Tang lang kung fu We are from Paterson, NJ

Tang lang kung fu

We are from Paterson, NJ. Im DB Defiant, I dont need a gangsta beat, Let me dig into my mind and give you all a little treat, from 541 to tha 313 Aint ever met another i am. I do Ill bless u too even if it mean blessin u to a torturous doom who knew that the truth wuld hurt like this? We knew truth hurt, Does anyone know when this battle will be available? what u talkin bout klick klack kaboom? only thing you know is how to smoke out a room i aint done with ya yet take ya money, take ya girl im my kinda rhymes, my kinda name, my kinda mindset. But shit, bruh, I aint really had a battle with you yet. And in this thread, I Hope you all ready for the new info that i need to share. coming Use this control to limit the display of threads to those newer than the specified time frame. Allows you to choose the data by which the thread list will be sorted. Note: when sorting by date, descending order will show the newest results first. All times are GMT The time now is 06:16 AM. Copyright 2011 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. But as things are, the war of the sword and the war of the pens is perpetual Thomas Hobbes, De Cive There s no denying this is greatly entertaining stuff. But as with the first video, I find the pro-Hayek message rather irritating well I would, wouldn t I? To pick up on one specific thing, however, I m frustrated by the Hayek character appropriating some words of Adam Smith about human beings not being mere pieces on a chessboard. The original Smith quote, from his Theory of Moral Sentiments, runs thus: The man of system, on the contrary, is apt to be very wise in his own conceit; and is often so enamoured with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan of government, that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it. He goes on to establish it completely and in all its parts, without any regard either to the great interests, or to the strong prejudices which may oppose it. He seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess-board. He does not consider that the pieces upon the chess-board have no other principle of motion besides that which the hand impresses upon them; but that, in the great chess-board of human society, every single piece has a principle of motion of its own, altogether different from that which the legislature might chuse to impress upon it. If those two principles coincide and act in the same direction, the game of human society will go on easily and harmoniously, and is very likely to be happy and successful. If they are opposite or different, the game will go on miserably, and the society must be at tang lang kung fu times in the highest degree of disorder. Smith s point is simple but extremely important. However ingenious and complex a plan or system may be, it can never match the complexity of the world upon which it is unleashed. Each action sets off incalculable further reactions. Each human agent affected by these actions and reactions will in turn be propelled by his or her own principle of motion in ways that cannot be predicted or controlled. No plan or system ever works out the way the men of system hope. As Smith, in his typically understated way implies, failing to see this can lead to social, political and economic disaster. Libertarians and classical liberals, Austrian economists and whoever else is on the wagon this week are fond of tang lang kung fu this passage. Over at CafeHayek it is proffered as advice for would-be czars and other experts to remember. Yet libertarians et al rarely realise that Smith s reflections apply with devastating force to their own state-minimalist politics. Even in the world of minimal-state libertarian fantasy, there will inevitably be economic recessions. Eventually, at least one of these will be severe. In recessions people suffer; that s what unemployment and poverty entail, especially under the minimal state where there is presumably no welfare support. When people suffer, however, they do not sit around idly and wait for the market to fix itself whenever that might be. They take action to alleviate their sufferings as soon as possible. Under such circumstances, large-scale collective action will be taken by individuals seeking relief from suffering. Action of this sort is known as politics. In tang lang kung fu politics, human beings mobilise so as to put the levers of power into the hands of those who will or at least promise to alleviate their sufferings. In modern societies this is done via the state apparatus. Hence even if magically we start out with libertarian state minimalism, we will not stay there. The power of the state will eventually be deployed so as to interfere with the market forces currently failing to alleviate the sufferings of ordinary people. Two things follow.