Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 124

Thread: Obama Wealth Spread

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Obama Wealth Spread


  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuSMS17shAc[/ame]

  3. #3
    ***el X Mercenary Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Socionix sleeper cell
    TIM
    Te-ISTp
    Posts
    1,413
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Scary.

    "His feeling that this world is not his Fatherland, and that it does not represent his proper condition, so to speak—his feeling that, basically, he 'comes from afar'—will remain a fundamental element which will not give rise to mystical escapism and spiritual weakness, but rather will enable him to minimise, to relativise, to refer to higher concepts of measure and limit, all that can seem important and definitive to others, starting with death itself, and will confer on him calm force and breadth of vision." — Julius Evola

    SLI-Te | 5w6 sp/so
    Oldham Solitary

    Johari
    Nohari

  4. #4
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    SAVE US FROM THE COMMYS

    SOCIALISM SOCIALISM COMMUNISM COMMUNISM COLD WAR 2 COLD WAR 2


    edited out because of faith in DJ

    PUTIN IS COMING AFTER US
    PUTIN IS COMING AFTER US
    PUTIN IS COMING AFTER US PUTIN IS COMING AFTER US
    PUTIN IS COMING AFTER US

    OH NOES OH NOES OH NOES OH NOES

    COMMUNISM SOCIALISM COMMUNISM SOCIALISM

    and

    BARAQ IS A TERRORIST COMMUNIST

    TERRORIST COMMUNIST

    Last edited by UDP; 10-15-2008 at 06:23 AM.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  5. #5
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    -- perhaps like me you're just making fun of the situation



    PS: Not only is he a terrorist communist, Barrraq is a
    black terrorist communist

    A black terrorist communist who is also a fake christian

    Baraq Sodom Hussein Communist Terrorist Communist Terrorist Negro Antichrist

    There, that's the bumper sticker. It's been fully derived.
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,687
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't trust Obama. I has read about him. He's an Arab.

  7. #7
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hellothere View Post
    I don't trust Obama. I has read about him. He's an Arab.
    That so needs to be lolcat'd.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    -- perhaps like me you're just making fun of the situation



    PS: Not only is he a terrorist communist, Barrraq is a
    black terrorist communist

    A black terrorist communist who is also a fake christian

    Baraq Sodom Hussein Communist Terrorist Communist Terrorist Negro Antichrist

    There, that's the bumper sticker. It's been fully derived.
    He's a blatant socialist.

    I'm sorry, but far left = big government socialism, and Barack Obama's actual record is literally 100% (that's one hundred percent) far left.

    His comments to that plumber were scary, and many people are just refusing to see it.

  9. #9
    heath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,722
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    a large portion of the world functions under socialism, somehow, somewhere.
    asd

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heath View Post
    a large portion of the world functions under socialism, somehow, somewhere.
    That is misleading, because governments who enact socialist policies can only afford to do so because of the capitalist free market. Otherwise, the inherent inefficiency of such systems becomes too expensive, and the government just collapses and/or starts opening its doors to a capitalist market. Even China learned this (the hard way).

  11. #11
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heath View Post
    a large portion of the world functions under socialism, somehow, somewhere.
    What's your point?

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drommel View Post
    What's your point?
    That socialism is good and doesn't have countless irreconcilable flaws that were disproved centuries ago that its exponents tend to totally ignore.

  13. #13
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't see how he's successfully making that argument. Just because something exists doesn't mean it's good, or efficient, or right. Many countries functioned under a monarch.

  14. #14
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,625
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    I'm sorry, but far left = big government socialism
    Nope. Every political party = big government socialism.

    That socialism is good and doesn't have countless irreconcilable flaws that were disproved centuries ago that its exponents tend to totally ignore.
    That's actually commuism btw (not that I think socialism any good, but it's also not completely infeasible (tho it may not be optimal)).
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nope. Every political party = big government socialism.
    Um.. Therefore, far left = big government socialism?


    That's actually commuism btw (not that I think socialism any good, but it's also not completely infeasible (tho it may not be optimal)).
    They both amount to special interests v consumers.

  16. #16
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,625
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Um.. Therefore, far left = big government socialism?
    Oh sorry you're right, yes.

