- Spontaneous Order

Spontaneous order is the spontaneous emergence of order out of seeming chaos; the emergence of various kinds of social order from a combination of self-interested individuals who are not intentionally trying to create order.
The evolution of life on Earth, human language, and a free market economy have all been proposed as examples of systems which evolved through spontaneous order. Atheists and naturalists often point to the inherent "watch-like" precision of uncultivated ecosystems and to the universe itself as ultimate examples of this phenomenon.
Spontaneous order is also used as a synonym for any emergent behavior of which self-interested spontaneous order is just an instance.


- Che (for his fans)

Bookmark and Share


- Crowdsourcing

Crowdsourcing is a neologism for the act of taking a task traditionally performed by an employee or contractor, and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people or community in the form of an open call. For example, the public may be invited to develop a new technology, carry out a design task (also known as community-based design[1] and distributed participatory design), refine or carry out the steps of an algorithm (see Human-based computation), or help capture, systematize or analyze large amounts of data (see also citizen science).

Bookmark and Share

The term has become popular with business authors and journalists as shorthand for the trend of leveraging the mass collaboration enabled by Web 2.0 technologies to achieve business goals. However, both the term and its underlying business models have attracted controversy and criticism.


- Australia Censoring the Internet

The citizens of Australia face some of the greatest threats to their personal liberty and freedom since the birth of their nation - that is after their island ceased to be a prison colony for British convicts. Under the guise of protecting innocent Internet users, the Australian government has launched a mandated Internet censoring program. In creating this filter, Australia 's government joins the ranks of China , Iran and Pakistan all of which limit Internet users' freedom online.
Fortunately, for the citizens of this tourist nation, the Australian government is still testing the ISP-level system, which will eventually monitor all traffic within the governments reach.

From a libertarian perspective, this is offensive on two points: first, it shows the government is actively seeking to censor the internet. Second, it sends a message saying, "The government knows best."

This action shows an active attempt by the government of Australia to monitor its citizens' web traffic. Already in the government's "blacklist" are 10,000 malicious or pornographic sites, which the government deems should not be viewed by ordinary citizens.

What is troublesome is that this list may include websites critical of the government or other prominent institutions such as businesses and religions; two institutions which the government of Australia has already shown it is willing to protect at the cost of civil liberties.

Bookmark and Share

Case in point, when Australia was home to World Youth Day simply wearing a t-shirt critical of the Catholic faith or the Pope could easily result in a $5000 fine. Albeit, World Youth Day is not the best event to protest, but the threat of fines still hampered individuals' rights to free speech. Unfortunately, it is all too easy to see Australia 's governments net-filter used in a similar fashion.

What is fortunate, at least for the time being, is that this filter is solely being used to keep internet users from websites which indeed could harm their computer. Though, the message (while possibly unintentional) is clear: the government knows best! In order to live in a free society, citizens must be able to screw up, so to speak. The Australian government - indeed any government - also has no place in deciding what is morally or physically harming to its citizens. If citizens see an issue with something around them they will actively seek to remove it from their lives; in this case by installing content filters on their home computers. There is utterly no need for a government mandate, in a free society where private firewalls are available, what is acceptable for internet users to view. Finally, while this "great firewall of Australia " is in its testing phase, individuals can opt out by contacting their Internet Service Provider.

For more information on Australia, visit http://www.australiamicroblog.com and http://www.melbournemicroblog.com.

About the Author
Web site development and search engine optimization services for small businesses and domain name owners.

- Defeating Socialism, Defending Freedom

Defeating Socialism, Defending Freedom: It's Not the Free Market that Caused the Financial Crisis

The Left's uproar over the financial mess is fairly typical. It's the end of libertarianism, American inequality is the problem, and only the super-socialist Barack Obama can fix this mess.

Well, libertarianism isn't dead. It never really lived. As long as Peter can vote to take money from Paul, there will never be a libertarian economy. The most I can hope for is a mostly free-market. What the left-leaning fail to acknowledge (or understand, I am not sure which), is that the financial crisis that has been thus far averted is a product of government subsidy, not the free market's excesses. Bad loans were made at government direction. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the derivatives made possible by their drunken loaning, are the reasons for the credit freeze. In the real world, the most sub-prime of sub-prime loans would simply not be made. If you cannot afford to buy a house, rent. The rest of us cannot afford anything else. You do not have the right to a house - you have the right to pursue a house.

Bookmark and Share

To my original point, the financial crisis is not just an American problem. The Europe Central Bank is being pressured by member states and other trade partners to coordinate a bailout in the amount of trillions. The United Kingdon has seized two massive banks. Germany has approved a plan that rivals the size of the American plan. By any standard, these are socialist economies all.

The idea that socialism prevents such crises is absurd. The red herring of inequality does not fly, either. Giving more money to people who cannot otherwise create it is pragmatically dumb and an invitation to systemic moral hazard. What the latter day and modern day socialists do not account for is that the wealth and income they want to "spread around" (to paraphrase the world's greatest anti-Hamiltonian, Barack Obama) has to be created by someone (typically by way of a corporation - gasp!). As in, we cannot print it. It must be made, a uniquely American concept that has served the world well.

