Tour to $13k house with heating, AC, sewage, water and electricity

Soundgarden - Pretty Noose

Corporate America in a nutshell...

Kyuss - 50 Million Years Trip (Video)

No More Chicken Chores: Never Freezes + Always Clean (Everflow 3.0)

Radiohead - Sail To The Moon (Live)

Planting Fruit Trees (before it's too late)

TL;DR: Fiat money and taxation fuel corruption and crony inequality through inflation and the Cantillon effect. Only hard money, free markets, and common law can create genuine wealth while disciplining governments against elite capture. True voluntary cooperation rewards real entrepreneurship and subjective value creation, distinguishing market-driven inequality (from serving millions) from crony privilege. Freedom rewards savers and creators; fiat punishes the people and entrenches power. Voluntary exchange beats central planning every time. Austrian economics was the mainstream scholarly framework before Marxism rose, and it remains the strongest counter to socialism and communism. The real problem is that taxation itself, especially the hidden inflation tax under fiat, incentivizes corruption, distorts prices, savings, and capital formation. As Will Durant pointed out, fiat money (under the guise of good intent) enables endless wealth transfer to the government and connected elites until societies collapse. We shouldn’t optimize how much the state takes. We should minimize coercion so voluntary exchange and real entrepreneurship can create wealth. Only free markets with common law end corruption, including regulatory capture and true monopolies. Common law is not top-down legislation; it is natural law in action, evolved bottom-up from real disputes over property and contracts. It enforces self-ownership (your body and life are your most fundamental property), homesteading, and the non-aggression principle without any central planner. This is why assault, theft, fraud, or any direct harm is off-limits: disputes were settled through restitution to the victim, not state punishment or revenge. The offender makes the victim whole again, real repair of harm rather than simply suffering a penalty. History shows this approach worked remarkably well. In Iceland’s Commonwealth, feuds were resolved with compensation at the Althing rather than prisons. The same principle operated in Tudor England through precedent-based courts and in countless pre-state and tribal societies. These systems delivered lower violence, actual repair for victims, and stable order for centuries with far less coercion than modern bureaucracies. People picture dungeons and misery, that's wrong. These systems were cleaner, faster, and fairer than our prison-industrial complex: no lifetime labels, no endless harm to victims or offenders, just real repair that actually worked. History shows it’s tough, the state has always stifled competition. But today, with cheap travel, instant information, global networks, and hard money, we can actually vote with our feet again and choose rules we consent to rather than endure imposed ones. As Saifedean explains in his Principles of Economics, natural law is the ethical bedrock of civilization: no one may initiate force. States claim legitimacy by pretending to uphold it, yet routinely betray it through coercion in the form of taxation, inflation, and monopoly power of all kinds. Bastiat captured the same truth in The Law: legitimate law protects persons, liberty, and property rather than plundering them. In practice, this delivers clear titles, arbitration, and the simple rules of honest dealing: don’t lie, don’t cheat, don’t steal, keeping markets free from artificial barriers such as intellectual property and other forms of corruption. Arguments resting on “modern money”: government prints what it needs and taxes to control inflation and inequality. Basically MMT thinking, and it’s where I break hardest. Hayek and Rothbard showed how printing power creates the business cycle and the Cantillon effect: new money flows to the connected and wealthy first. Saifedean lays it out perfectly in The Bitcoin Standard: fiat lets governments grow unchecked, while hard money forces discipline. That’s exactly why I’m for Bitcoin. Fixed 21 million supply, no central printer, no hidden tax on savers. Printing also creates the vicious loop you see today: debts get cheaper while hard assets rise. Those with collateral borrow more and roll over debt forever. Everyone else is stuck saving in a currency that’s lost ~97% of its value since 1913, at best. Many people worldwide have no access to banking and are forced to save in currencies that lose all their value. Tax competition? I see it as healthy market discipline on governments, not democracy’s enemy. It prevents them from going full plunder mode, without it, governments would literally need to imprison their subjects to stop people from leaving. Austrians separate two kinds of inequality. Crony inequality (bailouts, subsidies, Fed favors, the 1930s gold confiscation) is corrupt and hurts the poor. But market inequality from voluntary exchange usually just reflects value creation. In a true free market (no force, no