More Calvin on Time Preference

(Click to Enlarge)

Of course he has already made all those snowballs — his capital stock — but those are sunk costs, so I still think this is about time preference.

O.P.B.

Sometimes I leave comments on Other People’s Blogs.

Libertarian critter says, “I’m pretty sure that everyone, save a few hate filled radical leftie anarcho-frauds, supports the troops.”

To which I reply:

If you can tell me what it means to “support the troops” I’ll tell you if I do or don’t. What does support mean?

I’m not hate-filled, not lefty let alone radical lefty, and I don’t know what an anarcho-fraud is, but I don’t think I am one. And yet, if you ask me if I support the troops, I’d say No!

My support goes to very few people, certainly not people I don’t know — unless they are actively representing a principle I do stand for. The “troops” don’t count.

In fact, the troops count less than most: if there’s anything that unites them as individuals, it’s their willingness to relinquish the responsibilities of free will to the glorification of the State in the name of patriotism. I don’t see how any decent person could support such nonsense.

A willingness to kill under orders is not a virtue. Neither is “following orders” an excuse for violating anyone’s rights.

Unless supporting X means only that I do not actively wish harm upon X — in which case it is an almost useless concept — then I do not support “our” troops.

And on a lighter note, the literal-minded one writes of idiom blending, such as “your significant half” or “under the eight-ball” to which I add:

My favorite idiom blend was from the college drama club, combining “looking for fresh talent” and “needing new blood” into “We’re looking for fresh blood!”

One after-college acquaintance told me a certain iconoclast had been “totally hanged at the stake.” (But that was the same acquaintance who, when told that J. Edgar Hoover was a closeted homosexual, said “Wow, a gay president!”)