"I'm at home, drinking a cup of coffee, reading a news article in the morning. Not dressed up, at a fake funeral for a piece of computer software {AKA HUMOR} that isn't dead anyway. Take your sarcastic comments and dull sense of humor {ALERT, ALERT: IRONY DETECTOR AT CRITICAL THRESHOLD! DERP DERP DERP!} and shove them up your pretentious {IRONY DETECTOR HAS EXPERIENCED CORE MELTDOWN} ass."
childhood is spent absorbing every bond with your parents (to learn) the teenage years is spent dissolving every bond with your parents and your society (to become mobile) young adulthood is spent growing your own roots in society (somewhere new) old adulthood is spent raising your children (as a fixture of society)
its pretty standard psychological development
such that our kids (teenagers) have always been our enemies, since before we were even human: its simply a matter of developmental psychology that teenagers spend their years reflecting on and rejecting every bond they have with society, in order to become socially and geographically mobile, so to eventually set down their own roots somewhere new
its the same with chimpanzees
this is the only way a social creature can grow its society
but does anyone who is not brain addled and propagandized believe universal healthcare is anything remotely like north korea or cuba? thus the lies and demagoguery simple common sense faces
how the average lower middle class person is supposed to pay for healthcare in this country
the conservative answer is "shut up and get busy dying"
you don't have an answer beyond that, and it makes my blood boil. the cost of a sick society is much higher than the cost of a health care system which is attuned to taking care of people, rather than raping them for profit
"the ultimate effect of a conservative ideology is a third world country: a rich upper class of a few, and a vast underclass of poor"
The ultimate effect of a liberal ideology is a third world country: a rich elite ruling class of a few, and a vast underclass of dependents of the state.
can you point to such a society for me please? this is a pleasant fiction to support your bankrupt thinking, as this country doesn't even exist
meanwhile, i can point to many countries without a strong central government which naturally gravitate towards a rich upper class and the vast majority being poor. i don't understand why you cannot see that without strong functioning social nets this is the inevitable result of your ideology. how many examples of how many third world countries with weak central governments and no protections do you want? and yet this third world status quo is EXACTLY what you are arguing for. can you not see the obvious result of your ideology?
but the simple truth is that those who say dismissively "charity will take care of it" don't actually give to charity
such that the giving must be compulsory, for the sake of those who don't understand they are part of a society, they derive their income from a healthy functioning society, and so must be compelled to pay the maintenance they owe but don't understand. their animosity towards this compulsory payment is not derived from a superior way to run a society, but a simple stupid, shortsighted selfishness to not contribute. of course, plenty of them DO have "ideas", which when analyzed boil down to nothing more than "i got mine, fuck you" to the point of destruction of the society that sustains them: just because you believe you are an island doesn't mean you actually are one
if the contribution is voluntary, very few give, and you get a third world hell hole. i don't know why people can't see this simple truth
the ultimate effect of a conservative ideology is a third world country: a rich upper class of a few, and a vast underclass of poor
there is no room for the middle class in conservative ideology. this includes no room for middle class idiots who believe the corporate propaganda about "evuls socialisticisms". some people are their own worst enemy
the money you have in your pocket is an abstract expression of the wealth of the society you live in. if you do not invest in your society, the money in your pocket loses value. if you invest in your society, you are paid dividends of a richer society, which pays you back with more business opportunities, etc
"but dem freeloading welfare queens..."
oh shut up retard. take a look at denmark someday. tell me they aren't happier healthier and wealthier than the average american. and then take a look at their tax rate
i'd rather be taxed to high hell than worry about declaring bankruptcy if i get cancer
but the conservative answer about a rising poor underclass (made up of previous middle class people) is to buy more guns
the greatest irony/ tragedy/ comedy is how many previously lower middle class people who are now the new american poor (because of conservative initiatives like gutting depression era financial protections that created the real estate bubble) support with such rapturous passion the gutting of social safety nets that only exist to serve them. some people are full of so much stupidity and hatred- for their own neighbors, their own society, and their own government, that they only destroy themselves
but i'm not going to let the morons take us all down. and if you read my words and agree with me, roll up your sleeves: there is a real life zombie apocalypse of propagandized retards out there, and we need to fight them to save our country from their self-destructive conservative stupidity
It is usually difficult to practise anti-competitive practices unless the parties involved have significant market power or government backing.
Monopolies and oligopolies are often accused of, and sometimes found guilty of, anti-competitive practices. For this reason, company mergers are often examined closely by government regulators to avoid reducing competition in an industry.