government picking winners), every trade is win-win by definition. You only buy my product if you value it more than your money. I only sell if I value your money more than the item. When that happens over and over, some end up with more, not by taking, but by creating things millions voluntarily paid for. What's taken is the ability to choose. Intellectual property is a key pillar in obstructing free markets. As Stephan Kinsella says, no one can own an idea: the printing press, a song, a technique. Trying to stop sharing obviously impedes free choice. Steve Jobs didn’t get rich by stealing; he created the iPhone billions chose because it improved their lives. The corruption isn't that he made something wanted and profited, it’s that no one can/could compete. Regulation and IP create monopolies, not voluntary cooperation. Just laws enable competition, not protection of the connected. Teddy Roosevelt was praised as a “trust buster", but his actions strengthened the most powerful like Rockefeller and Morgan. Government “fixes” always entrench power. So inequality in a voluntary system is just billions freely choosing what they value most. It’s not zero-sum. If someone hoards all the airplanes, prices rise, that’s the growing incentive for others to compete. Voluntary inequality (outside government-controlled systems, rare at large scale by design) is proof someone created massive value. Of course the government can impose/force value on people, which they always have done, but black markets always exist, people trade and barter, and of course price caps and imposed value has never worked at scale and leads directly to unethical incentives. Quick note on “capitalism” (this is the confusion I hear a lot): what most people call capitalism today is actually cronyism or statism: centralization of power, whether fascist, socialist, communist, or Fed-backed monopolies. G. Edward Griffin boils it down to centralization vs. decentralization instead of arguing over labels. As soon as free markets are captured or altered, they are no longer free markets, and at that moment it’s no longer capitalism. Mises warned that anything that can be corrupted, will be; that’s why I emphasize local, accountable government and voluntary cooperation. True capitalism is simply voluntary human action and free exchange. The word has been hijacked as propaganda (Griffin and Jordan Peterson both point this out), but the core idea is the same thing many socialists claim to want: freedom. “Real socialism” has never been tried in the same way that “real capitalism” has never been tried. The difference is ‘almost socialism’ resulted in the impoverishment and death of hundreds of millions of people, while ‘almost capitalism’, even though it has still been filled with massive atrocity, has lifted billions from absolute poverty. This is true of every system: if it can be corrupted, it will be. That’s why human action and constant vigilance matter far more than the label. Massive corruption has been a constant humans have been fleeing from and fighting against. Voluntary cooperation and free markets, in spite of the inevitability of capture and centralization, have been the only way out and require constant vigilance to protect. All value is subjective. It’s an essential point that ties directly into dictating the value of money and interest rates. No central planner can know what people truly value, so fiat rates and supply always distort real signals. Examples: You have gold in a remote village (away from anyone else with gold) or in a dangerous place. As your neighbor I might value an offer of goods or services in trade more than that gold. Maybe I’m hungry and food is scarce, so I value food more than gold. The same bottle of water is priceless to someone dying of thirst but worthless next to a spring. A great surgeon earns more than a barista because patients subjectively value the surgery way more than a coffee. Even the lemonade-stand kid who does it smarter ends up with more. That’s just value creation, not zero-sum; it’s humanity advancing. A common Bitcoin concern is “what if someone buys it all?” Saifedean nails this: one dollar would be enough money for the entire world if divisible enough. If people hoard, (1) they can’t buy goods with it, and (2) the value of the rest rises. With hard money and common law, cost of living drops perpetually while goods and services improve. The mainstream view that inflation is needed to “incentivize spending” is just the fiat system justifying itself. Real voluntary saving is the engine of progress. The Great Depression is the textbook case. Rothbard shows Hoover and FDR’s interference (wage controls, huge spending, NRA cartelization that let big industries fix prices and crush small competitors) turned a necessary correction into a decade-long nightmare while funneling money to big banks first. That’s why hard money like Bitcoin flips the script: fixed supply rewards savers instead of punishing them and encourages the long-term thinking that actually builds strong societies. Anyway, that’s my take. Ever checked out Bastiat’s The Law (super short), Hayek, or Saifedean?