    They both amount to special interests v consumers.
    It's true that in a democracy probably two of the biggest problems are agency (namely that those who are in charge of the decisions often aren't directly affected by them) and the noisy minority - silent majority problem (which for example results in extremely large subsiding of agriculture). Somehow, though, a part of state-rulership seem to have a positive psychological effect on the members of the state itself, so that has to be taken into account in the equation to estabilish the optimal choice.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drommel View Post
    I don't see how he's successfully making that argument. Just because something exists doesn't mean it's good, or efficient, or right. Many countries functioned under a monarch.
    Right.

    Another example of socialism's weakness can be seen in the direct link between the various subsidies given to workers and unemployment.

    It's "not fair" that some workers don't make as much money as others, so let's force the companies to pay them more. Sounds good in theory, right? Sure. But the problem is that the net effect of such laws makes it more expensive for companies to hire workers, thereby reducing net employment and encouraging companies to outsource.

    It's special interests (i.e., one particular group of workers) vs other workers who can't find work.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's true that in a democracy probably two of the biggest problems are agency (namely that those who are in charge of the decisions often aren't directly affected by them) and the noisy minority - silent majority problem (which for example results in extremely large subsiding of agriculture).
    And that's another example of special interests (farmers) winning out against every consumer in America, (and in other countries, I'm sure) who can't buy the cheaper imported dairy and meat products if it means that American farmers will go out of business. The higher prices we pay for such goods are in effect a subsidy of the livelihood of farmers.

    Somehow, though, a part of state-rulership seem to have a positive psychological effect on the members of the state itself, so that has to be taken into account in the equation to estabilish the optimal choice.
    Huh?

  19. #19
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,625
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    It's "not fair" that some workers don't make as much money as others, so let's force the companies to pay them more. Sounds good in theory, right? Sure. But the problem is that the net effect of such laws make it more expensive for companies to hire workers, thereby reducing net employment and encouraging companies to outsource.
    It's not so simple, really. I'm not going to make one of those long theoretical points you say you dislike, but just as a quick rewiev of your posts, if we take:

    w = market equilibrium wage
    w+t = minimum wage
    c = costs of outsorcing
    w(c) = outsoruced wage

    then by definition we have that w<w(c)+c; as long as w+w+t<w(c)+c firms won't have an incentive to outsource, so that if we have w<w+t<w(c)+c companies will not be encourage to outsource. There's a margin for the government to maneuvre his policies. Problems need to be analyzed without ideologies restricting the thought-process.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    It's not so simple, really. I'm not going to make one of those long theoretical points you say you dislike, but just as a quick rewiev of your posts, if we take:

    w = market equilibrium wage
    w+t = minimum wage
    c = costs of outsorcing
    w(c) = outsoruced wage

    then by definition we have that w<w(c)+c; as long as w+w+t<w(c)+c firms won't have an incentive to outsource, so that if we have w<w+t<w(c)+c companies will not be encourage to outsource. There's a margin for the government to maneuvre his policies. Problems need to be analyzed without ideologies restricting the thought-process.
    Why didn't you just say that the cost of minimum wage doesn't always justify outsourcing?

    Anyway, the minimum wage will nevertheless be passed on to consumers in some form, whether in fewer jobs or higher prices.

  21. #21
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    He's a blatant socialist.

    I'm sorry, but far left = big government socialism, and Barack Obama's actual record is literally 100% (that's one hundred percent) far left.

    His comments to that plumber were scary, and many people are just refusing to see it.

    Why on earth do you care what that plumber is going through?
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  22. #22
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,931
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    Why didn't you just say that the cost of minimum wage doesn't always justify outsourcing?

    Anyway, the minimum wage will nevertheless be passed on to consumers in some form, whether in fewer jobs or higher prices.
    Everybody has to buy products, but not everybody has to employ people - i.e. an increase in the minimum wage benefits the poorer parts of society, and businesses may have to become more efficient as a result. Also, If every business is obliged to pay their employees at least the minimum wage, this may mean that their employees have extra capital to spend on products.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2005
    TIM
    D-LSI-Ti 1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    11,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
    Why on earth do you care what that plumber is going through?
    BECAUSE OF A NIFTY WORD CALLED "EXTRAPOLATION"

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    Everybody has to buy products, but not everybody has to employ people - i.e. an increase in the minimum wage benefits the poorer parts of society, and businesses may have to become more efficient as a result. Also, If every business is obliged to pay their employees at least the minimum wage, this may mean that their employees have extra capital to spend on products.
    So millions of people making the minimum wage of zero are a benefit to society?

