I second that.
I can’t be sure, I don’t think so.
It’s like…it happened. But that person will never tell you it did. So for all practical intents and purposes, it didn’t happen. Unless someone else saw it happen and can substantiate that they saw it happen. In which case, not only did it happen, but the murderer can now be sentenced to prison.
The premise assumes that it did happen.
That someone else could simply lie.
Yes, but it counts for nothing. No action can be taken by anyone other than the murderer, who probably won’t turn himself in. Or maybe the murderer will turn himself in, I dunno.
And yes, the witness could be a liar.
I recommend Central Banking, Free Banking, and Financial Crises , and Microfoundations and macroeconomics: an Austrian perspective.
I gotta refresh my memory on libertarianism to answer that one, but I surely say that you are wrong. Oh wait, the murdered would have a claim and that claim can be transfered. Anywho, the facts are that the murderer commited murder. Whether or not he can/will be prosecuted is irrelevant.
And yet, sci, you didn’t articulate the position here. Ok. No problem.
If there is no consequence, then the act itself goes unnoticed. It’s like it never happened. I think about this often when I think about how many people there probably are out there who have killed someone and totally gotten away with it.
and you reflect that they are not bad…
Wut?
It may be like it never happened, but it did happen.
But it’s not essential to Austrian economics to accept the legality (I said nothing aout the efficiency) of FRB, right?
perhaps you can rephrase your question?
but ‘austrian’ economics is not about what is right or wrong, it is the austrian method for understanding economics (not law)
-
If that tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, there is no consequence to its have fallen and so it’s like it never happened at all for all intents and purposes. There is no ideal realm where all things are seen and heard all the time. All phenomena require an observer for their having happened to matter at all.
-
But it doesn’t matter because nothing comes of it. It counts for nothing.
Whether it matters or not that the event happened is not in question. However, what is in question is whether or not the did event happen.
Alright, so basically it happened but it’s practical value is 0?
Value is subjective.
Yes, do you think that something that happened but has no consequence can be said to have any practical value?
I agree. But Maxliberty was equating the legality of fractional-reserve banking with economics.
I’m embarrassed to say that I didn’t think about that. Good point.