TL;DR: The NBA has traded grit for safety and raw competition for engineered parity. To bring back the electric, must-watch basketball of the past, the league should restore physical defense (hand-checking + interior warfare), clean up officiating with AI accountability, tie late-season wins to real stakes, and introduce a soccer-style promotion/relegation system between the NBA and G-League. Less central planning and more authentic competition because fans want competitive greatness through excellent basketball. What the NBA’s built isn’t true equality. It’s parity: forced balance where no team dominates, no dynasty rises, and everything’s flattened to “everyone gets a shot". It’s like handing out participation trophies instead of letting merit sort it out. Fans don’t want that kind of “equality” they want fairness without the artificial ceiling. They want a system where a small-market team can grind their way up, a star can carry a squad. Most importantly basketball fans want the best to win, not because the league rigged it, but because they earned it. Bring Back the Grit: How the NBA Can Recapture Its Old Magic in a Modern World Remember when an NBA regular-season game felt electric? Charles Barkley was throwing elbows in the post, Dennis Rodman was diving for loose balls like his life depended on it, and Michael Jordan was waging war every single night. Mid-range jumpers, low-post competition, and tenacious defense weren’t optional, they were the heart of the game. You didn’t need a playoff series to feel the stakes. Every possession was a battle. Fast-forward to today. We’ve had seven different champions in the last seven seasons. On paper, that sounds like perfect parity. In reality, the league feels flatter than a three-point contest. Regular-season ratings dipped 2% in 2024-25—the lowest non-pandemic mark in years. Casual fans tune out, and even die-hards admit: something’s missing. The talent is deeper and more skilled than ever. The problem isn’t the players. It’s the system. The NBA has become a heavily regulated monopoly. Good intentions (spread the talent, protect small markets, curb superteams) have created perverse incentives straight out of an economics textbook. Refs swallow their whistles on big calls or blow them on phantom fouls. The paint is a no-man’s-land. Defense feels like a chore instead of basketball. And the 2023 CBA’s second-apron rules have made building a true contender so punitive that teams are actively breaking up good rosters just to stay under the cap. From an Austrian economics perspective, this is central planning in sneakers: the more the league manipulates outcomes, the less authentic competition you get. Because it’s a monopoly, fans are stuck with whatever the cartel serves up. Just a few tweaks that reward effort and restore physicality could work wonders. Let Them Play: Hand-Checking and Interior Competition Bring back legal hand-checking on the perimeter. Loosen the rules in the paint so bigs can actually body up, box out, and battle without a whistle every three seconds. Right now the game is all spacing and step-back threes. That’s beautiful… until it gets boring. Today’s extreme spacing has sanitized professional basketball. Restore the war in the lane and suddenly you revive the lost art of the mid-range, the post-up, and the slashing drive. More creativity, play development. You revive team-oriented basketball, technique, and will. Players like a young Shawn Kemp, Karl Malone or prime Larry Bird thrived because they were effective inside and out. Clyde Drexler was gliding through crowds, Kevin McHale was working those sneaky post moves with elbows flying. Today’s spacing has changed all that. Let defenders touch, bump, and contest without fear, and defense stops being a chore, it becomes an asset again. The three-pointer doesn’t disappear; it just gets earned. Clean Up the Refs with AI and Accountability Bias isn’t usually malicious, it’s human. Give referees too much leeway and “star treatment” creeps in. The fix is simple and modern: AI tracking for every call. Flag high-variance fouls in real time. Let coaches and GMs submit anonymous reviews. Track patterns season-long. Use a third-party panel for big-game questionable