Although anti-competitive practices often enrich those who practice them, they are generally believed to have a negative effect on the economy as a whole, and to disadvantage competing firms and consumers who are not able to avoid their effects, generating a significant social cost. For these reasons, most countries have competition laws to prevent anti-competitive practices, and government regulators to aid the enforcement of these laws.
like you said, this is mickey mouse Econ 101 stuff. why don't you understand this? why don't you appreciate the fact that on any simple moral, philosophical, or ideological basis, nevermind legal basis, that the practice you are supporting and condoning with your words is a straightforward enemy of capitalism and a free market destroyer?
It is usually difficult to practise anti-competitive practices unless the parties involved have significant market power or government backing.
Monopolies and oligopolies are often accused of, and sometimes found guilty of, anti-competitive practices. For this reason, company mergers are often examined closely by government regulators to avoid reducing competition in an industry.
Although anti-competitive practices often enrich those who practice them, they are generally believed to have a negative effect on the economy as a whole, and to disadvantage competing firms and consumers who are not able to avoid their effects, generating a significant social cost. For these reasons, most countries have competition laws to prevent anti-competitive practices, and government regulators to aid the enforcement of these laws.
what the hell is wrong with you people?
this is pretty obvious basic simple economics here. is it really true that a lot people out there believe this anticompetitive bullshit is acceptable, even legal? do you not see the common sense basis for how this sort of practice destroys the marketplace, if you don't readily appreciate the simple illegality of the practice?
one would think all of this is obvious and simple conceptually
i find it hard to believe so many of you think this is fair or legal or acceptable on any moral, legal, or philosophical basis
so: two guys show up every sunday in the small town in the mountains, 10 bags of flour each
because of this competition, they have reached a natural equilibrium on price
now the asshole shows up and buys all 20 bags of flour and demands a 400% markup
my point still stands, with your fair alteration in the allegory to make note of the fact that market conditions are being destroyed
monopolistic, anticompetitive, straight up robbery. the behavior of the asshole is not defensible from the point of view of capitalism. his behavior is not a natural function of a healthy market, it is in fact the destruction of the market and behavior which is the enemy of natural capitalism. it cries out for regulation to keep the market healthy, which will take the form of hungry townfolk with pitchforks if no government is in place
so what are you telling me? monopolies are legal? either a monopoly is legal, or it is illegal. depending upon the truth there, either you are wrong or i am wrong
so make a minimum of effort, find out they are illegal, and shut up already, moron
you counterclaim the government will then take advantage of you. so... you want no government? don't you see your vulnerability is worse without one?
i agree and understand all of your criticism of entrenched power. except that that the existence of no goverment is simply worse. so what you do is you accept the government, and work to make it as accountable and toothless as possible. such as with democracy. it will STILL result in abuses, but what you have done is minimized the abuses you will experience in your life
what you are doing, meanwhile: pointing out the abuses of government, to justify a state of being which is full of far more abuse: no government, is simply stupid
Harm you how? Because society has seen fit to push these people into criminal enterprises necessary to support their habits? Remember, they don't care about money (or anything else). If they could get their heroin prescription filled at the corner drugstore cheap, how would you be hurt?
the drug itself pushes people desperate for a fix into criminal behavior, not society. the craven need for a fix is certainly stronger than the impulse to behave morally. meanwhile, if they could get their heroin prescription at the corner drug store, they would then lose that day zoned out and unproductive in relationship or work. so i need to support them. well, why do i have to support someone's drug habit? a drug habit is not necessary. so why don't i instead prevent you from taking heroin, force you to go clean, and make you support yourself. why do i have to support people who add nothing but only suck parasitically, unproductive in a stupor? or you are going to tell me someone high on heroin can work and carry on a healthy relationship? please don't make laugh. i don't have to support you, just because you are a drug addict. you are a drag on my freedom, so i will simply prevent you from getting that which turns you into a drag on my freedom
So lets shut down the churches with this logic. Organized religion has caused society far more harm than heroin.
i agree with you 100%. there's a reason why they call it an OPIATE of the masses
Or these people are hopeless to begin with and heroin is just their way of dealing with it. Odds are that they'd be on the public dole even if they were clean.
