Topic: If the government wishes to keep us safe from the terrorists...
Anonymous A started this discussion 12 years ago #33,577
...Why are they funding Al-Qaeda and giving them weapons to topple the secular nations of the middle east?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later[^] [v] #464,379
Op is socialist
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,380
Geopolitical chess. It's pure ideology.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,394
Because they've been funding Al-Qaeda since the 9-11 false flag attack, duh.
Ned Flander joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 25 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,395
@previous (D)
we helped fund and supply weapons for al qaeda and other muslim regimes even b4 9/11 when combatting the spread of communism.
we helped fund and supply weapons for al qaeda and other muslim regimes even b4 9/11 when combatting the spread of communism.
Metæ joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,399
@464,394 (D)
Actually it goes back to the 1980s when we were fighting a proxy war with the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
Actually it goes back to the 1980s when we were fighting a proxy war with the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 40 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,403
@previous (Metæ)
I can believe it. US leadership has been hostile to the Constitution and the Citizenry for several decades now.
I can believe it. US leadership has been hostile to the Constitution and the Citizenry for several decades now.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 57 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,404
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 3 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,410
@464,403 (D)
@previous (Metæ)
The fuck is it with Americans deifying ~the Constitution~? You shouldn't need to derive decent treatment of other human beings from some archaic document like that.
@previous (Metæ)
The fuck is it with Americans deifying ~the Constitution~? You shouldn't need to derive decent treatment of other human beings from some archaic document like that.
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,411
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 8 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,412
@464,410 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
So rule of law is deprecated? Politicians should do whatever they want and government should have limitless power?
So rule of law is deprecated? Politicians should do whatever they want and government should have limitless power?
Ned Flander replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,416
@464,410 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
that's retarded. you're retarded. not that I give a fuck about politics or anything.
that's retarded. you're retarded. not that I give a fuck about politics or anything.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,419
@464,410 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
I'm actually really happy you would ask this. The US Constitution seems to lay out what decent treatment means. (We have obviously forgotten the principle of the law and have become slaves to the letter of it as we still hold people and do horrific shit under the claim we're doing right because they aren't US citizens and we can do whatever we like to "enemy combatants" not under the protection of anything resembling basic human rights.) Wheeee! Yay! Beacon of fucking rational thinking and democracy! That's us! Every day our citizens see this and other countries see this, our claim of respecting personal and moral rights erodes steadily. Our claim of respecting basic human rights has eroded to the point of laughability.
As it goes, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights isn't bad... It's just we only seem to apply those rights when you are on our side. :/ (Yeah, I'm sorry about that. I wish I could could change the trainwreck that is US politics, but I can't)
I'm actually really happy you would ask this. The US Constitution seems to lay out what decent treatment means. (We have obviously forgotten the principle of the law and have become slaves to the letter of it as we still hold people and do horrific shit under the claim we're doing right because they aren't US citizens and we can do whatever we like to "enemy combatants" not under the protection of anything resembling basic human rights.) Wheeee! Yay! Beacon of fucking rational thinking and democracy! That's us! Every day our citizens see this and other countries see this, our claim of respecting personal and moral rights erodes steadily. Our claim of respecting basic human rights has eroded to the point of laughability.
As it goes, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights isn't bad... It's just we only seem to apply those rights when you are on our side. :/ (Yeah, I'm sorry about that. I wish I could could change the trainwreck that is US politics, but I can't)
floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,423
Thats what you get from big government, big problems.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 5 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #464,434
@464,410 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and we require our government officials to take an oath to uphold it for a goddamn reason.
It's not deification to observe they lied in taking the oath, simply doing whatever it takes to secure power. That's basic accountability, and it suggests they are working towards ends which may not be in the best interests of the Unites States or it's citizens.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and we require our government officials to take an oath to uphold it for a goddamn reason.
It's not deification to observe they lied in taking the oath, simply doing whatever it takes to secure power. That's basic accountability, and it suggests they are working towards ends which may not be in the best interests of the Unites States or it's citizens.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,448
@464,410 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
In a less politically correct, less pussified era, more than half of current US politicians would have been executed for high treason by now.
In a less politically correct, less pussified era, more than half of current US politicians would have been executed for high treason by now.
floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc replied with this 12 years ago, 38 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,451
@previous (D)
> In a less politically correct, less pussified era, more than half of current US politicians would have been executed for high treason by now.
We don't even need congress. I'd start downsizing government by doing away with the senate first. Really all we need are state reps anyway.
> In a less politically correct, less pussified era, more than half of current US politicians would have been executed for high treason by now.
We don't even need congress. I'd start downsizing government by doing away with the senate first. Really all we need are state reps anyway.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,454
@previous (floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc)
The more I think about it, the more I think human leadership is obsolete. Open source robot overlords may be the only solution. At least those can be trusted to do as their programming instructs.
The more I think about it, the more I think human leadership is obsolete. Open source robot overlords may be the only solution. At least those can be trusted to do as their programming instructs.
floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc replied with this 12 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,459
@previous (D)
I'd be happy if we'd just deregulate everything and cut government till it's tiny and powerless.
