these people seem woefully unprepared to take on homesteading

Geocities homesteaders rise up and be counted among the OG content thieves!

I see no driveway.
I hope he loses his homestead to pay for legal fees and to pay for the damage he did, no more driveway to defend.
What a douche. Enjoy prison fuckhead. So glad he's been arrested.

According to hermeneuticians, economics is apparently a matter of popular opinion. Ostriches. Like someone shot in the belly but continuing to work, ignoring the fact that he's bleeding out does not obviate the fact.

Collectivist anarchy cannot exist, unless what you mean by "anarchy" is chaos, for reasons already stated. But in the abstract, yes, you can advocate some sort of incoherence like anarcho-syndcalism and still call it anarchy. That's why some like to specify and call the (in my opinion) more coherent and desirable anarchism, libertarian anarchy or anarcho-capitalism, or free market anarchism, or voluntaryism. Any type of communalism or syndicate requires rulers to administer the "communal," which, unless unanimously selected, is in direct contrast with the purpose of anarchism (which means "without rulers"). And then you have the problem of coming up with and enforcing the "communal" rules without engaging in aggression.

Perhaps "we are getting snagged on definitions." I am not clear on your position so it could be the disagreements have to do with definitions. If you redefine socialism in a non-Marxist way, maybe you can make libertarian socialism coherent.

If you can come up with a social organization that involves zero initiation of violence against persons or their property, then whatever you want to call it, it agrees with libertarian anarchy.

Let me define the basic principle of the anarchism that I favor, to avoid semantic problems: non-aggression means never initiating violence against any individual or their property.
Property can only be a scarce resource. Non-scarce resources cannot be property or owned. You acquire property through homesteading, first appropriation, voluntary trade, or inheritance.
Legally, you can enforce contracts/voluntary agreements, and punish any violations of a person's "self" or property, meaning you can enforce non-aggression.
This view I call anarchy-capitalism, libertarian anarchy, or voluntaryism.
Or free market anarchy.

It strikes me that this isn't actually hugely different than the 3x3.6m cabins mandated by the Homestead Act (although it would have technically failed the test, despite having a window, by having one side only 2.1m).

I have to disagree a bit. Do you need to do hard work? Yes, but there are plenty of hard working people who struggle and never become financially successful. They may obtain some personal satisfaction, but the "rich people are rich because they work hard, and poor people are poor because they are lazy" mentality that is so popular in the US is flat out wrong. Not everyone working at your local restaurant, retailer or whatever is there because they are lazy, sometimes people get stuck in a rut and hard work alone won't get you out of it.

There is a great deal of talent and luck involved as well. Had Carnegie not worked for Scott, he very well may have never became the rich guy he became. He lucked out working for someone who mentored him and gave him a huge boost. Had Carnegie never gotten to where he did, then perhaps Frisk would have just been a hooligan and the Johnstown Flood never would have happened... had Carnegie been more himself, he probably never would have hired Frisk, which at least would probably have stopped the disaster of the Homestead Strike (of course then he may have never became the philanthropist he became). There were also plenty of hard working people in the early days of computers, there was a ton of luck involved for Apple and Micro-soft to break out and become what they would eventually become. In those two cases, it helped that Gates and Jobs were asshats in their early days, which gets back to being yourself. But for each Gates/Jobs there were many more equally hard working people who never became successful and faded back to obscurity. It's not like Romney became rich through hard work, he came from money and Bain Capital is named for Bill Bain who appointed Romney CEO... not to discount Romney's work there, or his work at school proving himself, but how likely would it be that he would have been CEO had he come from a poor family and didn't get to get to go to such a high end university? Likely no.

That all isn't to say hard work doesn't help, it is a key, but hard work alone counts for squat.

>> ^chilaxe:

Basically he's saying "Be yourself and somehow you'll become successful or something if you're lucky."
Better advice: "Hard work and perseverance beats talent and luck, and successful careers can be reduced down to an algorithm."

This is really just a silly Hyundai Elantra commercial where they also talk to one of the Walking Dead creators about his work. There are roughly 3 different versions of the car depicted, and none of them are feasible.



Of course no one would pick a compact coupe as the foundation for an armored car if they had any kind of choice in the matter (and if they don't, there's no reason to talk about what a great choice their only option is). There are a couple key areas in which this car really shows the limitations of the basic platform (a compact coupe): Height, Carry Capacity.

Basics:
An Elantra weighs about 2,800lbs unmodified (and roughly 3,500 - 4,000 as imagined), has about 150HP (not impressive numbers from a 1.8L engine), and has a sunroof roughly 4'8" feet off the ground.

Height:
The idea of a turret on top of the car for offense is great, except for the part where he's talking about a car with a height of less than 5 feet. The average person is about 5'6" with an arm's reach of at least an extra foot. So, the person in the protected turret is still likely in range (the hypotenuse of an arm reaching to this height would be slightly longer than the ~4'8" car height plus the roughly foot and a half of turret). Have you ever stood out of a compact coupe's sunroof while the car was in motion? There's not a lot of room in that car period, there's certainly no room for a person to stand in the center of it while it's in motion in a high stress situation.

