Interesting. But how do you make a record for someone who doesn’t pay? You inherently do not have that credit card number, so you can’t identify them.
The Usual Suspects: ABC’s Ross, Stephanolpoulos Point to Tea Party in Dark Knight Shooting
UPDATE: ABC Corrects, Apologizes–After Blaming ‘Social Media’ and the Public
I’m just making assumptions since I’ve never seen the app, but (from what I heard in the interview) I assume the drivers app tells the driver where the fare is, and where he wants to go, and shows the driver a rating for that customer, based on what other drivers rated the customer in the past. After dropping the fare off the driver and customer rate each other and leave notes on the experience, positive or negative. Based on this both customer and driver can accept or deny a ride/fare from specific people.
It sounded like fares must use a credit card to get picked up, so the company has that information. My guess is that the customer is identified by his phone number, but possibly also further by his credit card number, the driver may not have the card information, but still has the ratings and feedback from previous drivers.
Oh, I think I was misunderstanding your question, I’m guessing if the customer deny’s credit card payment later that the company would mark their account allowing drivers to use their own disgression about picking up that fare again.
Assuming the govt doesn’t find a way to shut this down I wonder if the cab industry will come up with innovations similar in degree to the wake in the breakup of the phone monopoly. I bet it will become common for “cabs” to run all sorts of errands for people rather than just driving them around.
I just want to emphasize that that opening quote is my characterization of her, not her own words. The second passage you cite are her words verbatim.
This is just another confession of faith. […]
What would really be interesting to me is if these girls had a discussion of what/who they trust and why. (I’ll go ahead and venture a guess: the girls who trust the government do so because it’s supposedly a “democracy”, which supposedly means they have some amount of control over what it does.)
Yes. Neither of them have much else than assertions or non-sequiturs. While it does seem that the girls in the middle trust aggression to solve everything I don’t find it implied in what they say that they trust democracy in particular to solve problems- although they would probably hold democracy as the highest form of governance if the question were posed to them. Most naive was Jackie’s comment that she doubts Julie’s argument that the legislative lobbyists cooked up this Paycheck Fairness Act (this is talked about at around the 30:00 mark) in order to cause conflict so that they can be called on to resolve this; Jackie thinks that such a conspiracy is the naive idea and doesn’t want to credit lobbyists with that much intelligence. I’d argue the opposite- indeed, she seems to have an ideal form conception of the US government. If she had even taken AP Govt. & Politics in high school she’d know that Congress is virtually nothing but an association of committees which are incessently badgered by special interest groups. All that is needed to totally vindicate Julie’s argument from the realm of “the absurd” [as it is regarded by Jackie] is the simple premise (as Clayton notes helped totally alter his perspective; see the top lines of the third paragraph, as well as the entire fifth paragraph in particular) that politicians are self-interested, too.
With regard to her respect for med students on the argument of the PPACA it’s not even an interesting appeal to popularity. She’s no understanding of economics apart from her dropping the word “demand” once during an argument (I pretty sure that was her). If it were something like the promise of a new drug and its effect on a certain illness and weighing potential pros and potential cons, she could appeal to the medical community’s findings with a bit more relevance (although, this doesn’t automatically make their opinion the truth; appeal to popularity is logical fallacy). But no, as John James critiqued, these are students being asked about the signature legislation of the guy who had overwhelming support of the twenty-something demographic. Yeah, they’re a good source of ethical/economic knowledge on this matter simply because they’ve been studying medicine (not economics, medicine; and they’ve been studying for the last few years, not acting in the market which actually requires conformity to regulations and subjecting one’s practice/operations to economic calculation) for the last few years.
If you haven’t seen the 'bate yet, Autolykos, I’d recommend it. If you’re not gonna laugh at the two girls in the middle then you’ll be exposed to ABillyRock and TokenLibertarianGirl; they ain’t just easy on the eyes.
Just watched this. The woman’s the perfect example of idiocy: arguing with emotion; shifting positions; speaking over your opponent and not allowing a chance for him to rebut your argument; banal assertions, and; a loud ignorance of economics.
After watching this video, I’m reminded of John James’ concern that Schiff may be hard of hearing (which is not without reason if one wishes to watch the video referenced in that post between he and Cenk Uygur; it’s just off). In that video between Cenk and Schiff, Peter is just talking no matter what- it’s almost as if he has a script that must be finished as a result of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. In that video, Schiff was extreme.
