Questions from the Lovers - Fire Bre | Starting Strength Radio #75
Printable View
I enjoyed the talk about libertarianism. One point I like to make for people that want more federal government intervention is that people suck. It’s much better when they are dispersed. A bunch of people doing terrible, but unfocused things is much more preferable than a focused federal government doing terrible things.
Sounds more like anarchy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukesdad23
I think the people of Cambodia would have preferred anarchy to Pol Pot. But I don't know, Hurling, maybe people are so in love with authority that the mere suggestion of anything that sounds like anarchy makes them turn in their parents for sedition.
Looks to me like most of those who once identified as anarchists are now BLM/antifa. Any takers?
Anarchocommunism is a popular thing among them. They postulate that in the absence of government humanity would self-organize into a communist society. This seems to be the most commonly expressed anarchy on the internet. Somehow they believe their worthless pursuit of art studies will be valued in this future utopia, or that they are the intellectuals that will guide the path of all the laborers who they are rescuing from the slavery of capitalists. Or some shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark E. Hurling
There are other flavors of anarchism, notably here would be anarchocapitalism. They postulate a life of free exchange without any need for government oversight. Their utopia is of rugged individuals and voluntary associations coordinating and competing guided by the Invisible Hand. Or some other shit.
Both are distinct from a government that allows individuals to exercise liberty within agreed-upon rules based on timeless principles.
OK then. I guess I tend to simplify things a little too much. A poisonous reptile is something to be avoided or killed. It seems less important to me to differentiate some of the finer gradations among the critters. But thanks all the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchless
Dear Rip — I was just watching the call-in „Questions from the Lovers“ (Starting Strength Radio episode #75) and I was really impressed with your responses to the two guys in their early 20’s about how they should continue to train — essentially, 3800 cal/day, 250-300 g of protein and don’t worry about your weight until you are done getting novice gains.
I wondered basically how this advice would change (if at all) with a much older trainee. I offer myself as an example:
Age: 55
Height: 6’ 4“
Weight: 253 lbs
Waist: 45 inches
Squat: 230 lbs
DL: 275 lbs
Bench press: 150 lbs
These numbers are after 6 weeks of linear progression. In a way, I feel like I am like the second caller — that 45 inch waist is worrisome — but I am also more than twice his age.
How does your general thinking on how I would optimally mange things change in my old man case?
Thanks for any input.
Old guys can't do this, for reasons detailed here: The Barbell Prescription: Strength Training for Life After 40 – The Aasgaard Company