Carry Capacity:
The Elantra has a roughly 900lbs carry capacity (this weight includes driver and passengers, plus armor and such). I'm going to assume the weight of the cow catcher is about equal to an average small truck snow plow (250lbs), and that it's for hitting zombies not clearing the road of vehicles, and I'm going to place a fair shot in the dark of roughly 172.5lbs for the rest of the armor (assuming 7 gauge sheet metal is ideal, and assuming 23 square feet will cover enough glass). So far we've got 477.5lbs of carry capacity for driver, gunner, passengers, and gear. Each person likely weighs roughly 200lbs which means the car has enough capacity to deal with a driver, a single gunner, and two moderately well stocked bags of supplies. Any more than this and the car will start to run into issues, a lot more than this (say, loading it up with passengers and gear) and you risk significant damage to the car's ability to continue driving. All of this assumes they don't want to beef up the rear of the car to allow the vehicle to be able to "safely" ram other obstructions in the road (in a demolition derby drivers drive, and crash into each other, backwards to protect all of the sensitive components in the engine bay).

Other:
The roman chariot style blades on the wheels of a car was tried in an episode of the tv show Top Gear and it threw off the wheel balance to the point of making the car entirely undrivable for any more than a mile or two. Also, just about the last thing you want to do when dealing with zombies is damage their legs because it's much easier to see a zombie walking than a zombie crawling (our soldiers crawl when they want to be harder to see in modern combat for a reason). The general purpose of a compact car is to be accessible (read: inexpensive), and often they utilize a small fuel efficient engine. Increasing the weight of this car by about 40% is not doing any favors to the already under powered car, and the fuel economy is going to suffer. Realistically, speed and acceleration are meaningless (of course the car will exceed the 3 mile per hour average human walking speed).

Improvements:
*Start with a different type of vehicle. Perhaps something that was designed to be large.
*Ignore the mad max spikes.


research tools:
http://www.hyundaiusa.com/elantra/specifications.aspx
http://www.hyundai-forums.com/197-i30-elantra-touring-forum/140546-load-capacity-2012-touring.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humvee
http://www.fisherplows.com/fe/showroom/homesteader
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/gauge-sheet-d_915.html
http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/scales/sheetmetal.html

@critical_d

The video is taken from the Husky Homestead near Denali National Park in Alaska.


The Husky Homestead is run by Jeff King who has won the Iditarod four times. The presenters are usually his daughters - they come home from college for the summer and work with the dogs.

In addition to the giant wheel shown in the video they also have the dogs pull ATVs and in the summer pull paddle boats (the dogs are harnessed and swim). The benefit to swimming is they don't overheat.

These dogs LOVE to run and Jeff and his family know how to take care of these dogs. The dogs' safety is a priority and they know what they are doing.

If you have a chance to visit Denali I would highly endorse visiting Husky Homestead. You get to hold a pup when you get there - which is all part of getting the dogs to trust people.

Below is me at Husky Homestead in 2009:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/112091950550424706604/albums/5396956416435499537/5396956438107352338

And after gridding 27th, he still placed 3rd in the actual race.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
You can't own land in Ethiopia, you can only lease it from the government. It is to that I am referring. Many other third world nations do not have things like titles to land, a major problem if you were trying to get a loan. No hand out suggested, mealy clear lines in which individuals establish ownership/control over objects might help their situation some, not all, but you have to start somewhere.
So what's needed, in your opinion, is redistribution of wealth. Again, government is respecting property rights -- it just has them all. To "start somewhere" with "individuals establish[ing] ownership/control" over land would mean government hand outs of land.
You know, like the US government did with various homestead acts .
Assuming by ownership of land you meant fee simple titles, and not allodial title
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
And my comments seem to be breaking in response to some of your posts today, wonder what that's about.

VS gets all cranky when you quote someone using the at sign to direct their comment at someone. Usually stripping it out (or just the code around it) fixes it.


I don't think I agree with your basic assertion that government owns all the land by default. Does the government also own your body by default as well? If not, why the arbitrary distinction? If so, grounds for abortion are possible, as well as many other oppressive things. So I don't buy the claim that, government "owns everything", nor would you I would wager. Furthermore, their is a difference between distribution and redistribution. If there is X amount of unclaimed land in the US, it can only be expected that people will make claims for it. The fact that in most cases, the land wasn't bought, but rather given by homestead acts, it served more like individuals submitting initial claims of ownership over them. In reality, this is splinting hairs anyway, as there isn't much in the way of unclaimed land anymore.

