9 years ago, I watched the Epic Rap Battles of History between the eastern and western philosophers. In it, Nietzsche has a line where he dumps on the classical philosophers.
I left a comment: "Nietzsche was a philologist. I doubt he'd deny he's a student of the classical philosophers."
Then, 6 years later, I saw it again and forgot I left that message and was going to leave a comment to that effect, then instead I left a comment to myself: "Good point, 6 years ago me."
I left a comment: "Nietzsche was a philologist. I doubt he'd deny he's a student of the classical philosophers."
Then, 6 years later, I saw it again and forgot I left that message and was going to leave a comment to that effect, then instead I left a comment to myself: "Good point, 6 years ago me."
The irony of people who blindly follow the orders of some random blocklist because they want to avoid "nazis" is humorous. Like thoughtlessly hating certain people because you're told to by some faceless list has nothing to do with what happened in Germany in 1938.
I don't have many lefties following me, but here's a bit of reality check for US lefties who talk about "how you don't need to pay for anything with Canadian Healthcare"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPQ2bhtRVqM
Skullagrim is Canadian, and he's selling his sword collection to pay medical bills.
"That can't be! He's in Canada, and not even a scrub province like Alberta!"
It isn't a magic lamp, of course there's limits -- and he's running up against them. The surgeries take forever to get even if they are free, but ancillary services are still mostly private.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPQ2bhtRVqM
Skullagrim is Canadian, and he's selling his sword collection to pay medical bills.
"That can't be! He's in Canada, and not even a scrub province like Alberta!"
It isn't a magic lamp, of course there's limits -- and he's running up against them. The surgeries take forever to get even if they are free, but ancillary services are still mostly private.
To be fair, both humidex and windchill are common metrics intended to better illustrate the way someone feels heat depending on actual attributes -- either reduced capacity of the human body to cool itself in high humidity or increase heat transfer during high winds.
Something like this is incredibly common in Canada because you end up in those edge cases where it's cold and either windy or not windy, or it's hot and either humid or not humid.
Something like this is incredibly common in Canada because you end up in those edge cases where it's cold and either windy or not windy, or it's hot and either humid or not humid.
There are actually a few examples of small businesses being owned by the super rich. In fact, something that qualifies as a "local small business" can secretly behind the scenes owned by larger aggregated funds that hold ownership in a bunch of small local businesses. The family that owns the mega corporation Uline owns a number of small local businesses within a fund that holds such things.
As for an example of families who own what look like mega corporations, franchise rights are a good example of that. Yes, the sign on the door says super ultra megacorp, but it's actually a small business operated by a local family who ends up kicking back a portion of the proceeds to the franchising company.
Notwithstanding the fact that publicly traded companies can be held by for example pension funds, meaning that no individual rich guy holds that company, instead it's collectively held by a large number of working-class people who want to retire someday.
Regardless, for the sake of my argument I don't need my hypothetical to exist. I simply needed to have the capacity to possibly exist. There's nothing stopping Scrooge McDuck from opening up a lemonade stand, and people who look rich because they own something big and important regularly end up penniless.
As for an example of families who own what look like mega corporations, franchise rights are a good example of that. Yes, the sign on the door says super ultra megacorp, but it's actually a small business operated by a local family who ends up kicking back a portion of the proceeds to the franchising company.
Notwithstanding the fact that publicly traded companies can be held by for example pension funds, meaning that no individual rich guy holds that company, instead it's collectively held by a large number of working-class people who want to retire someday.
Regardless, for the sake of my argument I don't need my hypothetical to exist. I simply needed to have the capacity to possibly exist. There's nothing stopping Scrooge McDuck from opening up a lemonade stand, and people who look rich because they own something big and important regularly end up penniless.
It isn't as straightforward a question as it looks at first for a few reasons.
One of the assumptions built into the question isnt about the companies but about the owners. It's assumed that the small business is owned by a poorer person and the large corporation is owned by a rich person or rich people. What if in one hypothetical situation your small business was owned by Bill Gates and the huge corporation was actually owned by a modest middle class family? In that case it isn't about stealing from a big or small company, it's about the more standard stealing from the rich or the poor.
Another thing is the use of the word "far". Not that it's just more immoral, but far more immoral. Such language suggests that the orders of magnitude are so great that it totally changes the moral calculus of a question.
But what is the telos we are striving towards? Today people might say the telos is sort of utilitarian, so you just want the most people to be the post happy and so stealing from a small organization is going to cause more unhappiness than stealing from a large one (the bike cuck problem). If on the other hand the telos of life is a life well lived, then stealing at all is damage to your honor, your virtue, the amount of sin in your soul, and so the act of missing the mark isn't about who you transgress against, but about the integrity of yourself and both are similar marks against you because the end result is you're living a life less well lived regardless of the direct measurable consequences to the world at hand.
