Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Doug Morris

Regulars
  • Posts

    1465
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Doug Morris last won the day on December 6 2023

Doug Morris had the most liked content!

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Sexual orientation
    Straight
  • Relationship status
    In a relationship

Recent Profile Visitors

4070 profile views

Doug Morris's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (6/7)

144

Reputation

  1. The current online New York Times has an article claiming that real estate commissions in the USA were at the high rate of 6% because the National Association of Realtors had the power to enforce it and that this constituted a failure of the free market that required antitrust action to correct it. Can anyone provide a good source explaining the real reason commissions were so high?
  2. I see that the document you linked mentions the East German Stasi. Maybe the secret police of a dictatorship could bring something like this off. But how workable would it be in a relatively free society?
  3. " "What we are seeing now is a globally co-ordinated and organised effort of control and conformity. Many countries around the world are currently using a model of policing called Community Oriented Policing [ie.gangstalking]." (ibid.pg.3) " Here is a definition of Community Oriented Policing from Wikipedia: Community policing or community-oriented policing (COP) is a strategy of policing that focuses on developing relationships with community members. It is a philosophy of full-service policing that is highly personal, where an officer patrols the same area for an extended time and develops a partnership with citizens to collaboratively identify and solve problems.[1] The goal is for police to build relationships with the community, at times through mediums such as local agencies, to reduce antisocial behavior and low-level crime.[2][3][4][5][6][7] Some scholarship, such as the broken windows theory, proposes that community policing can reduce serious crimes as well.[8][9] Community policing is related to problem-oriented policing and intelligence-led policing, and contrasted with reactive policing strategies which were predominant in the late 20th century.[10] Many police forces have teams that focus specifically on community policing.
  4. " Those who oppose the cabal are targeted and those of pure blood, those of a healthy mind incorruptible by its influence are foremost in the crosshairs. This group, especially those who are the most intelligent and intuitive amongst them, are prime target's for the cabal's use of the following means of global enslavement. " If this is true, why are you the only victim who posts here?
  5. Protecting children from alcohol and tobacco is a much simpler issue than protecting them from social media. Should we have laws protecting children from foods containing unhealthy amounts of sugar or salt? How do we define "unhealthy"? Should we have laws limiting children's access to over the counter drugs? To pornography? To violent fiction? Should we get into arguments about what ideas could be harmful to children?
  6. They don't raise the sort of issues that Gus talked about. The law in question is "one size fits all". We probably need a more complicated, nuanced approach. The better parents have a lot of responsibility here. We need to avoid closing paths to help for those children who need protection from bad parents.
  7. There is a difference in kind with respect to which rights are being violated. The "J6ers" were insurrectionists trying to interfere with legitimate election certification and orderly transfer of power. They were guilty of very serious crimes. Trump and his people made arbitrary assertions, without evidence, of a stolen election. They knew they were lying. People who fell for this deserve harsh criticism. What evidence do you have to back this up?
  8. The statism shown in the digital economy quote I posted and in fiat money, including central bank digital currency, is bad, but it is not in the same category as the suppression going on in Belarus. A government can be guilty of any or all of the former and still be more rights-respecting than one guilty of the latter.
  9. That document refers to central bank digital currency as something being studied, not something planned.
  10. I googled Transatlantic digital economy and found the following: With a wave of digital advancements, new security risks and vulnerabilities in critical technologies will continue to emerge, especially given current geopolitical instabilities. The technology may be digital, but the effects are real – the way governments regulate these risks is important. Who will design the rules for this new world, and for whose benefit? How can the EU and the US work together to regulate new technologies and deliver resilience to an increasingly digitalised society? This does not sound to me like it has anything to do with "basically, a digital central bank coin scheme" or "electronic programmable money".
  11. That sentence says "Specifically, it supports Strategic Objective 3.2 and 3.3 on developing coalitions to counter non-market coercive economic practices and collaborating with Europe to create a Transatlantic digital economy." How did you make the leap from "a Transatlantic digital economy" to "basically, a digital central bank coin scheme"?
  12. The US government has a lot wrong with it, but it is much more rights-respecting than the Belarus regime. They are not equivalent. MAGA consists of people who have let the lying demagogue Trump stir up their emotions to dangerous levels.
×
×
  • Create New...