  24. #24
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,931
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    So millions of people making the minimum wage of zero are a benefit to society?
    I don't think a higher minimum wage necessarily means fewer jobs, because it is possible for companies to pay the higher-ups less.

    According to wikipedia (oh dear) the UK has one of the highest gross annual minimum wages in the world. I'm not sure if there is a standard way of determining unemployment rates, but from a cursory search I get the impression that the US unemployment rate is slightly higher than the UK unemployment rate at the moment.
    Last edited by Subteigh; 10-16-2008 at 01:29 AM.

  25. #25
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    I don't think a higher minimum wage necessarily means fewer jobs, because it is possible for companies to pay the higher-ups less.
    Most minimum wagers aren't employed in companies with massive executive salaries. They're small business employees.
    According to wikipedia (oh dear) the UK has one of the highest gross annual minimum wages in the world. I'm not sure if there is a standard way of determining unemployment rates, but from a cursory search I get the impression that the US unemployment rate is slightly higher than the UK unemployment rate at the moment.
    What's happening at the moment doesn't represent history. Over the last 10+ years, the U.S. has had a lower unemployment rate.

  26. #26
    UDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East Coast West Coast Dirty South
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    14,826
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    BECAUSE OF A NIFTY WORD CALLED "EXTRAPOLATION"

    very
    interesting
    Pre-2013 post are written with incomplete understanding.

  27. #27
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subterranean View Post
    Everybody has to buy products, but not everybody has to employ people - i.e. an increase in the minimum wage benefits the poorer parts of society, and businesses may have to become more efficient as a result. Also, If every business is obliged to pay their employees at least the minimum wage, this may mean that their employees have extra capital to spend on products.
    You're stating the obivous -- higher wages means more money for those employed -- and ignoring any consequence of that. The costs of higher minimum wage gets past on to consumers, negating any preceived gain. You're just resetting the starting line, not making any actual economic gains.

  28. #28
    force my hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,334
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by discojoe View Post
    His comments to that plumber were scary, and many people are just refusing to see it.
    That if you make over $250,000 a year your taxes might increase?

    God forbid.

    We all know in these tight, economic times (for which the Republicans are entirely blameless and it's all the Democrats fault - true story, I heard it from a conservative pundit and they're never wrong), $250k doesn't go very far. Good thing that 95% of Americans make nowhere near that amount of money and therefore will be spared this cruel and unusual economic raping.
    SLI/ISTp -- Te subtype

  29. #29
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by force my hand View Post
    That if you make over $250,000 a year your taxes might increase?

    God forbid.

    We all know in these tight, economic times (for which the Republicans are entirely blameless and it's all the Democrats fault - true story, I heard it from a conservative pundit and they're never wrong), $250k doesn't go very far. Good thing that 95% of Americans make nowhere near that amount of money and therefore will be spared this cruel and unusual economic raping.
    Justify raising his taxes. How will it benefit him?

  30. #30
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it is time for a celebration. obama killed mccain in the debate. i just watched it and... wow. i was expecting obama to do well on matters of the economy, but his performance was nothing less than flawless. his ability to explain himself in both detail and simplicity, and his understanding of economics, is really commendable. before tonight he had a significant lead in the polls. now there is no doubt. he will be the next president. on every topic, obama put a good idea fourth. but more then that, he explained his ideas in detail, and these details actually made sense and were concretely plausible. recognize how rare that is for a presidential candidate. mccain had maybe 2 or 3 good ideas, but each of them were overshadowed by obamas. on the rest of the issues, he kept it very vague. there were a couple points in the debate where he reverted to full out appeal to emotion simply because he couldn't answer the question in light of obama overpowering him. the only point, of the 15 or so, which mccain won, was perhaps the most irrelevant one: the issue of vouchers, and charter schools, checks and balances placed on teaching staff, and generally how they may improve the educational system on an everyday, law by law level. and you know what happened there? Obama actually agreed with mccain, other then on the issue of vouchers, which i am not familiar with.
    mccains primary focus, the entire debate, as he had very few ideas to put fourth, was in attacking obamas ideas. obama dealt with these attacks with simplicity and clarity. this is the man we need for president, and there is no doubt about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Drommel View Post
    Justify raising his taxes. How will it benefit him?
    he is morally obligated to assist those less fortunate than him. he should be honored he has the opportunity to do so. the bottom line is someone has to pay taxes, and you have to make a choice between who can pay them and who can't pay them. it's not a matter of complaining about freedom and equality in the name of selfishness and negligence, it's a matter of coming to grips with reality, and giving in to the need to harbor a sense of altruism. just as we are obligated, as the most powerful country on earth, to assist those countries around the world less fortunate than ourselves; to step in and stop ethnic cleansing in africa, or to assist in the fight against aids, in the same manner we are also obligated to help those less fortunate than ourselves in our own country. this is the moral burden of power, and it means living up to the highly celebrated but often times hollow ideal of being an american. imagine hearing someone say "justify the usa sending peacekeeping troops to africa. how will this benefit the usa?"
    Last edited by crazedrat; 10-16-2008 at 06:00 AM.