I'd be happy if we'd just deregulate everything and cut government till it's tiny and powerless.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,477
@464,416 (Ned Flander)
Ableist slurs and "I don't fucking care about politics". Screams peak liberalism to me!
@464,419 (H)
American politics probably isn't entirely beyond repair! (Just that repair would entail a total teardown.)
@464,434 (J)
> it suggests they are working towards ends which may not be in the best interests of the Unites States or it's citizens.
This is the problem with politicians. They're elected to do the best thing for their constituents.
What the fuck about non-constituents who are affected by the policies of these politicians? I'm honestly of the belief that people in positions of power oughta think about everyone, not just the people who they technically have direct jurisdiction over.
@464,448 (D)
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand what about the millions of non-Americans that those fucks have gotten slaughtered via CIA intervention or "liberation" invasions? The US has done cataclysmic damage to many parts of the world, and the politicians responsible aren't gonna get held accountable because... well just take a look at how >0 ex-Presidents have gotten a fucking Nobel Peace Prize when most of them deserve to be prosecuted for war crimes!
@previous (floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc)
So that entirely deregulated corporations can rule everything. Yep. Cool. Much ethical, very justice, wow.
Ableist slurs and "I don't fucking care about politics". Screams peak liberalism to me!
@464,419 (H)
American politics probably isn't entirely beyond repair! (Just that repair would entail a total teardown.)
@464,434 (J)
> it suggests they are working towards ends which may not be in the best interests of the Unites States or it's citizens.
This is the problem with politicians. They're elected to do the best thing for their constituents.
What the fuck about non-constituents who are affected by the policies of these politicians? I'm honestly of the belief that people in positions of power oughta think about everyone, not just the people who they technically have direct jurisdiction over.
@464,448 (D)
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand what about the millions of non-Americans that those fucks have gotten slaughtered via CIA intervention or "liberation" invasions? The US has done cataclysmic damage to many parts of the world, and the politicians responsible aren't gonna get held accountable because... well just take a look at how >0 ex-Presidents have gotten a fucking Nobel Peace Prize when most of them deserve to be prosecuted for war crimes!
@previous (floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc)
So that entirely deregulated corporations can rule everything. Yep. Cool. Much ethical, very justice, wow.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,480
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
> So that entirely deregulated corporations can rule everything. Yep. Cool. Much ethical, very justice, wow.
And yet we have that WITH regulation. There's a revolving door for executives between regulatory agencies and the corporations they regulate.
Regulation is simply a mechanism for stifling competition by erecting artificial barriers to entry. They sell it as salvation to the ignorant, same as any priesthood.
> So that entirely deregulated corporations can rule everything. Yep. Cool. Much ethical, very justice, wow.
And yet we have that WITH regulation. There's a revolving door for executives between regulatory agencies and the corporations they regulate.
Regulation is simply a mechanism for stifling competition by erecting artificial barriers to entry. They sell it as salvation to the ignorant, same as any priesthood.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,509
@464,477 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
What about the millions Stalin and Mao killed off?
@464,459 (floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc)
At least get it vaguely back within constitutional limits.
@464,477 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
What is it with leftists scared of "deregulated" corporations but slavishly worshipping deregulated government?
@previous (D)
State regulation has failed so we need more regulation to fix it. Government regulation and licensing is re-creating the medieval guild system.
What about the millions Stalin and Mao killed off?
@464,459 (floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc)
At least get it vaguely back within constitutional limits.
@464,477 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
What is it with leftists scared of "deregulated" corporations but slavishly worshipping deregulated government?
@previous (D)
State regulation has failed so we need more regulation to fix it. Government regulation and licensing is re-creating the medieval guild system.
Anonymous H replied with this 12 years ago, 58 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,513
@previous (Metæ)
> What is it with leftists scared of "deregulated" corporations but slavishly worshipping deregulated government?
In short, it's because a government of the people keeps a check on corporate power. See: 20th century US history. When politics suddenly becomes a slave to deregulated business, shit goes amazingly wrong. (Yay! No bid contracts! Sound fucking familiar??) If we actually have a "government of the people" there to watch for that, then it might work out. But maybe we don't anymore.
I seriously don't think we can trust people (or corporations, because they are people too!) acting to enrich themselves to suddenly stop enriching themselves and become philanthropists once they have enough to live comfortably. If you think they might, please show me some examples of corporations that have done that. (And really, examples of individuals who have done that are hanging around, but Bill Gates and Warren Buffet (as cool as they are now) are off the table as they attained "wealthiest man in the world" status long before they started having liberal leanings.)
> What is it with leftists scared of "deregulated" corporations but slavishly worshipping deregulated government?
In short, it's because a government of the people keeps a check on corporate power. See: 20th century US history. When politics suddenly becomes a slave to deregulated business, shit goes amazingly wrong. (Yay! No bid contracts! Sound fucking familiar??) If we actually have a "government of the people" there to watch for that, then it might work out. But maybe we don't anymore.
I seriously don't think we can trust people (or corporations, because they are people too!) acting to enrich themselves to suddenly stop enriching themselves and become philanthropists once they have enough to live comfortably. If you think they might, please show me some examples of corporations that have done that. (And really, examples of individuals who have done that are hanging around, but Bill Gates and Warren Buffet (as cool as they are now) are off the table as they attained "wealthiest man in the world" status long before they started having liberal leanings.)