decisions and a board teams can send questions and concerns to. Refs with consistently questionable numbers slide down the rotation; the best rise to the playoffs. Unanimous objections from teams, especially when backed by AI-verified questionable calls could result in benching that official for a stretch. No conspiracy theories, no drama, just data-driven accountability. College and high-school ball feel fairer because the stakes are pure. The NBA can have that same honesty without turning every game into a foul-fest. Make Every Night Count: Post-All-Star Incentives Tanking is still rampant. The solution isn’t banning it; it’s making winning rewarding. Tie 20-25% of lottery odds to wins after the All-Star break. Give teams that finish strong automatic playoff-seeding advantages or home-court perks. Suddenly a February game in Milwaukee isn’t just another night, it’s a chance to climb. No need to gut the 82-game season. A longer slog benefits depth and team basketball; it builds character and chemistry. With restored physicality and meaningful regular-season stakes, “load management” actually starts to make sense again. Stars can rest strategically without guilt, teams adopt a longer-term orientation. A Real Developmental Ladder (With Market Discipline) Turn the NBA’s minor league (the G-League) into a true proving ground. Like some soccer leagues, introduce real consequences for chronic failure. A team that finishes at the bottom of the standings for multiple seasons could face relegation. The G-League champion could then earn a shot at the big time by playing a single game or short series against the worst NBA team. Win that series, and they’re promoted to the NBA the next year while the demoted team drops down. The promoted team could have first choice of key players from the demoted roster, plus favorable draft positioning and trade priority. This creates real skin in the game while still giving everyone a voluntary path back up. No perpetual safety nets, just market discipline that rewards winners and lights a fire under everyone else. The Counter-Argument (and Why It’s Wrong) Critics will say, “But superteams ruin parity!”, fair point. The fix isn’t going back to 2010s chaos. Loosen the second apron slightly so aggressive big-market teams can chase titles without nuclear penalties, while keeping enough guardrails for small markets. Balance, not extremes. Fans don’t crave perfect equality. They crave stakes, rivalries, authentic challenge, and the chance for competitive greatness. The league already has the data, the revenue, and the platform. A few rule tweaks: hand-checking, AI refs, post-All-Star break incentives, a touch more interior freedom, and a real developmental ladder, could flip the script overnight. The product would feel raw again. Defense would matter. Every game would matter. Stars would play like their legacies are on the line, because they would be. The NBA doesn’t need to choose between parity and excitement. It just needs to stop over-managing the game and let the players play. The old magic is still there, buried under layers of rules and caution. Time to dig it out. Fans are waiting. The league should give them what they really want: excellent basketball.

Free's

HOW AMISH REPLACE CHICKEN FEED WITH THIS 5 FREE PLANT AND GROW FOREVER!! (WHY DID THEY HIDE IT!?)

Mozart showing transformative art in Amadeus #shorts

KT #760 - STEVEO + TIM BUTTERLY

Primus • Jerry Was A Race Car Driver • 1991 (Reelin' In The Years Archives)

The sports stadium scam continues in Kansas City — with taxpayers on the hook for $1.8 billion

Queens of the Stone Age - Rickshaw

George Carlin - It's A BIG Club & You Ain't In It!

A Perfect Circle - Weak And Powerless - (Acoustic Sessions)

Jeff Bezos has begun the process of raising $100 billion for a new fund that would buy up manufacturing companies and then use Al to automate production. .@JPHi|||||||: It's just a weird sickness at some point, this level of greed. You have $200 billion dollars. You could wipe your ass with $100 bills and keep getting richer every day. Why kill thousands and thousands of jobs at this point? http://youtube.com/post/UgkxKCb4CY2b5_KlU1AfiUvbIPkUtfthEXPw

A Perfect Circle - The Outsider (Acoustic)