A SAD, SAD DAY...

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • asdf_admin
    i use to be important
    • Jun 2004
    • 12798

    k so many fallacies everywhere i have to respond to a few.......

    sacredawe78 wrote:
    people are dying, people are poor and suffering...and etiquette is only a part of stagnation....im not here to cause anyone physical harm, nor am i apart of anything EXCEPT raising the standards of equality


    So why do you vote for a party that takes money from the .0001% of the globes
    richest people and then redistributes it to the top 20% of the world's richest
    people. Buying votes much? Laughing You say: "But no! democrats really do care about poverty!" Laff. The only reason we have welfare is because republicans and democrats
    alike realized we were going to have to pay people not to turn communist. B/c
    of our utterly spoiled and useless lower class, the rest of the world suffers.
    Only one party collects their votes and promises further stagnation of the global
    economy on behalf of poor Americans. The party: Democrat

    Terry wrote:
    the only thing that hes right about is that you moronic country re elected a guy who has run 2 businesses into the ground driven your dollar ridiculously low and killed millions of your people for an unjust cause. enjoy the next few years of your life, they will be interesting


    A low dollar makes our exports more appealling abroad and makes imports
    look more expensive at home, which helps our country close its enormous
    and sometimes out of control trade defecit. If your talking about the two Texas
    oil companies W ran into the ground, you are wasting your breath. Tons of
    people lost their shirts when Texas Tea dried up.

    sacredawe78 wrote:
    it can be right here...but i cant happen if we contiue to live in a world based on the individuals proliferation, hoarding of all natural resources, (i.e. capitalism)...


    WTF. Hoarding of natural resources is called mercantilism. Repeat after me.
    Mercantilism. Capitalism is about making things more valuable by generating
    cash flows and making the assets you have appreciate in importance over
    time. Not about building a big pile of money to sit on. Everyone who has
    ever stepped into economics 101 knows that hoarding natural
    resources is self-defeating. Some of the world's greatest philosophers and
    social scientists were actually economists. They also have been seeking ways
    for people to live in peace and prosperity. The only thing holding capitalism back today is
    the uneducated dimwits who enter the American workforce with absolutely no
    capitalistic training what-so-ever. And the hilarious thing is most of those people
    go around calling everyone else uneducated or uncultured. Laughing

    sacredawe78 wrote:
    we can be TACTFUL with our strife, we can argue, we can reduce our omnipresent strife to a stage of reason...THE ARGUMENT...that CAN happen...


    Argument and reason mandate that all people maintain complete objectivity.
    Can you ask a parents to accept the suffering of their children? Can you
    ask a husband to accept the suffering of his wife? No. Because of the intimate
    emotional bonds between people. Objectivity is only possible through the
    suppression of emotions. As long as humans have emotions, Utopia will be
    unattainable.

    Damn i gotta go work on this project.

    Peace
    thank you Lexicon. :wink:
    dead, yet alive.

    Comment

    • LobsterClan
      Getting Somewhere
      • Aug 2004
      • 133

      Originally posted by mylexicon
      B/c of our utterly spoiled and useless lower class, the rest of the world suffers.
      Only one party collects their votes and promises further stagnation of the global
      economy on behalf of poor Americans. The party: Democrat
      I don't know who you are, and I care not for your little economics lesson, but your views on lower class and impoverished people are despicable. Apparently to you, how much money one makes is the sole factor determing their worth.

      Believe it or not, there is more to life than money.

      Comment

      • Yao
        DUDERZ get a life!!!
        • Jun 2004
        • 8167

        Lexicon had been around here longer than us Lobster, just been away for a while.

        And yes, he has also struck me as being very capitalistic. Hopefully he has heard about humane capitalism, too.
        Blowkick visual & graphic design - No Civilization. Now With Broadband.

        There are but three true sports -- bullfighting, mountain climbing, and motor-racing. The rest are merely games. -Hemingway

        Comment

        • Jenks
          I'm kind of a big deal.
          • Jun 2004
          • 10250

          Re: A SAD, SAD DAY...

          MyLexicon lol,cracks me up when he does that. I pretty much agree with all of it.

          cheers man, come around more often!

          Comment

          • sacredawe78
            Getting Somewhere
            • Aug 2004
            • 150

            Originally posted by mylexicon
            k so many fallacies everywhere i have to respond to a few.......

            Originally posted by sacredawe78
            people are dying, people are poor and suffering...and etiquette is only a part of stagnation....im not here to cause anyone physical harm, nor am i apart of anything EXCEPT raising the standards of equality
            So why do you vote for a party that takes money from the .0001% of the globes
            richest people and then redistributes it to the top 20% of the world's richest
            people. Buying votes much? You say: "But no! democrats really do care about poverty!" Laff. The only reason we have welfare is because republicans and democrats
            alike realized we were going to have to pay people not to turn communist. B/c
            of our utterly spoiled and useless lower class, the rest of the world suffers.
            Only one party collects their votes and promises further stagnation of the global
            economy on behalf of poor Americans. The party: Democrat

            Originally posted by Terry
            the only thing that hes right about is that you moronic country re elected a guy who has run 2 businesses into the ground driven your dollar ridiculously low and killed millions of your people for an unjust cause. enjoy the next few years of your life, they will be interesting
            A low dollar makes our exports more appealling abroad and makes imports
            look more expensive at home, which helps our country close its enormous
            and sometimes out of control trade defecit. If your talking about the two Texas
            oil companies W ran into the ground, you are wasting your breath. Tons of
            people lost their shirts when Texas Tea dried up.