(Edited 26 seconds later.)
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 48 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,519
@previous (H)
I think you've confused business with charity. Businesses (at least the ones that don't file for Chapter 11) are in the business of making a profit. This is as true for small business mom-and-pop establishments as it is for Apple or Amazon. Sometimes companies do philanthropy, and sometimes they don't. Asking for a selfless charitable corporation is like asking "Well if the Salvation Army is so good why didn't they help us take out Saddam?"
In a free market, companies and owners enrich themselves by satisfying desires. Example: Apple makes desirable, easy to use, fashionable iThings, which satisfy wants and needs. People hand over cash for iStuff and Apple gets richer. Apple can't force anybody to buy iStuff. They can't force anybody to work for them. Apple can only make money to the extent that it satisfies the needs and wants of its employees owners and customers. No one is forced at gunpoint to buy an iPhone.
Will crooked politicians and avaricious businessmen try to conspire to make big bucks? Of course. The best solution is to minimize these opportunities by restricting government to its role of protecting freedom, courts, and national defense.
Why do you think all businessmen are 19th century robber baron caricatures who would bite the head off a live kitten for a dollar and all politicians and legislators are just selfless public servants looking out for "the people"?
I think you've confused business with charity. Businesses (at least the ones that don't file for Chapter 11) are in the business of making a profit. This is as true for small business mom-and-pop establishments as it is for Apple or Amazon. Sometimes companies do philanthropy, and sometimes they don't. Asking for a selfless charitable corporation is like asking "Well if the Salvation Army is so good why didn't they help us take out Saddam?"
In a free market, companies and owners enrich themselves by satisfying desires. Example: Apple makes desirable, easy to use, fashionable iThings, which satisfy wants and needs. People hand over cash for iStuff and Apple gets richer. Apple can't force anybody to buy iStuff. They can't force anybody to work for them. Apple can only make money to the extent that it satisfies the needs and wants of its employees owners and customers. No one is forced at gunpoint to buy an iPhone.
Will crooked politicians and avaricious businessmen try to conspire to make big bucks? Of course. The best solution is to minimize these opportunities by restricting government to its role of protecting freedom, courts, and national defense.
Why do you think all businessmen are 19th century robber baron caricatures who would bite the head off a live kitten for a dollar and all politicians and legislators are just selfless public servants looking out for "the people"?
Anonymous H replied with this 12 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,520
@previous (Metæ)
> This is as true for small business mom-and-pop establishments as it is for Apple or Amazon.
lolno
> They can't force anybody to work for them. Apple can only make money to the extent that it satisfies the needs and wants of its employees owners and customers.
Of course not! HAHAHAHAHA!
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html
> Will crooked politicians and avaricious businessmen try to conspire to make big bucks? Of course. The best solution is to minimize these opportunities by restricting government
You live a goddamn fantasy world.
> This is as true for small business mom-and-pop establishments as it is for Apple or Amazon.
lolno
> They can't force anybody to work for them. Apple can only make money to the extent that it satisfies the needs and wants of its employees owners and customers.
Of course not! HAHAHAHAHA!
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html
> Will crooked politicians and avaricious businessmen try to conspire to make big bucks? Of course. The best solution is to minimize these opportunities by restricting government
You live a goddamn fantasy world.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 9 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,521
@464,513 (H)
Also its incredibly quaint for $5 million dollars to be a huge corruption scandal. That's not even a rounding error in Washington today.
Also its incredibly quaint for $5 million dollars to be a huge corruption scandal. That's not even a rounding error in Washington today.
Metæ double-posted this 12 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,522
@464,520 (H)
> > This is as true for small business mom-and-pop establishments as it is for Apple or Amazon.
> lolno
Source?
> > They can't force anybody to work for them. Apple can only make money to the extent that it satisfies the needs and wants of its employees owners and customers.
> Of course not! HAHAHAHAHA!
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
You missed the part in the article where people in China are flocking to these factories because its considered a good job in China.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html
> daily fail
> opiniom
> > Will crooked politicians and avaricious businessmen try to conspire to make big bucks? Of course. The best solution is to minimize these opportunities by restricting government
> You live a goddamn fantasy world.
Please explain how my free market fantasy world is any less realistic than your altruistic Marxist selfless politicians fantasy world.
> > This is as true for small business mom-and-pop establishments as it is for Apple or Amazon.
> lolno
Source?
> > They can't force anybody to work for them. Apple can only make money to the extent that it satisfies the needs and wants of its employees owners and customers.
> Of course not! HAHAHAHAHA!
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
You missed the part in the article where people in China are flocking to these factories because its considered a good job in China.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382396/Workers-Chinese-Apple-factories-forced-sign-pledges-commit-suicide.html
> daily fail
> opiniom
> > Will crooked politicians and avaricious businessmen try to conspire to make big bucks? Of course. The best solution is to minimize these opportunities by restricting government
> You live a goddamn fantasy world.
Please explain how my free market fantasy world is any less realistic than your altruistic Marxist selfless politicians fantasy world.
Anonymous H replied with this 12 years ago, 17 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,525
@previous (Metæ)
> Source?