i agree with you again. but you can't imagine that heroin compounds their hopelessness? they are obviously trying to escape some great pain. some of that pain might be temporary, such as a relationship endin. heroin won't get them over that, it will just delay their painful day of reckoning. so heroin is a tax on their time and my time: they need to bit the bullet and get over it and stop turning to me to support them while they dither. if however they have some organic psychological inability to deal with reality, that simple life is that painful, then heroin might indeed be refuge for them. but again, it doesn't solve their problem, it just gives them temporary relief, then they have an addiction and a hangover PLUS their organic psychological deficit: clearly worse than simply being in pain at life all the time. so the onyl effect when they zone out is make their pain MY pain: i have to support them. why do i have to support them simply because they are in pain organically? it is not my fault. making it my pain is not fair to me. don't be angry with me, be angry with god or darwin or whomever, but don't force me to pay for your painful life, i have my own problems. no, the truth is, heroin as a coping mechanism fails because you take your organic pain, TEMPORARILY put if off, and then you wind up with the same old organic pain PLUS a hangover PLUS an addiction: you are worse off than when you were simply in pain
monopolies, cartels, price gouging, barriers to entry, price fixing, etc...
these are the enemy of capitalism, not a part of capitalism. capitalism is the refinement of competition to achieve a maximum of efficiency. anticompetitive practices therefore have no place in natural capitalism. anticompetitive practices therefore are a greater threat to capitalism than communism
its illegal most everywhere robbery is also illegal, because its the same thing as robbery, but diffuse rather than specific
furthermore, in my example above, if the people can't afford $5, they starve. you don't consider that a problem?
what this guy is doing is nothing but robbery, but diffuse, rather than specific
it adds no value to the economy, it drains and destroys the economy, it is anticompetitive
what we are talking about here is the death of capitalism. the greatest enemy of capitalism is not communist thinking, but monopolistic and oligopolistic practices like this example. to keep capitalism healthy therefore you need constant government regulation and intervention. this really is the truth
my point is to counteract the extremely toxic libertarian and free market fundamentalist lie that markets left to their own will be healthy and fair: no, they won't. they will bubble and pop, they will be gouged, and the smaller players will be abused by larger players who take advantage of natural imperfections like in my example
in other words, the most committed capitalist in this word, if they really understand the marketplace, wants to make sure the government is heavily involved in the marketplace. but we have unfortunately in this world certain idiots who don't think about reality, but instead have this moronically simplistic, almost religious idea about how the marketplace works. and, through their ideology and efforts, such as dismantling the depression era protections that led the bubbling and popping of the current economic malaise, we all suffer mightily for their stupidity
seriously, my example above is not some hypothetical. its going on right now in a thousand markets around the world, always has been, and always will. it adds no value to the economy, its a form of parasitism. you do understand that it is a form of robbery, right? please tell me your neurons can fire on that obvious concept
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=vodak
"I'm at home, drinking a cup of coffee, reading a news article in the morning. Not dressed up, at a fake funeral for a piece of computer software {AKA HUMOR} that isn't dead anyway. Take your sarcastic comments and dull sense of humor {ALERT, ALERT: IRONY DETECTOR AT CRITICAL THRESHOLD! DERP DERP DERP!} and shove them up your pretentious {IRONY DETECTOR HAS EXPERIENCED CORE MELTDOWN} ass."
please drink more vodak
k thx
it appears you are complaining about someone wasting their time on the internet
in a comment on slashdot
lol!
while i repair my irony detector, please think about the meaning of concepts like "hypocrisy", "equivalency", and "lack of perspective"
k thx
"If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a noise?"
internet era update:
"If a webpage is published on the web and no google spider notices it, does it exist?"
near future update:
"If a thought enters your mind that is not already indexed by google, is it real?"
couldn't we instead pillory and behead it, tie it to a stake and alight it on a burning pyre, and then stomp on its corpse?
clearly, by evidence of the broken eggshells, we're talking about a primitive IRC eggdrop
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggdrop
childhood is spent absorbing every bond with your parents (to learn)
the teenage years is spent dissolving every bond with your parents and your society (to become mobile)
young adulthood is spent growing your own roots in society (somewhere new)
old adulthood is spent raising your children (as a fixture of society)
its pretty standard psychological development
such that our kids (teenagers) have always been our enemies, since before we were even human: its simply a matter of developmental psychology that teenagers spend their years reflecting on and rejecting every bond they have with society, in order to become socially and geographically mobile, so to eventually set down their own roots somewhere new
its the same with chimpanzees
this is the only way a social creature can grow its society
mod +6 please
but does anyone who is not brain addled and propagandized believe universal healthcare is anything remotely like north korea or cuba? thus the lies and demagoguery simple common sense faces
how the average lower middle class person is supposed to pay for healthcare in this country
the conservative answer is "shut up and get busy dying"
you don't have an answer beyond that, and it makes my blood boil. the cost of a sick society is much higher than the cost of a health care system which is attuned to taking care of people, rather than raping them for profit
"the ultimate effect of a conservative ideology is a third world country: a rich upper class of a few, and a vast underclass of poor"
The ultimate effect of a liberal ideology is a third world country: a rich elite ruling class of a few, and a vast underclass of dependents of the state.
