Autolykos's Comments

Re: Last Comment

michael.lagoy — Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:43:22 GMT

I wouldn't say it is out of character. I make it a point to always learn more, to apply as objectively as possible what I learn from any theory or particular theorist, and that is shown in that comment. I've read a lot of material from the Austrian School since my first post, and have learned quite a bit. However, I've also learned a lot from others in other schools of thought, and my heart leans toward a more socialized society even if my mind hesitates based on what it has been taught by Hazlitt, Mises, and others. I want to dedicate myself to continued learning, and try to apply that knowledge to potentially solve the problems that are believed to cripple most socialist systems. It is not trolling. I simply wanted to clarify, for any who may look me up, that I no longer associate, in any sense other than (possibly) an ideological one, with the the Austrian School of Economics or with libertarian political theory. Just damage control for the future, trying to reduce potential confusion. Take care.

Lagoy

Anenome — Mon, 10 Sep 2012 20:34:51 GMT

Yeah, finally got down to his last post, lol, what the hell was that?

Nice work

Malachi — Fri, 17 Aug 2012 22:57:08 GMT

I commend thee, thou art a Polemic Gold Metallist!

Hi again

Lady Saiga — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:42:49 GMT

Hey thanks! I do poke around this forum, and only have contributed a tiny bit. I'm not really qualified to contribute much, as you can see. I didn't notice your comment right away because I've turned off those notifications due to having as much Viagra around as I can manage...

As you see I'm still working my way around the Ethics questions, probably no closer to understanding than I was initially.

Courts & Law

Anenome — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 02:02:21 GMT

Your comment I never responded to revealed in me a significant weakness involving my conception of autarchy--namely that I don't understand the philosophy of law well enough to come to cogent answers on that front. Thus I'm going to delve into a few relevant works, starting with Bastiat's "The Law." Do you have any others to recommend?

Money Creation

Elise — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:23:18 GMT

Thank you so much Autolykos, for your answer.

Thanks

freeradicals — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 19:41:29 GMT

Thanks for the friend invite. I have read your various posts on these boards and they are very well thought out and logical, keep it up! I have learned a lot from you already.

On Arguments from Ignorance

LNielsen76 — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 00:30:19 GMT

As I understand the argument from ignorance ("assertion that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false"), can one make the argument that AnCap is an argument from ignorance because it asserts, a priori, certain propositions (ie. laws of economics) to be necessarily true (ie. axioms) that cannot be proven false (ie. they are non-experimental)?

sorry, my mistake

Charles Anthony — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 18:14:37 GMT

Sorry, I accidentally deleted your reply to one of my posts.

Please forgive me. Pleas repost it because I am keen on replying to it.

sorry

mrokl — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 19:40:24 GMT

didnt think the comment would end up in one big chunk... i still don't know how to send a message like you did to me. =)

thanks for the encouragement

mrokl — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 19:39:39 GMT

although i've been reading about all sorts of economics, i haven't been writing them out in my own words... so i keep having to re-check what i wrote in the post. i thought i did an gd job on that reply, but in light of your reply, i didnt articulate it very well, even though that was what i meant; banks cant claim limited liability on 10% of their assets and then go on to accept all the profits from the rest of the 90%, unless of course this is explicity stated and agreed by all parties. besides, i also never considered the fact of how it might be considered 'socialist', especially about "implied promises", which i think encompasses too wide a category for any business, so i think that point deserves some merit, which i failed to address... so i thought it prudent to cede some ground. as an aside, im just extremely curious to see how all these debt will get resolved. if indeed we are going to move to a new monetary system as a result (its just a matter of time isnt it), i think its prudent to consider other forms of monetary systems; MMT, gold standard, free banking, metacurrency etc. im just really curious about what might lead the people to choose X over Y, which is why i did the other post "why gold" and currently reading up on financial history- i'm trying to understand the interactions in the society for the selection of gold back then and why it continued... the same could be thought about FRB. like hayek said, in effect, "you won't know how a system might break down if you dont know how it came to be accepted and how it could continue to work well". cheers and once again, thanks for the encouragement. oh, happy new year =)

Hey...

ladyphoenix — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:01:35 GMT

So what are the rules here? That is to say, am I free to question why a well-reasoned reply to another member has gone completely unanswered when that same member has replied several times after being directly addressed?

Picard.

Telpeurion — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 23:52:15 GMT

Hello Jean-Luc.