Did that. You pretty much just dismissed people in China literally dying for a job.
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
> You missed the part in the article where people in China are flocking to these factories because its considered a good job in China.
You missed the part where you were arguing that capitalism works.
> daily fail
Fair enough, but yeah... Super happy capitalist workers are... not working. Just committing suicide... :( Why??
> your altruistic Marxist selfless politicians fantasy world.
I'm not a Marxist, and I don't have a fantasy world with selfless politicians in it. Sorry.
> Source?
Did that. You pretty much just dismissed people in China literally dying for a job.
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
> You missed the part in the article where people in China are flocking to these factories because its considered a good job in China.
You missed the part where you were arguing that capitalism works.
> daily fail
Fair enough, but yeah... Super happy capitalist workers are... not working. Just committing suicide... :( Why??
> your altruistic Marxist selfless politicians fantasy world.
I'm not a Marxist, and I don't have a fantasy world with selfless politicians in it. Sorry.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,527
@previous (H)
> > Source?
> Did that. You pretty much just dismissed people in China literally dying for a job.
Oh, I thought you were doubting the part where I said small businesses were in for profit just like large businesses. My bad.
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
> > You missed the part in the article where people in China are flocking to these factories because its considered a good job in China.
> You missed the part where you were arguing that capitalism works.
But it is: it's raising wages and living standards in China. Not that I'm arguing that Shenzhen is Galt's Gulch or anything but even working at Foxconn is better than subsistence agriculture for a lot of people in China.
> > daily fail
> Fair enough, but yeah... Super happy capitalist workers are... not working. Just committing suicide... :( Why??
Suicide is global: young bankers are killing themselves even though they're going to be the future 1%.
> > your altruistic Marxist selfless politicians fantasy world.
> I'm not a Marxist, and I don't have a fantasy world with selfless politicians in it. Sorry.
Do you think that politicians and bureaucrats are somehow more honest or selfless than businessmen? If so, why?
> > Source?
> Did that. You pretty much just dismissed people in China literally dying for a job.
Oh, I thought you were doubting the part where I said small businesses were in for profit just like large businesses. My bad.
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html
> > You missed the part in the article where people in China are flocking to these factories because its considered a good job in China.
> You missed the part where you were arguing that capitalism works.
But it is: it's raising wages and living standards in China. Not that I'm arguing that Shenzhen is Galt's Gulch or anything but even working at Foxconn is better than subsistence agriculture for a lot of people in China.
> > daily fail
> Fair enough, but yeah... Super happy capitalist workers are... not working. Just committing suicide... :( Why??
Suicide is global: young bankers are killing themselves even though they're going to be the future 1%.
> > your altruistic Marxist selfless politicians fantasy world.
> I'm not a Marxist, and I don't have a fantasy world with selfless politicians in it. Sorry.
Do you think that politicians and bureaucrats are somehow more honest or selfless than businessmen? If so, why?
Anonymous H replied with this 12 years ago, 17 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,528
@previous (Metæ)
> Oh, I thought you were doubting the part where I said small businesses were in for profit just like large businesses.
I don't doubt that. It's usually just on a different scale. Small business does things like give back to the community and foster growth. (At least in the great libertarian dream) Apparently small or big business in China just demands people do shit. It doesn't give a fuck if they die.
> even working at Foxconn is better than subsistence agriculture
Not if you off yourself...
> Suicide is global
Yep. It is. That's... not an argument about why a particular group of workers are doing it. Drinking water is global. It's not weird that some Foxconn employees drink some water now and then. Some Foxconn employees drink a whole lot of water sometimes... Not newsworthy. Nothing to see here. Move along.
> Do you think that politicians and bureaucrats are somehow more honest or selfless than businessmen?
Politicians are at least beholden to a constituency and have a vested interest in protecting that constituency. They are there to represent a slice of the population. (As opposed to representing... what? What the board of directors thinks the population wants based on a report from marketing?? How does that even work?)
> Oh, I thought you were doubting the part where I said small businesses were in for profit just like large businesses.
I don't doubt that. It's usually just on a different scale. Small business does things like give back to the community and foster growth. (At least in the great libertarian dream) Apparently small or big business in China just demands people do shit. It doesn't give a fuck if they die.
> even working at Foxconn is better than subsistence agriculture
Not if you off yourself...
> Suicide is global
Yep. It is. That's... not an argument about why a particular group of workers are doing it. Drinking water is global. It's not weird that some Foxconn employees drink some water now and then. Some Foxconn employees drink a whole lot of water sometimes... Not newsworthy. Nothing to see here. Move along.
> Do you think that politicians and bureaucrats are somehow more honest or selfless than businessmen?
Politicians are at least beholden to a constituency and have a vested interest in protecting that constituency. They are there to represent a slice of the population. (As opposed to representing... what? What the board of directors thinks the population wants based on a report from marketing?? How does that even work?)
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,535
@464,509 (Metæ)
Yes, Stalin and Mao did kill people! Such an insightful observation!
Even their tens of millions of deaths aren't gonna scale up to the sheer scope of the destruction caused by American imperialistic capitalism, though — that literally kills tens of millions of people per year via entirely preventable starvation, extreme overworking, economically-motivated wars, and lack of medical services.