  31. #31
    ***el X Mercenary Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Socionix sleeper cell
    TIM
    Te-ISTp
    Posts
    1,413
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    he is morally obligated to assist those less fortunate than him.
    Bull.

    "His feeling that this world is not his Fatherland, and that it does not represent his proper condition, so to speak—his feeling that, basically, he 'comes from afar'—will remain a fundamental element which will not give rise to mystical escapism and spiritual weakness, but rather will enable him to minimise, to relativise, to refer to higher concepts of measure and limit, all that can seem important and definitive to others, starting with death itself, and will confer on him calm force and breadth of vision." — Julius Evola

    SLI-Te | 5w6 sp/so
    Oldham Solitary

    Johari
    Nohari

  32. #32
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    he is morally obligated to assist those less fortunate than him. he should be honored he has the opportunity to do so. the bottom line is someone has to pay taxes, and you have to make a choice between who can pay them and who can't pay them. it's not a matter of complaining about freedom and equality in the name of selfishness and negligence, it's a matter of coming to grips with reality, and giving in to the need to harbor a sense of altruism. just as we are obligated, as the most powerful country on earth, to assist those countries around the world less fortunate than ourselves; to step in and stop ethnic cleansing in africa, or to assist in the fight against aids, in the same manner we are also obligated to help those less fortunate than ourselves in our own country. this is the moral burden of power, and it means living up to the highly celebrated but often times hollow ideal of being an american. imagine hearing someone say "justify the usa sending peacekeeping troops to africa. how will this benefit the usa?"
    He's not morally obligated to assist anyone, and neither is the U.S. morally obligated to assist the rest of the world.

    Taxes are about where money ends up being put to the best use: In the hands of the government or the hands of those who earn it. The government has increasingly spent more compared to GDP and done increasingly little. What has benefitted the entire nation and the world, specifically those in most of need, has been cold, hard capitalism. Capitalism has made living standards much higher for everyone, lifted millions out of poverty, and brought peace to much of the world.

    The Federal government is not suppose to the nations keeper. It's role is suppose to be that of protecting the nation so that citizens can pursue their own needs.

  33. #33
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the accumulation of excessive and irrelevant power is not without a price. it is from the lower class which the upper class draws their wealth; and the lower class is a servant of the upper class. when the spread between the lower and upper class extends too far, as it has in america, it is your duty to your fellow man, and to those who put you into your place of favor to begin with, to return to that which has granted you so much benefit. the idea of the accumulation of power and wealth is intrsically flawed to begin with, and is the driving force behind global destruction. In the strictest logic, he is morally obligated to sell all his unnecessary possessions, as are every one of us.


    Capitalism has not brought peace to the world. It has driven the world to the brink of collapse, no different than a petri dish of bacteria polluting its environment and wiping out the entire colony- a natural cycle which can be observed again and again, and is occuring on a global economic scale. This is apparent to anyone who opens their eyes. The united states has the greatest wealth spread of any nation. Capitalism actually creates a further potential for poverty. With higher standard of living comes the implied maintenance of this standard of living, which actually ends up complicating and making life more top heavy and maintenance oriented than before. The benefits of capitalism are an illusion which can't be understood by someone stuck within its grips. If you moved to new zealand or some desert island you might come to understand

  34. #34
    I had words here once, but I didn't feed them Khola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    3,535
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Meanwhile, here in Australia, beer, sunshine and well........no that's about it. Love this place ^.^
    Hello, my name is Bee. Pleased to meet you .