I have often thought of using an idea something similar to the Ethiopian model of property rights, however, as a means to limit the ease of transmitting wealth easily (allowing for large accumulations of it) from generation to generation. I thought it might be an interesting means to stop people from trying to horde wealth, and instead, be constantly trying to create new wealth. Instead, I think it works backwards from that. Things you don't own, you are slow to invest long term in. If I own a house, I paint the walls, put in tile floors and other things. When I rent, well honestly you probably can't do most of things, but even if you could, most wouldn't. Owning something is as primitive as it gets, and usually the means in which we use to grow things. You only truly want to grow things that are in your control. If we recognize this, we can use the strengths of it, and try to deal with its weaknesses as best we can.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

You can't own land in Ethiopia, you can only lease it from the government. It is to that I am referring. Many other third world nations do not have things like titles to land, a major problem if you were trying to get a loan. No hand out suggested, mealy clear lines in which individuals establish ownership/control over objects might help their situation some, not all, but you have to start somewhere.

So what's needed, in your opinion, is redistribution of wealth. Again, government is respecting property rights -- it just has them all. To "start somewhere" with "individuals establish[ing] ownership/control" over land would mean government hand outs of land.

You know, like the US government did with various homestead acts^*.

* Assuming by ownership of land you meant fee simple titles, and not allodial title
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
And my comments seem to be breaking in response to some of your posts today, wonder what that's about.


VS gets all cranky when you quote someone using the at sign to direct their comment at someone. Usually stripping it out (or just the code around it) fixes it.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Ima gonna let me finish, since I only did 14 back then.

15. I have an extremely boring day job that would put you to sleep if I explained it.
16. I am secretly plotting a return to the home of my birth - the USA.
17. Would like to write an SF novel, but fear I lack the discipline and talent
18. Would like to lose my American accent over here in Australia because I get tired of the first question with any stranger always being "where you from?"
19. I enjoy the show Glee - much to the dismay of most of my friends
20. No TV in our house for over 10 years
21. Started VideoSift after a 6 month, all-bank-accounts drained around the world trip with my wife and two kids
22. I once ran over a dog when delivering pizzas in high school, at night on snowy roads. It affected my driving for life
23. I can blow perfectly formed sprays of spit bubbles that float up into the air and last for up to a minute.
24. I spent a year in Salamanca, Spain as part of a university language program
25. I shat in an empty stairwell once due to explosive diarrhea that I could not contain.

Last one too much?>> ^dag:

1. I lived on the last federally granted homestead in the US in rural Alaska without running water or electricity for 5 years as a kid.
2. Had a ten speed when everyone else had a BMX, and thus never learned to tail slap.
3. Was an accomplice to deathcow stealing a LadyBug and Cosmic Adventure Colecovision cartridges from Art's Video Mart in 1984.
4. Bought my first 300 bps modem in 1985 for the Apple IIe.
5. Wore a spangly sequined vest in my high school's swing choir - and sang bass.
6. Attended Chaminade University of Honolulu for 2 years.
7. Attended Universidad de Salamanca in Spain for 1 year.
9. Worked in Osaka Japan for 3 years - probably for the Yakuza.
10. Married by a catholic priest to my Aussie wife in Japan.
11. Have acted in several community theater productions
12. Would like to have my head frozen at Alcor.
13. Can do good Sterling Holloway and Neil Diamond impressions
14. Founded best online community ever.

Also, it is within rights of a municipality to ban drilling - for example recently Pittsburgh voted to ban drilling rights within city limits. Also, at least in Allegheny county PA, homeowners don't retain the mineral rights (including drilling), so other townships can vote similar. There is a distinction between homesteads and farmsteads though, but I don't own a farm so I'm not familiar.

Personally I'm not against natural gas drilling, but I'm against the contractors who are doing it, and the corners they are cutting to save a buck. And even if you installed a Dean-Kamen-style water purifier in every home, the contaminants and heavy metals in the run-off will go to all the streams, rivers, lakes, tributaries and have a definite negative impact on the environment.

I love "explainers". Say something other people criticize, and then imply other people are stupid for not "getting" you or are just not perceiving your particular form of linguistic conveyance. And then you go on to agree with a comment that says basically what you did without using hyperbole.

Mentality said "you're the fucked up psychos". Do you not recognize hyperbole? Earlier, you used the same term (psycho) as mentality. Why is it hyberbole when you use it, but you fail to see it as such when others use it? Do you think hyberbole is incapable of relating the true feelings of a writer? Or is it just a convenient method of saying whatever bat-shit nonsense you wish, complete with back door?

Also, your proclamation of pet ownership is simply a comical appeal to authority. Is it also the basis of your behavioural profile of cat haters, such as the "c*nt"? Do you realize that more people have pets than have children? Did you intend for people to read your comment and think, "Oh look... pet owner. I thought he was just an idiot before, but it's obvious now that he knows what he's talking about."?

Your weak analogy of cat and baby is a logical fallacy in itself.>> ^shponglefan:
First of all, learn to recognize hyperbole. Second of all, as a pet owner I think you are completely full of shit.
Let me ask you this: if she had done the same to a baby, would you have the same lackadaisical reaction?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Henry Clay Frick, Homestead, Carnegie Steel, organized laboer, pinkertons, union' to 'Henry Clay Frick, Homestead, Carnegie Steel, organized labor, pinkertons, union' - edited by kronosposeidon