@464,522 (Metæ)
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahnope. They're being fucking forced by ~market forces~ to work in poor conditions at low wages because that's what ~the market~ fucking wants. The market can fuck itself and fucking pay $21/hour as a minimum wage and provide good working conditions for even the lowest-tier jobs.
Yes, Stalin and Mao did kill people! Such an insightful observation!
Even their tens of millions of deaths aren't gonna scale up to the sheer scope of the destruction caused by American imperialistic capitalism, though — that literally kills tens of millions of people per year via entirely preventable starvation, extreme overworking, economically-motivated wars, and lack of medical services.
@464,522 (Metæ)
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahnope. They're being fucking forced by ~market forces~ to work in poor conditions at low wages because that's what ~the market~ fucking wants. The market can fuck itself and fucking pay $21/hour as a minimum wage and provide good working conditions for even the lowest-tier jobs.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #464,542
@464,509 (Metæ)
> State regulation has failed so we need more regulation to fix it. Government regulation and licensing is re-creating the medieval guild system.
Something was tried and didn't work, therefore we need MORE of it. LOL. Thanks for proving libtard insanity is based on ignorance of experimental results and irrational faith in a false premise.
> State regulation has failed so we need more regulation to fix it. Government regulation and licensing is re-creating the medieval guild system.
Something was tried and didn't work, therefore we need MORE of it. LOL. Thanks for proving libtard insanity is based on ignorance of experimental results and irrational faith in a false premise.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,573
@464,535 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
If you got a job paying more than the average salary in Canada, would you voluntarily redistribute the excess to the poor working masses?
> American imperialistic capitalism, though — that literally kills tens of millions of people per year via entirely preventable starvation, extreme overworking, economically-motivated wars, and lack of medical services.
And none of these were present in the Soviet Bloc, Vietnam, China, North Korea, or Cuba?
Why would Cubans living in the worker's paradise construct makeshift boats and risk their lives to be worked 120 hours a week for two cents an hour and be starved to death in Imperialist America?
If you got a job paying more than the average salary in Canada, would you voluntarily redistribute the excess to the poor working masses?
> American imperialistic capitalism, though — that literally kills tens of millions of people per year via entirely preventable starvation, extreme overworking, economically-motivated wars, and lack of medical services.
And none of these were present in the Soviet Bloc, Vietnam, China, North Korea, or Cuba?
Why would Cubans living in the worker's paradise construct makeshift boats and risk their lives to be worked 120 hours a week for two cents an hour and be starved to death in Imperialist America?
Ned Flander replied with this 12 years ago, 14 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,582
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,585
@previous (Ned Flander)
You want workers to be whipped to death in a Dickensian workhouse for an annual salary of half a farthing per decade while emaciated street urchins say "please, sir, can I have some more?" and get brutally beaten for requesting more gruel while business owners swim in an olympic sized pool of gold coins like Scrooge McDuck
You want workers to be whipped to death in a Dickensian workhouse for an annual salary of half a farthing per decade while emaciated street urchins say "please, sir, can I have some more?" and get brutally beaten for requesting more gruel while business owners swim in an olympic sized pool of gold coins like Scrooge McDuck
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,595
@previous (Metæ)
> references fiction and Disney mind control propaganda instead of historical facts
> expects to be taken seriously
Keep going with that mind control pal. It's not like it's calculated to destroy you or anything.
> references fiction and Disney mind control propaganda instead of historical facts
> expects to be taken seriously
Keep going with that mind control pal. It's not like it's calculated to destroy you or anything.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,597
@previous (D)
Communism has an unbroken track record of improving living standards for all. It has been an unabashed success in every country that has tried it. If a few million Chinese die in the Great Leap Forward, thats nothing compared to the 500 million people capitalist exploitation kills every second.
Communism has an unbroken track record of improving living standards for all. It has been an unabashed success in every country that has tried it. If a few million Chinese die in the Great Leap Forward, thats nothing compared to the 500 million people capitalist exploitation kills every second.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 16 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,601
Ned Flander replied with this 12 years ago, 36 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,608
@464,585 (Metæ)
I really don't give a shit in the long run as long as I have weed and sex. I'm just enjoying my stay, as far as I'm concerned the human race can go fuck itself after I'm dead.
I really don't give a shit in the long run as long as I have weed and sex. I'm just enjoying my stay, as far as I'm concerned the human race can go fuck itself after I'm dead.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,634
@464,573 (Metæ)
I'd voluntarily campaign for redistribution of that sort to be applied internationally — there are no individual solutions to systematic problems.
On the other hand, if I've got spare cash laying around, why not donate some?
@464,582 (Ned Flander)
Still in the intellectual tradition of liberalism as per the left/SJ/Mao definition.
I'd voluntarily campaign for redistribution of that sort to be applied internationally — there are no individual solutions to systematic problems.
On the other hand, if I've got spare cash laying around, why not donate some?
@464,582 (Ned Flander)
Still in the intellectual tradition of liberalism as per the left/SJ/Mao definition.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,638
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
> I'd voluntarily campaign for redistribution of that sort to be applied internationally — there are no individual solutions to systematic problems.
That's not what I asked, though. Would you donate your wages above the national average to the poor?
