As I was saying...Kibiyama wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiology?
"Psychological"
As you were saying...DarkNemesis wrote:Last edited by DarkNemesis on Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Tehw00tz wrote:I miss my headset. This headset only covers two of my ears.
Kibiyama wrote:
- We no longer have a free market. We have a tangled web of rules -- contradictory, outdated, sometimes outright screwing the "Average Joe" in favor of big business.
- We're dead scared we are of letting any business die. Businesses are supposed to come and go, evolve or get replaced by a new company.
- Everything is owned by a very small number (about 6) of big businesses.
- We spend money like it's nothing, we print money like it's nothing, and as a result it has become nothing.
Elreth wrote:it never ceases to amaze me how opinionated people can be when they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about
Uh, except this is a poll, not a discussion board.Elreth wrote:it never ceases to amaze me how opinionated people can be when they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about
Because there's a huge difference between a "reply" and a "discussion" to something.jamn455 wrote:No, you vote and discuss your vote and the topic. If there isn't anything to talk about, why do you reply every 3-4 messages with your opinions?
well how about you stop "replying" and just give up then.DarkNemesis wrote:Because there's a huge difference between a "reply" and a "discussion" to something.jamn455 wrote:No, you vote and discuss your vote and the topic. If there isn't anything to talk about, why do you reply every 3-4 messages with your opinions?
And that's the point, isn't it? That's exactly what a my reply's were....reply's, not discussions and/or arguments, at least for the most part.
Prove me wrong. The only thing I can see you disputing is the 6 companies thing. My source for that is Zeitgeist, though, so honestly I sort of dispute it too.Storamin wrote:...I think that covers it.Elreth wrote:it never ceases to amaze me how opinionated people can be when they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about
Tehw00tz wrote:I miss my headset. This headset only covers two of my ears.
Why don't you remind Jamn and Tehwootz while your at it.Storamin wrote:well how about you stop "replying" and just give up then.DarkNemesis wrote:Because there's a huge difference between a "reply" and a "discussion" to something.jamn455 wrote:No, you vote and discuss your vote and the topic. If there isn't anything to talk about, why do you reply every 3-4 messages with your opinions?
And that's the point, isn't it? That's exactly what a my reply's were....reply's, not discussions and/or arguments, at least for the most part.
i think you proved yourself wrong there.Kibiyama wrote:Prove me wrong. The only thing I can see you disputing is the 6 companies thing. My source for that is Zeitgeist, though, so honestly I sort of dispute it too.Storamin wrote:...I think that covers it.Elreth wrote:it never ceases to amaze me how opinionated people can be when they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about
DarkNemesis wrote:Why don't you remind Jamn and Tehwootz while your at it.
Oh yeah, that's because your in on the troll fest.
Phrased in an alarmist way, yet nevertheless has a decent amount of truth in it. To say the market isn't still mostly free is wrong, and it still operates pretty damn well, but its absolutely not completely free.We no longer have a free market. We have a tangled web of rules -- contradictory, outdated, sometimes outright screwing the "Average Joe" in favor of big business.
Absolutely true. Bad business decisions should lead to the company dying, not having taxpaye dollars to fund even more bad decisions. One of the best quotes i read during the auto bailout pointed out that bankruptcy IS a bailout, a releasing or delaying payment of debt.We're dead scared we are of letting any business die. Businesses are supposed to come and go, evolve or get replaced by a new company.
Bullshit, especially now that i know its from zeitgeist ;PEverything is owned by a very small number (about 6) of big businesses.
Again accurate, the highest deficit was set a few years ago at around $300b, now Obama's (Mr Hope of all people) talking about trillions lost per year as far as we can see. And there's no denying the dollar has lost alot of buying power in the past 8 years (although it has shown signs of recovering since around july). I will dispute that we print money like its nothing though...if that were the case, we'd be seeing insane inflation, not this moderate rise. Certainly we print more then we should, but its not like we're printing it to pay off the national debt over a year.We spend money like it's nothing, we print money like it's nothing, and as a result it has become nothing.