can you point to such a society for me please? this is a pleasant fiction to support your bankrupt thinking, as this country doesn't even exist
meanwhile, i can point to many countries without a strong central government which naturally gravitate towards a rich upper class and the vast majority being poor. i don't understand why you cannot see that without strong functioning social nets this is the inevitable result of your ideology. how many examples of how many third world countries with weak central governments and no protections do you want? and yet this third world status quo is EXACTLY what you are arguing for. can you not see the obvious result of your ideology?
too depressing all the questions about the movie when i don't have time to finish it
translated into reality
but the simple truth is that those who say dismissively "charity will take care of it" don't actually give to charity
such that the giving must be compulsory, for the sake of those who don't understand they are part of a society, they derive their income from a healthy functioning society, and so must be compelled to pay the maintenance they owe but don't understand. their animosity towards this compulsory payment is not derived from a superior way to run a society, but a simple stupid, shortsighted selfishness to not contribute. of course, plenty of them DO have "ideas", which when analyzed boil down to nothing more than "i got mine, fuck you" to the point of destruction of the society that sustains them: just because you believe you are an island doesn't mean you actually are one
if the contribution is voluntary, very few give, and you get a third world hell hole. i don't know why people can't see this simple truth
mix it with some RED bull! party! aiiiieee! (cue allegro mariachi music)
for public or private resources
the ultimate effect of a conservative ideology is a third world country: a rich upper class of a few, and a vast underclass of poor
there is no room for the middle class in conservative ideology. this includes no room for middle class idiots who believe the corporate propaganda about "evuls socialisticisms". some people are their own worst enemy
the money you have in your pocket is an abstract expression of the wealth of the society you live in. if you do not invest in your society, the money in your pocket loses value. if you invest in your society, you are paid dividends of a richer society, which pays you back with more business opportunities, etc
"but dem freeloading welfare queens..."
oh shut up retard. take a look at denmark someday. tell me they aren't happier healthier and wealthier than the average american. and then take a look at their tax rate
i'd rather be taxed to high hell than worry about declaring bankruptcy if i get cancer
but the conservative answer about a rising poor underclass (made up of previous middle class people) is to buy more guns
the greatest irony/ tragedy/ comedy is how many previously lower middle class people who are now the new american poor (because of conservative initiatives like gutting depression era financial protections that created the real estate bubble) support with such rapturous passion the gutting of social safety nets that only exist to serve them. some people are full of so much stupidity and hatred- for their own neighbors, their own society, and their own government, that they only destroy themselves
but i'm not going to let the morons take us all down. and if you read my words and agree with me, roll up your sleeves: there is a real life zombie apocalypse of propagandized retards out there, and we need to fight them to save our country from their self-destructive conservative stupidity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticompetitive
like you said, this is mickey mouse Econ 101 stuff. why don't you understand this? why don't you appreciate the fact that on any simple moral, philosophical, or ideological basis, nevermind legal basis, that the practice you are supporting and condoning with your words is a straightforward enemy of capitalism and a free market destroyer?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticompetitive
what the hell is wrong with you people?
this is pretty obvious basic simple economics here. is it really true that a lot people out there believe this anticompetitive bullshit is acceptable, even legal? do you not see the common sense basis for how this sort of practice destroys the marketplace, if you don't readily appreciate the simple illegality of the practice?
one would think all of this is obvious and simple conceptually
i find it hard to believe so many of you think this is fair or legal or acceptable on any moral, legal, or philosophical basis
so: two guys show up every sunday in the small town in the mountains, 10 bags of flour each
because of this competition, they have reached a natural equilibrium on price
now the asshole shows up and buys all 20 bags of flour and demands a 400% markup
my point still stands, with your fair alteration in the allegory to make note of the fact that market conditions are being destroyed
monopolistic, anticompetitive, straight up robbery. the behavior of the asshole is not defensible from the point of view of capitalism. his behavior is not a natural function of a healthy market, it is in fact the destruction of the market and behavior which is the enemy of natural capitalism. it cries out for regulation to keep the market healthy, which will take the form of hungry townfolk with pitchforks if no government is in place
so what are you telling me? monopolies are legal? either a monopoly is legal, or it is illegal. depending upon the truth there, either you are wrong or i am wrong
so make a minimum of effort, find out they are illegal, and shut up already, moron
no matter what you do
the best defense is a government
you counterclaim the government will then take advantage of you. so... you want no government? don't you see your vulnerability is worse without one?