> I'd voluntarily campaign for redistribution of that sort to be applied internationally — there are no individual solutions to systematic problems.
That's not what I asked, though. Would you donate your wages above the national average to the poor?
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 26 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,644
@previous (Metæ)
It's utterly useless unless everyone who earns above average does the same. Your question is wrong.
It's utterly useless unless everyone who earns above average does the same. Your question is wrong.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 51 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,665
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
So you only believe in redistribution if it spends other peoples money?
Do you feel the same way about charity? If a homeless man asked you for a dollar would you say "I'd voluntarily campaign for welfare of that kind, but my individual contribution is meaningless"?
So you only believe in redistribution if it spends other peoples money?
Do you feel the same way about charity? If a homeless man asked you for a dollar would you say "I'd voluntarily campaign for welfare of that kind, but my individual contribution is meaningless"?
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,675
@previous (Metæ)
If a homeless person asked, and I had cash on me, I'd give 'em some.
Also glad that I have a contrarian tulpa, now.
If a homeless person asked, and I had cash on me, I'd give 'em some.
Also glad that I have a contrarian tulpa, now.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,727
@464,644 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
If you ended up making $100,000 a year and donated half (GDP per capita in Canada is ~50k) to several poor families, I don't think they would see it as "utterly useless". In fact, the fact you did so voluntarily, without government coercion would make you a moral example to be followed. Its easy to redistribute other peoples money, but doing so yourself shows you take "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" seriously.
If you ended up making $100,000 a year and donated half (GDP per capita in Canada is ~50k) to several poor families, I don't think they would see it as "utterly useless". In fact, the fact you did so voluntarily, without government coercion would make you a moral example to be followed. Its easy to redistribute other peoples money, but doing so yourself shows you take "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" seriously.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 12 years ago, 7 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,761
@464,665 (Metæ)
I believe in redistribution of wealth when it's done though leveling the playing field as opposed to employing the government in direct theft, which is really how rich people wound up with all the money. We all know lawmakers have been helping their campaign contributors.
I'll never understand why people think we can build a grand society by rationalizing theft into a thing which is moral and just. LOL retards: no principles, no justice. It really is as simple as that.
But as with all things, the ignorant are there to invite their own destruction.
I believe in redistribution of wealth when it's done though leveling the playing field as opposed to employing the government in direct theft, which is really how rich people wound up with all the money. We all know lawmakers have been helping their campaign contributors.
I'll never understand why people think we can build a grand society by rationalizing theft into a thing which is moral and just. LOL retards: no principles, no justice. It really is as simple as that.
But as with all things, the ignorant are there to invite their own destruction.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 42 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,765
@464,727 (Metæ)
It's not easy to redistribute the money of others when they can just run off to other countries with tax structures more tuned towards allowing the rich to get richer. :v
It's not easy to redistribute the money of others when they can just run off to other countries with tax structures more tuned towards allowing the rich to get richer. :v
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,769
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,770
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,772
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
Actually most countries have progressive tax codes where rates go up with income.
Actually most countries have progressive tax codes where rates go up with income.
(Edited 25 seconds later.)
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM replied with this 12 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,773
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 43 seconds later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,774
@464,772 (Metæ)
Yes, they do—
—but they're far too generous at the top end. Anything over a million should be taxed at ≥90%. Literally no one needs nor deserves that much money.
Yes, they do—
—but they're far too generous at the top end. Anything over a million should be taxed at ≥90%. Literally no one needs nor deserves that much money.
(Edited 18 seconds later.)
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,776
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
Why not make the 90% tax rate kick in, at say, 75k a year?
Why not make the 90% tax rate kick in, at say, 75k a year?
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 20 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,778
@previous (Metæ)
Less political opposition in the meantime. Start where it's easiest to get the money; evaluate strategies from there.
Less political opposition in the meantime. Start where it's easiest to get the money; evaluate strategies from there.
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,779
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 13 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,781
@previous (bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM)
Fuck the poor, amirite? The middle class needs their leased BMWs and iPhones.
Fuck the poor, amirite? The middle class needs their leased BMWs and iPhones.
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM replied with this 12 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,782
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,784
@previous (bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM)
The 100% tax rates will find generous state benefits and employment. Everyone will be rich.
The 100% tax rates will find generous state benefits and employment. Everyone will be rich.
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM replied with this 12 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,787
squeegee !first/o5zA joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,789
we should have a guaranteed minimum income of 25k a year, and a maximum income of 100k a year with 100% tax on anything over 100k.
Then socialize all oil and gas production, transportation, and sales.
Also socialize insurance.
This would literally solve all of the worlds problems and bring about global peace.
Then socialize all oil and gas production, transportation, and sales.
Also socialize insurance.
This would literally solve all of the worlds problems and bring about global peace.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,793
@previous (squeegee !first/o5zA)
But what happens if people just decide not to work and cash in their $25k?
But what happens if people just decide not to work and cash in their $25k?
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,796
@previous (Metæ)
Cash it in for what? Oh, goods and/or services provided by someone who does actual work.
Cash it in for what? Oh, goods and/or services provided by someone who does actual work.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,797
@previous (bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM)
No, the government will just print goods and services and money to pay for such.
