Ctrl+V

[Ragitsu]

[tkdguy]

Selfies are dangerous!

 

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2016/02/09/selfie-deaths-in-2015/

[Ragitsu]

[Certified]

[Ragitsu]

He'd expected some technical explanation on social camouflage or something as preposterous.

[Clonus]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/us/animas-river-spill-by-the-numbers/index.html

[tkdguy]

Largest model railway. Some scenes NSFW: http://pickle.ninemsn.com.au/2016/02/11/12/21/xxx-model-train

 

"Your food is gross - we're through!" http://shanghaiist.com/2016/02/10/cny_dinner_breakup.php

[Certified]

[Certified]

[Certified]

[tkdguy]

https://munchies.vice.com/en/articles/the-us-military-has-created-pizza-that-stays-edible-for-three-years

[Clonus]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/isn't

[Pattern Ghost]

1608

[Certified]

https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/45i8y6/gmnastics_67/

[Clonus]

Hold me tight The dream's coming slowly true The shades catching up Hell's so near I can see them, hold me tight

[Ragitsu]

"Age will be the death of you."

[Ragitsu]

[Ragitsu]

[Certified]

[tkdguy]

http://taskandpurpose.com/7-guys-you-meet-in-every-infantry-platoon/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tp-today

[Clonus]

"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States"

[Ragitsu]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prosody

[Ragitsu]

[Ragitsu]

Genghis Khan was a leader of various nomadic steppe peoples from ~1206 -1227. Over the course of his lifetime he greatly expanded his empire and rapidly improved the quality of life for his people. When Genghis came to power some of the people of his particular tribe were so desperately poor that they wore clothing stitched together from field mice. In many cases mongols of that period would wear clothing so long that it would literally rot off their skin over the course of weeks or months before they could procure something better.

The man was the founding father of Mongolia, brought the Silk Road under control and is credited with largely making it passable. Perhaps one of his lesser known accomplishments was the imposition of a single rule of law over a very wide area, the Yassa code. The mongols were a meritocratic society where even men who had previously attempted to kill the great Khan in battle could rise high in the ranks if they proved their skill and loyalty. On top of all of that the mongol empire was actually religiously tolerant, believing that you can worship whoever you damn well please so long as you ask them to pray for the Khan while you're doing it.

So why am I rambling about all of that? Because the Mongols, a 13th century warrior people had a system of property rights that makes as much sense to me as yours does. In Mongol culture everything belonged to the Khan. Every single thing alive in the world, every castle, every bit of gold or wine all belonged to the Khan, and when the Mongols came upon people they told them to submit to the obvious divine goal of the mongols (to bring everyone together as one) or to be crushed. The mongols then took (by force if necessary) huge amounts of loot from these societies, that was then given to the great Khan, who in turn gave it to his generals, who gave it to their officers and so on.

Now I ask you, what is wrong with this principle of property rights? It is logically derived, particularly for the standards of mongols (Genghis Khan was a huge badass who got people to follow him en masse as he conquered). It deals with the problem of scarcity as everything belongs to the Khan to divide as he sees fit. It solves the problem of initial acquisition because everything belongs to the Khan and simply needs to be taken if he wills it. What is your issue with Mongol Based Economics (MBE)?

You might say that this is reducto ad absurdum, and maybe it is... but please, explain to me why your theory of property rights is any more objectively correct than MBE. I'll agree with you wholeheartedly that making mountains of skulls from the bodies of the slain killed in your rampage across europe is a little disgusting by modern standards, but if we're arguing that something is an incorrect system of economics simply because society finds it morally reprehensible then I'd argue the same applies to Anarcho-Capitalism which wouldn't poll at 1% if it were brought to a vote. If your argument is that it's inefficient I will say f*** you, that is a consequentialist argument and we're talking deontology here b****. To my eyes MBE view of property rights is equally as valid from an outside viewpoint as your homesteading belief, or the version we as a society use now. If there is an objective morality out there then that could shed some light on things, but unfortunately if there is we don't know what it is. For all we know Khorne is sitting up on his throne of skulls being all pissed off shouting "The Goal of All Life is Death! The mongols had it right you f******!" and we'll never know.

I'd like to hear you come up with a reason that Mongol Based Economics are somehow less valid than First-Use. Because as far as I can see both are utterly arbitrary if you ignore consequentialist arguments, and if you add in consequentialist arguments then first-use gets the everloving s*** kicked out of it due to real world applications.

[Certified]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mby8uukRNqE&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ&index=11