The centerpoint of the socialist attack is on these producers. They use guilt. They employ strong arm tactics, leveraging the powers of the government bureaucracy to exact through taxation or regulation the resources needed to further the "spread". An additional obligation to society is created, a society that, perversely, does not include the targeted donor. It is as if the founding tenets of the American system do not matter in the least. Individualism is only to be tolerated in subservience to the collective. In reality, the Founding Fathers viewed individualism as the collective. If you subscribe to Barack Obama's view of the world, you must necessarily redact a substantial portion of the Declaration of Independence and consider Publius an alchemist.

When the house falls, as it has globally in the recent financial crisis, where a suspension of incentives results in calamity, it is the free market that is blamed. The free market is simply the monicker we use for the aggregate of human desires and production. It leaves no one behind who accepts it. The socialist alternative demands that one man rule over another because there is more of the former than the latter. That is not a democratic republic. That is a mobocracy.

About the Author
Nathan Moore is a rare breed - a conservative thinker, author and criminal defense attorney. He lives in Nashville, Tennessee, and co-authors the political blog http://www.MooreThoughts.com with his wife, and his own criminal defense blog, the Moore Law Blog.

How To Use A Job

Before you start that job search, let me ask you a question: Why would you want a job? Just for a paycheck? Instead of assuming that a job is a necessity that we all must have (it really isn't), consider what is actually important to you.
Once you have determined what you really want, you may very well want a job. But you can then see it as a means to accomplish those goals that matter to you. It may also be a "limited engagement." With that approach in mind, I have to say that jobs do have their advantages. Here are some ways to use a job temporarily, to get closer to more important goals.

1. To Save Money

Whatever your goals may be, a job is a way to create income - some of which can be diverted into savings for future plans. I used a good job to pay off my first home early - and then quit the job. Other jobs have been devoted to earning travel money. A job can provide the money for a business as well.

2. To Buy Time

People often claim they don't have time for what is important - even for the ones they love. This is rarely true. Stop using a job to buy nice clothes or better furniture or whatever else you use it for, and it can buy time instead. Save enough money to take a week off from work to play with the dogs if that is what you really want.

3. To Get Business Training

Most people think of a job as an end in itself, or a means to a better job. But in many fields it is possible to use a job as a training exercise for owning a business. This is common in businesses like carpet cleaning and even restaurant management. You learn the business from the inside, and then move on to start your own with the training you have received.

4. To Learn Skills

Some jobs are a great place to learn skills. Many people join the military for this reason, but you don't have to go to that extreme. If you work as a tax preparer for one season, for example, you can apply the knowledge and skills you learn to all of your future businesses. A year as a car salesman might prepare you with the negotiating skills to become a great real estate investor.

Bookmark and Share

5. To Be Where You Want

If you want to be where the best skiing is, but can't afford more than the occasional weekend vacation, what do you do? Get a job there! The next time you are in Aspen, Colorado, ask a few bartenders and other employees how they ended up there. Half came not for the job, but for the skiing opportunities. The job is just the means to that. You might get a job in the Florida Keys if you want more sun and ocean.

6. To Pay The Bills

This is not an exciting use for a job, but it is necessary at times. Unless you really love the job you get, though, make this a temporary solution. Remember, whatever job you get, if you got one that paid a little less you still would have survived, right? So pay the bills, but also put a little bit of every paycheck aside and start looking for ways to pursue goals that are more interesting. At the very least continue your job search until you take one more step up in income, and then save even more towards those important goals.

About the Author
Copyright Steve Gillman. Learn more, and get the free Unusual Ways, (To Make And Save Money) Newsletter, plus e-courses and ebooks, at: http://www.UnusualWaysToMakeMoney.com

- Hate war. Hate violence.

it is a combat between support war or dont support war. I am supporting our north american troops, does that means I am supporting war. I hate war. I prefer peace, dialog.
Should we solve problems (Afghanistan, Iraq) with war ?

There is something I must admit, easily.
We have to support our troops, our society isnt still enough against war.


Bookmark and Share

- statism

“A businessman’s success depends on his intelligence, his knowledge, his productive ability, his economic judgment—and on the voluntary agreement of all those he deals with: his customers, his suppliers, his employees, his creditors or investors. A bureaucrat’s success depends on his political pull. A businessman cannot force you to buy his product; if he makes a mistake, he suffers the consequences; if he fails, he takes the loss. A bureaucrat forces you to obey his decisions, whether you agree with him or not—and the more advanced the stage of a country’s statism, the wider and more discretionary the powers wielded by a bureaucrat. If he makes a mistake, you suffer the consequences; if he fails, he passes the loss on to you, in the form of heavier taxes.”

thanks to Ayn Rand
thanks to www.antagoniste.net
please comment

Bookmark and Share

spread the love and share this video
Bookmark and Share
Bookmark and Share
world greatest dad team Hoyt my redeemer lives