No, the government will just print goods and services and money to pay for such.
bookshelf !yWRRh9MpJM replied with this 12 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,798
@previous (Metæ)
People will still want to spend money on things besides the basic items the government will print for everybody.
People will still want to spend money on things besides the basic items the government will print for everybody.
Anonymous J replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,799
@464,774 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
Keep dreaming. You powerless poorfags always think the mythological all-powerful beast of government is going to save you. Are you so blind not to see the force of government exists entirely on the backs of mercenaries and bureaucrats who's only real interest is getting paid? Well, rich people make that possible and poorfags do not. It's that fucking simple, and that's why you'll all be rounded up and exterminated one day by your precious governments 'of the people'.
But don't feel too bad about it, I'm sure some evil utilitarian fuckface will have brainwashed you idiots into accepting 'redistribution of health' by then, so at least your organs will live on in the bodies of political elites.
You dumb shits bitch about the system being ruled by wealth while still imagining your vote has an influence. Your vote is secured as easily as telling you want you want to hear. Wake up. If you empower government to redistribute wealth they will redistribute it to the powerful, not to you tools who believe everything their C-averaging, poorfag public school teachers indoctrinated them with.
The cognitive dissonance would be humorous were it not so sadly pathological. You'll never come out ahead. You're inviting government to behave like an abusive parent in some lame attempt to compensate for your lack of courage and dignity, and you're actually stupid enough to imagine this abusive parent could ever love you.
Keep dreaming. You powerless poorfags always think the mythological all-powerful beast of government is going to save you. Are you so blind not to see the force of government exists entirely on the backs of mercenaries and bureaucrats who's only real interest is getting paid? Well, rich people make that possible and poorfags do not. It's that fucking simple, and that's why you'll all be rounded up and exterminated one day by your precious governments 'of the people'.
But don't feel too bad about it, I'm sure some evil utilitarian fuckface will have brainwashed you idiots into accepting 'redistribution of health' by then, so at least your organs will live on in the bodies of political elites.
You dumb shits bitch about the system being ruled by wealth while still imagining your vote has an influence. Your vote is secured as easily as telling you want you want to hear. Wake up. If you empower government to redistribute wealth they will redistribute it to the powerful, not to you tools who believe everything their C-averaging, poorfag public school teachers indoctrinated them with.
The cognitive dissonance would be humorous were it not so sadly pathological. You'll never come out ahead. You're inviting government to behave like an abusive parent in some lame attempt to compensate for your lack of courage and dignity, and you're actually stupid enough to imagine this abusive parent could ever love you.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 5 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,822
@previous (J)
Tough guy objectivist throwing around homophobic slurs while placing themselves in some kind of magical position of objectivity above the people.
Cute.
Tough guy objectivist throwing around homophobic slurs while placing themselves in some kind of magical position of objectivity above the people.
Cute.
floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc replied with this 12 years ago, 17 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,828
@464,789 (squeegee !first/o5zA)
Why would any ever work if everyone got 25k?
What's the incentive to get a job?
Why would any ever work if everyone got 25k?
What's the incentive to get a job?
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 49 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,839
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 23 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,843
@464,789 (squeegee !first/o5zA)
> Also socialize insurance.
Curious that you would put your only sensible recommendation last. Please don't lump good ideas in with batshit insane ones. It's detrimental to society.
> Also socialize insurance.
Curious that you would put your only sensible recommendation last. Please don't lump good ideas in with batshit insane ones. It's detrimental to society.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 22 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,848
@464,822 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
How much more proof do you guys need that big government = big corruption? Do you actually have to wake up in concentration camps before you'll get it?
How much more proof do you guys need that big government = big corruption? Do you actually have to wake up in concentration camps before you'll get it?
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 19 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,851
@previous (M)
I don't get how you think that the free market can be trusted any more than that. Desires for efficiency and profit at the expense of humanity need to be kept in check either by structural impossibility or some sort of force.
I don't get how you think that the free market can be trusted any more than that. Desires for efficiency and profit at the expense of humanity need to be kept in check either by structural impossibility or some sort of force.
Anonymous M replied with this 12 years ago, 19 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,854
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
> profit at the expense of humanity
That's precisely where you're wrong. Never forget the slavery of the 19th century was a legally regulated activity.
In a truly free market, profit is impossible without healthy humanity. But in a regulated market, profit is legally guaranteed.
> profit at the expense of humanity
That's precisely where you're wrong. Never forget the slavery of the 19th century was a legally regulated activity.
In a truly free market, profit is impossible without healthy humanity. But in a regulated market, profit is legally guaranteed.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,857
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 13 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,860
@464,854 (M)
That's libertarian mythology which relies upon every single person being perfectly informed, perfectly empathetic, and perfectly benevolent in intentions.
@previous (D)
I'm only in support of efficiency when it's done in a humane manner towards the benefit of all humanity. Efficiency is cool when it's possible to have in a humane manner — if it can only be done via exploitation, it can be thrown in the fucking trash.
That's libertarian mythology which relies upon every single person being perfectly informed, perfectly empathetic, and perfectly benevolent in intentions.
@previous (D)
I'm only in support of efficiency when it's done in a humane manner towards the benefit of all humanity. Efficiency is cool when it's possible to have in a humane manner — if it can only be done via exploitation, it can be thrown in the fucking trash.
