The Obama cutout didn't mind either. One person seemed a little suspicious, but that was it. I was showing people I was taking photographs and blogging right from my phone, so that there posts were up about 10 seconds after the photo was taken, and no one else cared at all.
Erhmmm. Gene, please forgive the quibble, but why are you "monkeying" around with an orangutan? It is a great ape and like us a member of the hominid family, and NOT a monkey.
(The monkeys have tails; those of New World monkeys are prehensile, while those of the Old World are reprehensible.)
Yes, Tom, I learned that distinction when I was about six, but do bad puns need to be taxonomically accurate?
Monkey:
"1. any of several families of Old and New World primates usually having a flat, hairless face and a long tail "2. loosely any of other, similar primates, as a gibbon or chimpanzee"
By the way, the major cladistic division is Old-World Monkeys/Apes versus New World Monkeys -- "monkey" itself is not a taxonomic term at all!
But why you wanna quibble me so? You are like an amiable and often amusing gadfly, whom I could never bear to swat even though I can't understand why it keeps buzzing past my ear.
Ancaps often declare, "All rights are property rights." I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of running into libertarians online who insisted that libertarianism supports "the freedom of movement," and realized that this principle actually entails that people without property have no rights at all, let alone any right to "freedom of movement." Of course, immediately, any ancap readers still left here are going to say, "Wait a second! Everyone owns his own body! And so everyone at least has the right to not have his body interfered with." Well, that is true... except that in ancapistan, one has no right to any place to put that body, except if one owns property, or has the permission of at least one property owner to place that body on her land. So, if one is landless and penniless, one had sure better hope that there are kindly disposed property owners aligned in a corridor from wherever one happens to be to wherever the...
In this paper , Hoppe, Hülsmann, and Block (HHB) make their ethical case against fractional reserve banking (FRB) based on the fact that "two individual owners cannot be the exclusive owner of one and the same thing at the same time." They then posit that since fractional reserve bank notes creates multiple titles or claims to the "same" gold, they are inherently fraudulent. In analyzing this claim, the first thing we will have to do is to turn it into a remotely sensible claim. No one who deposits money at a bank thinks they are entitled to the same money back. What they want, when they go to get their money out, is the same amount of money back. What a gold-backed fractional reserve note comprises is a claim to a certain amount of gold, not certain particular pieces of gold. I hope that change to their argument is uncontroversial! So their complaint comes down to this: if a bank issues pieces of paper that allow the bearer to claim a certain amount of gold...
Did anybody mind that you were wandering around snapping photos? (Presumably the monkey didn't care, but besides him?)
ReplyDeleteThe Obama cutout didn't mind either. One person seemed a little suspicious, but that was it. I was showing people I was taking photographs and blogging right from my phone, so that there posts were up about 10 seconds after the photo was taken, and no one else cared at all.
ReplyDeleteErhmmm. Gene, please forgive the quibble, but why are you "monkeying" around with an orangutan? It is a great ape and like us a member of the hominid family, and NOT a monkey.
ReplyDelete(The monkeys have tails; those of New World monkeys are prehensile, while those of the Old World are reprehensible.)
Yes, Tom, I learned that distinction when I was about six, but do bad puns need to be taxonomically accurate?
ReplyDeleteMonkey:
"1. any of several families of Old and New World primates usually having a flat, hairless face and a long tail
"2. loosely any of other, similar primates, as a gibbon or chimpanzee"
By the way, the major cladistic division is Old-World Monkeys/Apes versus New World Monkeys -- "monkey" itself is not a taxonomic term at all!
As I said, Gene, it's merely a quibble.
ReplyDeleteShall we estrange
ourselves from our cousin apes?
Or "monkey" with care?
But why you wanna quibble me so? You are like an amiable and often amusing gadfly, whom I could never bear to swat even though I can't understand why it keeps buzzing past my ear.
ReplyDeleteWhat can I say? Even if I fail to inform, I am rewarded by agreement or by learning from disagreement, and in either case learn something about you..
ReplyDelete