In the end, we can all agree I think that we should steal not from small businesses or large corporations, but from homeless people. They have less debt than any of you and if they're high enough they won't even notice their stuff is missing. As well, they won't harm any customers or supply chains up or down, they don't have an economic multiplier effect, and as one famous fictional character tells us, if you steal enough from them you could even help reduce the surplus population which will have far ranging positive effects!
One of the assumptions built into the question isnt about the companies but about the owners. It's assumed that the small business is owned by a poorer person and the large corporation is owned by a rich person or rich people. What if in one hypothetical situation your small business was owned by Bill Gates and the huge corporation was actually owned by a modest middle class family? In that case it isn't about stealing from a big or small company, it's about the more standard stealing from the rich or the poor.
Another thing is the use of the word "far". Not that it's just more immoral, but far more immoral. Such language suggests that the orders of magnitude are so great that it totally changes the moral calculus of a question.
But what is the telos we are striving towards? Today people might say the telos is sort of utilitarian, so you just want the most people to be the post happy and so stealing from a small organization is going to cause more unhappiness than stealing from a large one (the bike cuck problem). If on the other hand the telos of life is a life well lived, then stealing at all is damage to your honor, your virtue, the amount of sin in your soul, and so the act of missing the mark isn't about who you transgress against, but about the integrity of yourself and both are similar marks against you because the end result is you're living a life less well lived regardless of the direct measurable consequences to the world at hand.
In the end, we can all agree I think that we should steal not from small businesses or large corporations, but from homeless people. They have less debt than any of you and if they're high enough they won't even notice their stuff is missing. As well, they won't harm any customers or supply chains up or down, they don't have an economic multiplier effect, and as one famous fictional character tells us, if you steal enough from them you could even help reduce the surplus population which will have far ranging positive effects!
My original word target for Future Sepsis was 60,000 words, I'm at 65,000 words today. Getting close now!
Much of Canada is in a deep housing recession right now, but all housing markets are local and I guess Winnipeg is in the money?
That's just really weird.
Like, imagine if we picked an interest for everyone who committed a crime. "Star Trek fan arrested for CP" "LA Kings fan arrested for drunk driving" "Funko Pop collector arrested for robbing a Circle K"
Like, imagine if we picked an interest for everyone who committed a crime. "Star Trek fan arrested for CP" "LA Kings fan arrested for drunk driving" "Funko Pop collector arrested for robbing a Circle K"
One of the harms of modernism is we have decided something can only be true if we can measure it, label it, and test it with very limited tests to prove perfectly that it's true and always perfectly true.
It's given us many superpowers as we narrow down the physics of the universe, but we've lost thousands of years of wisdom in the process.
It's given us many superpowers as we narrow down the physics of the universe, but we've lost thousands of years of wisdom in the process.
I am specifically dealing with technology that exists, because anything that we do today must be based on what exists. Since we have never successfully captured energy from space, and since we haven't been able to get a tomokak energy positive yet at scale, whatever we do is going to not be those things. Fission is one thing that can be used, but the big point I'm getting at is that we're going to need a lot more energy production than we think to stop using fossil fuels, because electricity is only a small piece of the puzzle -- you have to take hydrocarbons that were previously "free" energetically speaking, and put them together with energy you got elsewhere.
Since 2009 I've softened on my stance that we require fewer people imminently, but if we are to make decisions today, it needs to based on reality today. A lot of 1970s opposition to growth was proven wrong because we were able to turn energy into opportunities, so it all starts with energy.
One set of decisions is definitely to use fission (as well as hydroelectric and geothermal, two proven long term base load technologies), to pursue fusion and space based energy, but they don't exist until they exist. We were wrong in the 1970s about what technology would look like today, after all.
Since 2009 I've softened on my stance that we require fewer people imminently, but if we are to make decisions today, it needs to based on reality today. A lot of 1970s opposition to growth was proven wrong because we were able to turn energy into opportunities, so it all starts with energy.
One set of decisions is definitely to use fission (as well as hydroelectric and geothermal, two proven long term base load technologies), to pursue fusion and space based energy, but they don't exist until they exist. We were wrong in the 1970s about what technology would look like today, after all.
I referenced my previous work, I've posted it here previously:
https://lotide.fbxl.net/posts/6006
It lays out my hypothetical conversation of 3 key process industries and how they compared to global energy sources that lack a marginal carbon cost.
https://lotide.fbxl.net/posts/6006
It lays out my hypothetical conversation of 3 key process industries and how they compared to global energy sources that lack a marginal carbon cost.