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,863
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
Can you fix Detroit, genius? When you do, then we'll talk.
Can you fix Detroit, genius? When you do, then we'll talk.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 12 years ago, 47 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,873
@previous (D)
I'm not even from Detroit. Haven't been there, haven't lived there, don't know what the people of Detroit want in any specific terms.
I'm not even from Detroit. Haven't been there, haven't lived there, don't know what the people of Detroit want in any specific terms.
HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,915
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
They want more money so they can pump out even more nigger criminals. They're no different from the Africans and Haitians.
They want more money so they can pump out even more nigger criminals. They're no different from the Africans and Haitians.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 5 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,968
@previous (HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY)
Profit=evil. Now that GM is bankrupt and no longer really profitable, it's no longer evil.
The citizens of Detroit are gathered around singing Kumbaya now that the evil businessmen have all been removed.
Profit=evil. Now that GM is bankrupt and no longer really profitable, it's no longer evil.
The citizens of Detroit are gathered around singing Kumbaya now that the evil businessmen have all been removed.
decibelmilliwatts !!beW+FQoWB replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #464,993
@464,915 (HaikerensGuide !dBGi/iH4eY)
I'm not even gonna respond to arguments if they contain slurs, just saying. That's entirely unacceptable behaviour.
I'm not even gonna respond to arguments if they contain slurs, just saying. That's entirely unacceptable behaviour.
TheOwl !xi8/JKFwzo joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #465,004
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 24 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #465,012
@previous (TheOwl !xi8/JKFwzo)
All real monopolies (like AT&T pre-1984) are kept in place by government force.
All real monopolies (like AT&T pre-1984) are kept in place by government force.
Anonymous J replied with this 12 years ago, 25 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #465,014
@previous (Metæ)
Yeah but it's preplanned Hegelian dialectic meant to create permanent oligopolies for the fascists.
Regulate for a time to erect barriers to entry and contain the number of viable new entrants. Later, deregulate for a time to buy up the new blood. After which you regulate, deregulate, regulate... ad infinitum to ensure all new businesses or inventions of consequence ultimately come under control of the corporatist oligarchy.
This is the real reason it takes money to make money. You have to buy up the political whores every decade or so.
Yeah but it's preplanned Hegelian dialectic meant to create permanent oligopolies for the fascists.
Regulate for a time to erect barriers to entry and contain the number of viable new entrants. Later, deregulate for a time to buy up the new blood. After which you regulate, deregulate, regulate... ad infinitum to ensure all new businesses or inventions of consequence ultimately come under control of the corporatist oligarchy.
This is the real reason it takes money to make money. You have to buy up the political whores every decade or so.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #465,016
@previous (J)
What's funny is those who hate oligopoly are the most strident advocates of regulation and barriers to entry in business.
But of course politicians would never be bought and paid for -- they're just selfless public servants representing the people.
What's funny is those who hate oligopoly are the most strident advocates of regulation and barriers to entry in business.
But of course politicians would never be bought and paid for -- they're just selfless public servants representing the people.
Anonymous J replied with this 12 years ago, 1 day later, 5 days after the original post[^] [v] #465,255
@previous (Metæ)
It's not funny at all. In fact it's expected human behavior. The weak and fearful always resort to hypoagency. Those who can't afford shit love to blame the successful and expect government to do something about it FOR THEM.
But of course, hypoagency only works when you're giving up something in exchange. Those who buy into the myth 'rule of law' can be maintained though democratic processes actually believe a vote matters, which is why they're being destroyed ATM. Those with wealth and productivity know the truth: money talks and bullshit walks. Which is why they've already taken over the world and built themselves comfy survival bunkers in the Ozarks.
It's not funny at all. In fact it's expected human behavior. The weak and fearful always resort to hypoagency. Those who can't afford shit love to blame the successful and expect government to do something about it FOR THEM.
But of course, hypoagency only works when you're giving up something in exchange. Those who buy into the myth 'rule of law' can be maintained though democratic processes actually believe a vote matters, which is why they're being destroyed ATM. Those with wealth and productivity know the truth: money talks and bullshit walks. Which is why they've already taken over the world and built themselves comfy survival bunkers in the Ozarks.
(Edited 32 seconds later.)
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 12 years ago, 2 days later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #465,709
@465,012 (Metæ)Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do, we do!
Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do, we do!
Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do, we do!
Who robs cavefish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do!
We do!!!
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 20 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #465,837
The government wishes to have a monopoly on terrorism. Actually call them out on their terrorist ways though, and you'll only get the response of a Pee-Wee Herman sized intellect: 'I know you are but what am I'. It's a laughably brilliant con for those of us fortunate enough to own investments in large security and military contractors.
Metæ replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #465,854
@465,255 (J)
There's always free cheese in the mousetrap.
@465,709 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
My god I remember when that show was good!
There's always free cheese in the mousetrap.
@465,709 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
My god I remember when that show was good!
floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc replied with this 12 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #465,858
floorboard !hbZVTk6JYc double-posted this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #465,860
i remember when we had good old fashioned dictators and monarchs. democracy is such shit compared to every other available system...