Edit: tbf it's a spectrum, and some religions and associated things are outright scams, but I think expressing awe and gratitude for creation and sharing timeless values is so not a scam.
I had been an aethiest then agnostic or whatever, i always wondered if there was a supra powerful order to things, as a kid... then i lived through so much unbelievable sh** i'd have to be fully retarded not to believe something greater than me saved me from it all,
but still yet i went full retard instead and dismissed the whole thing.
in the last 3 years i've become a baptized Christian,
and have dove headlong into a life of service to Christ and YHVH, and am beginning to , finally live my life for the right reasons.
Interesting, I've gone from militant atheist, to someone with faith, and truly sees the Bible as one of the best kept secrets in our world. Meaning, most people haven't read it, think it's a scam, and attribute all kinds of things that it doesn't actually say.
What's a pro-religion atheist, not heard of that one, genuinely interested.
I see the value religion adds to people's lives and society at large, but I don't find any of the supernatural claims convincing.
Listening to Jordan Peterson's Biblical Lecture Series really helped me see the value in those stories and the metaphorical truths they hold. I grew up entirely secular and just never understood what people got out of the biblical stories.
next cycle changes that i think. At this point you have most of mainstream financial media and actual big money in favor of bitcoin, thinking it's a scam is becoming an outdated take at this point
There's nothing inherently untoward about borrowing someone else's resources for something you want in the present and it would be silly to expect access to their resources for free.
You know I rally against debt all the time, but I don't think I ever said it was because I thought it was a scam. I mean specie produced from fiduciary media (fractional reserve banking) is a scam, but the reason I rally against debt in particular is because every instance where you introduce debt into a system it breaks apart on a macro level.
I see debt like bleach. Bleach is not a scam, but drinking bleach is a mistake. (Most people would say liquor instead of bleach but I'm being humorously dramatic)
I'm curious why you wouldn't claim it's a scam, if you think it's destructive and enriches those who sell it.
My view on debt is that you're basically making an intertemporal trade with yourself. When we had our first kid, it was very valuable to be able to move into a larger house, but we didn't have the resources yet, so we borrowed them from present and future me. So far, present me is happy with the exchange and I foresee future me continuing to be happy with it.
Well you described why its not a scam right? You borrowed money and allowed yourself to get ahead and use those gains to pay the money back. Good bleach. Washes those white socks very nice.
So what's drinking bleach? Well you didn't scam anyone, but you did cause people to do things that will kill the system you're participating in. For one thing, you probably bought a single family large house in an area that is zoned for single family housing. You did this because its nice and because you can pay for it in the future. In doing so, you've made life harder for your children. With a large plot of land being used for only one family, and with it being illegal to build a structure designed for multiple families, your children will find it more difficult to find a place to live. They could of course just live with you in that large house for their whole lives, but when they have children, because your house is not a multi-family structure, it will be more more and more unbearable.
Basically, borrowing money creates a planning problem. It makes it more difficult for all economic actors to plan how to build things in a way that has a long term sustainable future and it breaks apart as a result.
I like the way the people of the Philippines figured out their lives. They don't save pesos, they save in building materials. They then build a structure that is designed to be expanded as time goes on. When they have children, they take advantage of their design to expand on their structure to create a room for them. When they have grandchildren, they might build a second floor and so on and so forth.
Saving in a medium of exchange makes a lot more sense to me than saving in one particular commodity that you may or may not want in the future. Of course, it would be ideal if the medium of exchange were not a depreciating fiat currency.
I don't see the connection between debt and city planning. Either one can exist without the other. Whatever the "drinking bleach" part is, I missed it. Without being too specific, I live in the middle part of North America where there are very few land use restrictions and there's lots of available land for homes. Absent a space constraint, people generally don't want to live in multi-family housing and there's no good reason to impose it on anyone.
As far as being able to find a place to live in the future, I feel like you just fundamentally don't understand market allocation. Things have to be priced such that people can afford them or the seller doesn't get anything for their goods.
Yes of course its nicer to save in a medium of exchange rather than a commodity. The people of the Philippines do that only because of the fact that the peso is depreciating.
I do of course understand market allocation, but I understand market allocation as it applies to debt as well. Surely you can afford to pay off a 10 year loan on a house....surely you can pay a 20 year loan on a house....surely you can pay a 30 year loan on a house and so on and so forth until the debt term is the entire lifespan of the person.
So the connection between debt and city planning. I understand it doesn't make sense at first economically. We have to remember that economics is a phenomena of human action. As such, this is sort of an issue with human psychology. People buy houses in single family zoning BECAUSE it is single family zoning. BECAUSE its illegal to build multi-family structures. They can afford to buy this luxury as well. So when you do run into space constraints, the suggestion to change the zoning makes the people there feel very angry. They bought that building because it was going to increase in value as the city around them grew. If you build a multi-family structure in their area, its going to reduce their home value. They don't like that, so they lobby against it.
Whereas without debt, people might be more upset about buying a property they can't expand.
Gotcha. That's a nice point about how city planning gets entrenched. It's very much part of the general NIMBYism that's ruining many American cities. It just doesn't apply to my situation.
It sounds like you're using bleach to wash your clothes instead of trying to drink it lol (in other words, you're using debt right. The psychology it can cause other people hasn't affected you)
I just don't trust people in general to maintain that over the long run.
Recently I stayed in one hostel and connected restaurant was making steaks on grill every now and then, I asked what they did with the fat (pure beef gold), and I was shaking my head to hear they throw it out (clog those pipes fuck yea). So I started to collect it before they could and it nicely (and for free) covered my cooking needs.
When I loved alone, every 3 weeks I rendered tallow. Cheaper and tastier than buying motor oil (sunflower).
The skin and retina are photon receptors that respond positively to Sunlight.
blocking Sunlight with blackout curtains in bedrooms, wearing long-sleeved tops, long pants, hats with visors, sunglasses, and application of sunscreen lotion could be doing more damage than good by reducing your vitamin D levels and significantly impacting your body's immune system.
the problem is when sunlight is available 18 to 24 hours a day. Hence the need for blackout courtains ;) but otherwise yeah, sun good. But nothing is good in excess.
Rising prices on video games. Come on guys, the dollar isn't worth shit, of course video game prices are increasing. You're basically paying less money for a video game every year it stays the same price.
In the same vein, microtransactions are just shrinkflation. A way to get around trouble with raising prices.
The problem is, who gets to decide what is fair and reasonable?
The mafia has a word called 'pizzo' which is money paid to the mafia in the form of a forced transfer of money resulting from extortion. In return for paying the pizzo, businesses receive protection and can ask the mafia to resolve disputes.
The government has a word called 'tax' which is mandatory contributions levied on individuals or corporations by a government entity. In return you get protection in the form of police, roads, health care, schools and other services.
Taxation might be the best system we currently have.. but let's not pretend the mechanics of how it works aren't extortion. At the end of the day we're all just groups of humans driven by incentives. Some of the monkeys tell the other monkeys what to do for their own best interest.
I'll be interested to hear what country you live in, my country certainly doesn't have "fair and reasonable" taxes. However, we have roads, and free healthcare.
Also, I wonder if you can call something, "fair", if it's taken from you without consent?
Is there anything else that can be taken from you without your say so?
I'm in the U.K. for context, our health system is a joke, it's dead, nobody wants it admit it. People are trying to afford private healthcare if they have it available to escape the system.