Yeah, I'll retract that. I was being intentionally extremist because this thread was all "Let's echo what we hear on the news and pretend we're actually discussing something so we feel intellectual."DarnYak wrote:Bullshit, especially now that i know its from zeitgeist ;P
It's either free or it's not. As long as we've got enough choices to satisfy most people, consumers will think it's "free enough." But small businesses are fucked, and big businesses are more often co-conspirators than competitors.DarnYak wrote:To say the market isn't still mostly free is wrong, and it still operates pretty damn well, but its absolutely not completely free.
Tehw00tz wrote:I miss my headset. This headset only covers two of my ears.
One anti free law doesn't make the entire thing non-free, its far more of a sliding scale.It's either free or it's not.
Uh, this IS the free market. Not necessarily a healthy one, but the government didn't mandate that text messages cost money or anything. Bad example, its more of one of how too free of a market sucks when there's not sufficient competition.Text messages, for example -- the first company that had the idea to make people pay for those should've been ridiculed and the rest should've provided it for free. But instead they all hopped onboard and made tons of money off of something that costs them virtually nothing.
"Let's echo what we hear on the news and pretend we're actually discussing something so we feel intellectual."
I hope you weren't excluding yourself."But that's just the climate, that's saying nothing of how the government is screwing over the little guy. I won't pretend to know the specifics there, I just know that that's how it is. As long as there've been politicians, there've been corrupt politicians."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economyIt's either free or it's not.
Do you have another way of doing it? You claim to want a 'free market', yet you seem willing to put restrictions on certain things that you feel should be resources to everyone and to prevent people from exploiting opportunities to make money out of them that would result in a lot of people getting hurt. Regardless of flutters to the good or evil side of your moral compass, that's basically what the United States and many other major-world economies do, except it doesn't involve itself in the frivolous 10-cent market of texting (because a) that doesn't really hurt anyone, b) they have to deal with scarier shit every year).Text messages, for example -- the first company that had the idea to make people pay for those should've been ridiculed and the rest should've provided it for free. But instead they all hopped onboard and made tons of money off of something that costs them virtually nothing.
It's probably better to explain those rules and go over the specific ones you disagree with, because some of those rules save small business' lives yearly. The United States is one of the most hospitable places for small business in the entire world, and every "big business" corporation was generally at some point, a small business. Is it perfect? No. But really you can't generalize like that without providing a little more evidence as to what you mean and why it is you mean and why you think it sucks.We no longer have a free market. We have a tangled web of rules -- contradictory, outdated, sometimes outright screwing the "Average Joe" in favor of big business.
There are few things worth sourcing from Zeitgeist and that certainly was not one of them.Prove me wrong. The only thing I can see you disputing is the 6 companies thing. My source for that is Zeitgeist, though, so honestly I sort of dispute it too.
So you just want us to vote, but not actually discuss the matter?DarkNemesis wrote:Uh, except this is a poll, not a discussion board.Elreth wrote:it never ceases to amaze me how opinionated people can be when they have no idea what the fuck they are talking about
There really isn't any thing to talk about, you just vote.
No it doesn't.Perhaps wrote:Trolling requires intent to provoke. In which case I don't think that's their intentions for this thread. Well a few posts are, but most aren't. Though flame and trolling can go hand to hand, regardless there's a sizable contrast. Someone who'd be a troller but not really a flamer, myself. Someone who'd be a flamer but not so much a troller would be Jamn455.
got my MBA from a top b school 25 school and CPA license and stopped unless somebody was paying for my opinionDarnYak wrote:Storamin, I suggest you say more against what people say instead of just accusing them to not know what the fuck they're talking about, because at the moment that person looks like you.
You're certainly trivializing what Obama wants to do. I guess I don't understand -- paying for the army is somehow better spending than giving students access to the internet?DarkNemesis wrote: Moving on...
What I find funny and ironic is Obama bitching about Bush and his deficit, yet he want's to spend three times as much, or more, (800 billion-1 trillion) to so called "boost" the economy. There is no doubt Bush spent way too much, that's a no-brainer, but at least, for the most part, his spending went to stuff like defense and the army. Obama, however, wants to give all little kids in Arkansas high-speed internet access and hire government workers to screw in light bulbs in public buildings, as if it requires so much arduous labor.