i agree and understand all of your criticism of entrenched power. except that that the existence of no goverment is simply worse. so what you do is you accept the government, and work to make it as accountable and toothless as possible. such as with democracy. it will STILL result in abuses, but what you have done is minimized the abuses you will experience in your life
what you are doing, meanwhile: pointing out the abuses of government, to justify a state of being which is full of far more abuse: no government, is simply stupid
Harm you how? Because society has seen fit to push these people into criminal enterprises necessary to support their habits? Remember, they don't care about money (or anything else). If they could get their heroin prescription filled at the corner drugstore cheap, how would you be hurt?
the drug itself pushes people desperate for a fix into criminal behavior, not society. the craven need for a fix is certainly stronger than the impulse to behave morally. meanwhile, if they could get their heroin prescription at the corner drug store, they would then lose that day zoned out and unproductive in relationship or work. so i need to support them. well, why do i have to support someone's drug habit? a drug habit is not necessary. so why don't i instead prevent you from taking heroin, force you to go clean, and make you support yourself. why do i have to support people who add nothing but only suck parasitically, unproductive in a stupor? or you are going to tell me someone high on heroin can work and carry on a healthy relationship? please don't make laugh. i don't have to support you, just because you are a drug addict. you are a drag on my freedom, so i will simply prevent you from getting that which turns you into a drag on my freedom
So lets shut down the churches with this logic. Organized religion has caused society far more harm than heroin.
i agree with you 100%. there's a reason why they call it an OPIATE of the masses
Or these people are hopeless to begin with and heroin is just their way of dealing with it. Odds are that they'd be on the public dole even if they were clean.
i agree with you again. but you can't imagine that heroin compounds their hopelessness? they are obviously trying to escape some great pain. some of that pain might be temporary, such as a relationship endin. heroin won't get them over that, it will just delay their painful day of reckoning. so heroin is a tax on their time and my time: they need to bit the bullet and get over it and stop turning to me to support them while they dither. if however they have some organic psychological inability to deal with reality, that simple life is that painful, then heroin might indeed be refuge for them. but again, it doesn't solve their problem, it just gives them temporary relief, then they have an addiction and a hangover PLUS their organic psychological deficit: clearly worse than simply being in pain at life all the time. so the onyl effect when they zone out is make their pain MY pain: i have to support them. why do i have to support them simply because they are in pain organically? it is not my fault. making it my pain is not fair to me. don't be angry with me, be angry with god or darwin or whomever, but don't force me to pay for your painful life, i have my own problems. no, the truth is, heroin as a coping mechanism fails because you take your organic pain, TEMPORARILY put if off, and then you wind up with the same old organic pain PLUS a hangover PLUS an addiction: you are worse off than when you were simply in pain
monopolies, cartels, price gouging, barriers to entry, price fixing, etc...
these are the enemy of capitalism, not a part of capitalism. capitalism is the refinement of competition to achieve a maximum of efficiency. anticompetitive practices therefore have no place in natural capitalism. anticompetitive practices therefore are a greater threat to capitalism than communism
its illegal most everywhere robbery is also illegal, because its the same thing as robbery, but diffuse rather than specific
please educate yourself
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticompetitive
surely you can appreciate how and why
furthermore, in my example above, if the people can't afford $5, they starve. you don't consider that a problem?
what this guy is doing is nothing but robbery, but diffuse, rather than specific
it adds no value to the economy, it drains and destroys the economy, it is anticompetitive
what we are talking about here is the death of capitalism. the greatest enemy of capitalism is not communist thinking, but monopolistic and oligopolistic practices like this example. to keep capitalism healthy therefore you need constant government regulation and intervention. this really is the truth
my point is to counteract the extremely toxic libertarian and free market fundamentalist lie that markets left to their own will be healthy and fair: no, they won't. they will bubble and pop, they will be gouged, and the smaller players will be abused by larger players who take advantage of natural imperfections like in my example
in other words, the most committed capitalist in this word, if they really understand the marketplace, wants to make sure the government is heavily involved in the marketplace. but we have unfortunately in this world certain idiots who don't think about reality, but instead have this moronically simplistic, almost religious idea about how the marketplace works. and, through their ideology and efforts, such as dismantling the depression era protections that led the bubbling and popping of the current economic malaise, we all suffer mightily for their stupidity
the earth has 4 CORNER SIMULTANEOUS 4-DAY TIME CUBE
http://timecube.com/
seriously, my example above is not some hypothetical. its going on right now in a thousand markets around the world, always has been, and always will. it adds no value to the economy, its a form of parasitism. you do understand that it is a form of robbery, right? please tell me your neurons can fire on that obvious concept