In reflection, I’m starting to think that, with Schiff constantly having extemporaneous debates with absolute idiots several times a week, often in front of a national audience, he has formed this sort of defense of “just talking.” Talking with people like this woman day in and day out must really take a toll on faith in humanity. I won’t say patience, because there are still examples of Peter demonstrating incredible amounts of that in his video where he talks to the people at OWS.
Hmm.
New book out at the Mises store:
ORGANIZED CRIME: THE UNVARNISHED TRUTH ABOUT GOVERNMENT by Tom DiLorenzo
Politics and thieves, coercion and regulation, fascism and the Fed, centralization and liberty, workers and unions, trade and freedom, free-market achievements and government disasters in American history—this book covers it all!
Organized Crime collection of essays in the tradition of Austrian political economy—a combination of applied economics and the study of governmental reality. Unlike “mainstream” economists who are content to spin mathematical model after mathematical model which explain little or nothing about the real world, DiLorenzo’s focus has always been just the opposite—to use economic understanding to gain a better understanding of how the political-economic world works. Austrian economics is indispensable to succeed at this task.
I must say it looks epic.
https://forum.freecapitalists.org/t/july-2012-low-content-thread/23495/96
Yeah that probably plays into it a bit too. But I think the larger culprit is the audio setup and Schiff’s own hearing. If you recall back in October when Schiff had Robert Wenzel on his radio show, apparently there was an issue in which if Peter was talking, Wenzel’s audio would get muted out, or lowered to a point that it was inaudible. (Which is not uncommon in a radio setup, as a knowledgeable commenter informed Wenzel), but this was only after Wenzel took to his own blog to whine about how he had been gamed, and that that was the last time he went on a radio show without his own recorder to capture the conversation. He basically came out and alleged that Schiff was sitting there with his finger on a mute button, shutting Wenzel up whenever he felt like no one whould listen.
If you want a rundown of the whole episode (which ended up being the subject of at least 6 different posts on Wenzel’s blog), that thread provides a nice play by play in real time as it was all going down. It starts here.
:EDIT:
Holy goddamn shit. Get a load of this first sentence, from Robert Wenzel. What the hell did I just say. What an insecure little shit.
Peter Schiff Tries to School the Confused Diana Carew
He really could have used a mute button with this one. Carew certainly learned in media class that you should keep on talking.[…]
Pretty awesome. The NAP is stated pretty well, too:
What Is the Point of My Libertarian Anarchism?
Insanity at Large: George Bush Promotes a Book on Economic Growth
Elitist Wall Street Battle: Bartiromo versus Spitzer (and launched by Warren Buffett)
This show has already passed the Gary Johnson interview and is now #1 all-time.
You Will Love Madison Avenue…when you compare current advertising to this 1650s ad for coffee.
Murray Rothbard on Neoconservatives
How Authoritarianism Will Lead To The Rise Of The Data Smuggler
The Odd Spike in Cash Withdrawals Just Before 9-11
‘Monica, Monica’ Chants Taunt Clinton in Egypt
Murray Rothbard on John Maynard Keynes
Report: Romney Has Made VP Decision
Politico Isn’t Expecting Anything Big Out of Ron Paul at the Convention
Market Knowledge Signaled Jeremy Lin’s departure from Knicks
Plastic Water Bottle Huggers Go Crazy in The People’s Republic of San Francisco
New Yahoo CEO is a Big Donor to Obama and DNC
Announcing: Morning Coffee with Murray Rothbard
Here Come the Online Purchase Taxes
On Social Darwinism and What Obama Amazingly Missed
Is Stagflation Around the Corner? Core Inflation Climbs
Ron Paul Warns of Possible False Flag Events in Tampa
Classic.
via Tom Woods:
Courtesy of the Tea Party Economist, here’s a video in which two guys make perfectly clear that the jobs they want to create, and for which they seek public funding, involve digging holes and filling them back in again. The labor leaders they catch on tape have absolutely no problem with this.
For some reason I felt like asking this on the forum instead of the FB page, but who is making those really bad quote pictures on the LvMI Facebook page?
Sex-crime victim could be jailed for tweeting her attackers’ names
Justice is as justice does…amirite?
I commented a recommendation to use Inkscape instead of MS Paint. They really do look awful, and they’re posting so much of them. I decided to stop getting updates from that account.
So they were shot for showing up to protest a shooting. Sounds about right.
I commented a recommendation to use Inkscape instead of MS Paint. They really do look awful, and they’re posting so much of them. I decided to stop getting updates from that account.
Not just that, but some of the quotes they are using don’t really stand alone as a quotable statement. Bluntly it’s a bunch of crap, but I don’t want to offend any LvMI staff making them. The Bastiat Institute FB page churns out some rather good ones