  35. #35
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    the accumulation of excessive and irrelevant power is not without a price. it is from the lower class which the upper class draws their wealth; and the lower class is a servant of the upper class. when the spread between the lower and upper class extends too far, as it has in america, it is your duty to your fellow man, and to those who put you into your place of favor to begin with, to return to that which has granted you so much benefit. the idea of the accumulation of power and wealth is intrsically flawed to begin with, and is the driving force behind global destruction. In the strictest logic, he is morally obligated to sell all his unnecessary possessions, as are every one of us.
    Neither class is servant to the other. It's symbiotic: All of their exchanges are mutually benefitial, otherwise they wouldn't be making them. Your understanding of the world is fundamentally wrong.

    People are, in no way, obligated to sacrifice for one another.

    Capitalism has not brought peace to the world. It has driven the world to the bring of collapse, no different than a pool of bacteria polluting its environment and wiping out the entire colony- a natural cycle which can be observed in nature, and observed on a global scale by anyone who opens their eyes. The united states has the greatest wealth spread of any nation. With higher standard of living comes the implied maintenance of this standard of living, which actually ends up complicating and making life more top heavy and maintenance oriented than before.
    You're very wrong. Nations that used to hate each other now tolerate each other, because their economies are interconnected. You need to explore history a little more. The world used to be a much more violent place before global trade came about.

    Stop updating your post
    Last edited by Drommel; 10-16-2008 at 06:37 AM. Reason: He updated my post; I'm responding to his.

  36. #36
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    global economics have been the underlying driving force behind every war since the french revolution. i think it is you who need to study history more, my friend. google a fellow named rothschild, learn about the banks of england, and the business cycle. all facts, and all stuff you need to learn before we continue talking

  37. #37
    ***el X Mercenary Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Socionix sleeper cell
    TIM
    Te-ISTp
    Posts
    1,413
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    it is from the lower class which the upper class draws their wealth;
    And it is from the upper class which the lower class draws their salary.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    and the lower class is a servant of the upper class.
    Employer/employee.

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    In the strictest logic, he is morally obligated to sell all his unnecessary possessions, as are every one of us.
    Who's logic? Who has the right to "morally obligate" one individual into doing something against his will when no laws have been broken nor rights of others violated?

    "His feeling that this world is not his Fatherland, and that it does not represent his proper condition, so to speak—his feeling that, basically, he 'comes from afar'—will remain a fundamental element which will not give rise to mystical escapism and spiritual weakness, but rather will enable him to minimise, to relativise, to refer to higher concepts of measure and limit, all that can seem important and definitive to others, starting with death itself, and will confer on him calm force and breadth of vision." — Julius Evola

    SLI-Te | 5w6 sp/so
    Oldham Solitary

    Johari
    Nohari

  38. #38
    crazedrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    moon
    Posts
    4,885
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    employee/employer is another word for slave/master. My argument is not as extremist as it could be. I am only arguing it is the duty of the master to treat the slave with civility. The Master has benefited from this slaves productivity. From what you are arguing, if the slave gets sick, he can die. The slave only exists for the benefit of the master, and the master picks and chooses when to take responsibility for its slaves. This is a one sided and stunted relationship. The master is a parasite. The relationship is not symbiotic.

  39. #39
    ***el X Mercenary Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Socionix sleeper cell
    TIM
    Te-ISTp
    Posts
    1,413
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    God, you're a dumbass.

    "His feeling that this world is not his Fatherland, and that it does not represent his proper condition, so to speak—his feeling that, basically, he 'comes from afar'—will remain a fundamental element which will not give rise to mystical escapism and spiritual weakness, but rather will enable him to minimise, to relativise, to refer to higher concepts of measure and limit, all that can seem important and definitive to others, starting with death itself, and will confer on him calm force and breadth of vision." — Julius Evola

    SLI-Te | 5w6 sp/so
    Oldham Solitary

    Johari
    Nohari

  40. #40
    Drommel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Now in color.
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnslick55 View Post
    global economics have been the underlying driving force behind every war since the french revolution. i think it is you who need to study history more, my friend. google a fellow named rothschild, learn about the banks of england, and the business cycle. all facts, and all stuff you need to learn before we continue talking
    Enlighten me: How was the French revolution caused by global economics?

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •