man you really just fucking Googled “laziness programming definition” and regurgitated words from the first Wikipedia article you saw? I’m curious how you’re going to try to weasel your way of of that and somehow connect lazy evaluation to however you were responding to that person. Because if you actually knew what the hell lazy evaluation was then you would know how stupid you sound right now. Let me guess, you won’t even attempt to because you realize trying to explain would make you look even more clueless.
What is obvious is that you saw the words “functional programming” online one time and thought “you should learn functional programming” sounded like a fancy way of saying “you should learn logic” so you used it without having a clue as to what you were even talking about. The most stereotypical ancap pseudo-intellectualism I’ve seen!
Man you really just fucking Googled “laziness programming definition” and regurgitated words from the first Wikipedia article you saw?
In my language what I said looked fine in this context and I’d be understood. In your language it’s still fine because a person arguing in good faith starts with assuming that the problem is with them, and the rest are not worth worries.
Since I well know what lazy evaluations are, I am using them correctly, for the analogy that another person should have separated two arguments I’ve made (EDIT: as in “evaluating one is not necessary to evaluate another referring to it”).
So it is clear for any spectator, competent or not, that you are a fool. Except some of them are the same.(EDIT2: removed for pettiness as well, found mentions of ADHD and, well, ADHD people usually seek arguments not to humiliate others, so I’m changing my interpretation)
I didn’t “think it was a long ban”, I thought the specific comment got removed for some reason and I asked you to postpone continuation for 8-10 hours because I’d rather not test my willpower to not argue with fools in that timespan.
I also think you are incompetent at your job, because people use informal language all the time to talk about concepts. (EDIT: this is petty, removed)
In my language what I said looked fine in this context and I’d be understood.
Haha no fucking way you’re trying to use “in my language it’s different” in this context. What language? What language could you possibly even be referring to? Is this language in the room with us right now?
Since I well know what lazy evaluations are, I am using them correctly, for the analogy that another person should have separated two arguments I’ve made. So it is clear for any spectator, competent or not, that you are a fool. Except some of them are the same.
You saying “I’m right and your wrong because… because I know I’m right!” is certainly an argument. I guess I was correct about you not being able to come up with actual reasoning for the bullshit you tried pulling.
I also think you are incompetent at your job, because people use informal language all the time to talk about concepts.
What kind of pseudointellectual oral diarrhea is this? “Informal language”? You think anyone actually believes the bullshit you’re making up about “lazy evaluation” being “informal language” for something else in your language?
Are you in 10th grade or something? You sound so unbelievably dumb right now trying to make justifications for your stupidity up on the fly and failing horribly.
“I realize me trying to use terms I don’t know the meaning of in an argument makes me look stupid now to people who actually have knowledge about the subject, so I’m going to make a short and quippy comment to avoid trying to address my incompetently made claims and hope the other person lets me have the last word, or else I’m going to continue arguing because it would hurt my ego if they got to have the last word.” That is how you look to everyone else. Ancaps are very predictable. How many times have you tried to mic drop people today so far?
Most ideologies require you only to bunch together and yell louder. Ancap is not suited for that, which is why it’s cool.
Then why the fuck do I constantly see Ancaps doing this?
I’ve literally never actually seen an ancap successfully practice their ideas. I’ve only ever seen them desperately fail trying, or loudly exclaiming that they’re the smartest and bestest and all their ideas are golden (ignore the fact they’ve never even tried to put them In place, just loudly yelled complaining about the world they exist in like cats).
I’ve literally never actually seen an ancap successfully practice their ideas.
There is a community in Montenegro I know of trying to do that. It hasn’t yet desperately failed. It’s Russian, so may not fit you.
I also fuzzily remember a group of people planning of another such place like 10 years ago, but I stopped following them.
or loudly exclaiming that they’re the smartest and bestest and all their ideas are golden (ignore the fact they’ve never even tried to put them In place, just loudly yelled complaining about the world they exist in like cats).
How is this different from any kind of leftists except tankies?
I also fuzzily remember a group of people planning of another such place like 10 years ago, but I stopped following them.
A group near me completely failed after their town was overrun by bears because the abolished the trash/recycling rules and the animal control department.
How is this different from any kind of leftists except tankies?
Literally every single leftie has a larger history of putting their ideology into practice, seen or heard of a welfare state? Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats probably built it. Every nation on earth has a Dem Soc or Soc Dem major party.
Hell even the other anarchists have spent the past century building communes literally everywhere, and they’re the second most ineffective political group after Ancaps.
A group near me completely failed after their town was overrun by bears because the abolished the trash/recycling rules and the animal control department.
Well, incompetence sucks.
Literally every single leftie has a larger history of putting their ideology into practice, seen or heard of a welfare state? Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats probably built it. Every nation on earth has a Dem Soc or Soc Dem major party.
Of course it’s larger, ancap is from 1960s.
So non-ancap nations influenced by ancap count?
Hell even the other anarchists have spent the past century building communes literally everywhere, and they’re the second most ineffective political group after Ancaps.
Because ancaps exist for less than a century.
I guess you won’t call cryptocurrencies a success of ancap ideology.
If you only read Rothbard and his ilk, it did. But just like Marxism had thousands of years of proto-projects and inspiration, the thought behind Ancap has been around in practice for centuries.
So non-ancap nations influenced by ancap count?
The only countries to be ideologically pure in anything have been hellscapes, so I’d say being inspired is probably the best example you can get.
I guess you won’t call cryptocurrencies a success of ancap ideology.
You literally had to recreate centralized exchanges for crypto to succeed, and through that, you rebuilt everything that’s wrong with traditional currency but transferred the control from democracies to private citizens.
If you only read Rothbard and his ilk, it did. But just like Marxism had thousands of years of proto-projects and inspiration, the thought behind Ancap has been around in practice for centuries.
Not that much. Maybe Catholic distributivism and, eh, early USA.
The only countries to be ideologically pure in anything have been hellscapes, so I’d say being inspired is probably the best example you can get.
OK, then it’s hard for me to draw a border between something being ancap-inspired and generally right-liberal. Ancap is extreme voluntarism. The name is wrong, it’s not about capitalism, but capitalism results from it.
You literally had to recreate centralized exchanges for crypto to succeed, and through that, you rebuilt everything that’s wrong with traditional currency but transferred the control from democracies to private citizens.
I didn’t mean that as an achievement of ancap, it’s an utter (mostly technical, but still) failure. Just that it’s clearly influenced by that ideology.
They sure do want us all to live in a world where you have to swipe your credit card to drive anywhere, to go into a store, to walk anywhere, to use a public bathroom, to call 911, to use any services at all.
But I guess it will be worth it, because I’m sure the ancaps and libertarians and sovcits have a really good plan to keep each of us wealthy enough that privatizing the entirety of civilization won’t harm anyone.
Absolutely not an expert or anything, but is it possible that the partition of your harddrive that you’re trying to install Debian on (hd0) is too small?
At some point, the installation should ask you the driver on which it should be installed and also how the driver should be interacted with; i.e full wipe and then installation or only specified partitions. You specified elsewhere that you don’t intend to dual-boot. Hence, selecting the correct drive and following the instructions for full wipe + installation (which should be regular/default installation) should have been sufficient.
Considering that it has a 2020 firmware, and is built by “to be filled by OEM”, my completely unfounded wild guess is that the system firmware has broken legacy boot support. From other posts here, I gather you’re using a legacy dos-style partition table. Try installing again with GPT/EFI instead.
Interesting. Looks like perhaps your boot loader isn’t properly pointing at your root partition.
I’m assuming you’ve just done the install and never successfully booted, yes? In that case, you can try to re-run the installer, or try rescue mode and try repairing the bootloader.
Are you doing dual-booting, or is this system dedicated to Linux?
Yes, I have not been able to successfully boot yet. I have already rerun the installer and tried every solution I could find online in rescue mode. Tried repairing grub too.
Together with all the other information you’ve shared, it’s not entirely clear why it has failed; at least to me.
If you’re not married/tied to the installation of Debian, may I suggest installing Linux Mint, Pop!_OS, Tuxedo OS or Zorin OS instead?
There are of course many other distros you could choose, but the earlier mentioned ones are ‘stable’ like Debian is. I thought that perhaps it was what attracted you towards Debian in the first place.
Yeah, I couldn’t find a good solution online either. Maybe It was a bit flip? Guess the universe sent a high velocity particle at my PC from lightyears away just to ruin my day, that’s the only explaination I have after seven hours of looking online.
I setup popos and EndeavourOS recently, very easy to install. Learning them was about equal IMO, they have different ways of doing things. I liked PopOS initially because its supported by a company that has financial incentive to make sure it runs reliably.
I dont know how you flashed the usb, but it seems like the installer is damaged. Try redownloading the iso, check the file hash, flash the usb drive with balena etcher and reinstall.
Did you change the partition layout in the installer?
Hi, it would be useful to know what kind of device you are installing on. For a laptop the model and make would be especially useful. If it is a PC then the drive configuration would be interesting (what kind of drive, how many etc.)
Ok, that looks like a fairly standard setup. I guess taking a look at the boot loader itself would be the next step. When you see the Debian bootloader you could try pressing ‘e’ to view what commands it uses internally to boot. The lines starting with “linux” and “initrd” would be most interesting.
Holy crap I thought this was some deep D&D type thing where rolling dice creates your map and therefore a table full of dice ended up being some monstrosity of map and then I read these comments an see why there’s a desire to escape into fantasy world’s away from the bullshit rolls in this one
Snapchat premium or whatever it’s called. It allows you to change the background, delete messages, more tapbacks and other messaging features. Remove the stupid AI. Maybe removes ads from stories?
lemmy.world
Oldest