            Originally posted by sacredawe78
            it can be right here...but i cant happen if we contiue to live in a world based on the individuals proliferation, hoarding of all natural resources, (i.e. capitalism)...
            WTF. Hoarding of natural resources is called mercantilism. Repeat after me.
            Mercantilism. Capitalism is about making things more valuable by generating
            cash flows and making the assets you have appreciate in importance over
            time. Not about building a big pile of money to sit on. Everyone who has
            ever stepped into economics 101 knows that hoarding natural
            resources is self-defeating. Some of the world's greatest philosophers and
            social scientists were actually economists. They also have been seeking ways
            for people to live in peace and prosperity. The only thing holding capitalism back today is
            the uneducated dimwits who enter the American workforce with absolutely no
            capitalistic training what-so-ever. And the hilarious thing is most of those people
            go around calling everyone else uneducated or uncultured.

            Originally posted by sacredawe78
            we can be TACTFUL with our strife, we can argue, we can reduce our omnipresent strife to a stage of reason...THE ARGUMENT...that CAN happen...
            Argument and reason mandate that all people maintain complete objectivity.
            Can you ask a parents to accept the suffering of their children? Can you
            ask a husband to accept the suffering of his wife? No. Because of the intimate
            emotional bonds between people. Objectivity is only possible through the
            suppression of emotions. As long as humans have emotions, Utopia will be
            unattainable.

            Damn i gotta go work on this project.

            Peace
            2 entries found for mercantilism.
            mer?can?til?ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m?rkn-t-lzm, -t-)
            n.
            The theory and system of political economy prevailing in Europe after the decline of feudalism, based on national policies of accumulating bullion, establishing colonies and a merchant marine, and developing industry and mining to attain a favorable balance of trade.
            The practice, methods, or spirit of merchants; commercialism.


            cap?i?tal?ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kp-tl-zm)
            n.
            An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.



            i don't see what your point is???

            mercantalism was culturally from a completely different historical period first of all...capitalisam utlmately is just an extension of that era...i don't see how you can sit here and honestly think that mercantalism is even around right now??? the laws of supply and demand will always bring about equity growth to those resources that are more valued (in demand)...that is just a naturally occuring mechanism of capitalism that keeps it going...

            the same thing happened during the mercantile era...except it evolved into more advanced forms of individuals having control in a more "free" market...hence, the capitalism we know today...

            youre trying to say that they are mutually exclusive realities and that mercantalism may be an alternate reality to what we currently have...

            i say that that mercantalism was part of a historical evolution in economy and i say that its evolved into what we have today

            you are out of context


            secondly, yes i do agree with you about emotions being a problem to overcome when attaining a moral utopia...but ive already made it very clear that strife is essential, that you need only one variable existent to be homogenous with entropy, etc...

            people die randomly at the hands of nature...death will always occur no matter what outside of our control...we can die from an accident, an earthquake, causes outside of our scientific understanding, etc....

            that is in itself a variable

            i dont see why we cannot have a morally perfect world, a utopia, and still not live in accordance with entropy...seeing that for sure at least this one variable would always be there...

            it seems mathematically possible

            emotions can be suppressed...yes they are essential, but with reason being the level playing field in an argument, we all have to play by the rules...we have to follow a deductive path from premise a and b and c, etc. to the conclusion....therefore, our emotions really have no place in this arena anyhow....

            why cant we be tactful with our eternal strife and set the stage ourselves...in the form of an argument??? rather than just using our understanding of entropy as a normative justification in itself, i.e. the world is at war, so i must do everything i can do justify that fact...continue to cause more and more chaos (moral problem)

            and then you may say, well how do you avoid dogma?? one person cant always be right, etc,.

            the answer to that is that you view arguments as an inductive possibility in themselves...they are not a panacea...just because you resolve one conflict through reason does not mean that it is over

            i think that in a continual dynamic social reality where humans argue constantly about what is best (morality) in terms of consequence (not intention)...the arguing in itself is the most probable (inductive) way of achieving a utopia...and since we can never ovecome the bounds of living within entropy, we can reduce as many variables as possible all the time...this is in accordance with what we can possible know and do, therefore it is a utopia

            you may say weve already achieved all the arguing and fighting continually
            but its not rational, we dont reduce the variables, we extend as many as possible...we base our arguments on religion, on profit, on loss, on bullsit like that...we dont first reduce our arguments to the moral sphere in a scientific deductive manner, and then homogenize with entropy...we tend to want to create more and more strife as much as possible

            seriously this needs to be elucidated, but it could fill a book

            more later

            Comment

            • mylexicon
              Addiction started
              • Jun 2004
              • 339

              Originally posted by sacredawe78
              2 entries found for mercantilism.
              mer?can?til?ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m?rkn-t-lzm, -t-)
              n.
              The theory and system of political economy prevailing in Europe after the decline of feudalism, based on national policies of accumulating bullion, establishing colonies and a merchant marine, and developing industry and mining to attain a favorable balance of trade.
              The practice, methods, or spirit of merchants; commercialism.


              cap?i?tal?ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kp-tl-zm)
              n.
              An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.



              i don't see what your point is???

              mercantalism was culturally from a completely different historical period first of all...capitalisam utlmately is just an extension of that era...i don't see how you can sit here and honestly think that mercantalism is even around right now??? the laws of supply and demand will always bring about equity growth to those resources that are more valued (in demand)...that is just a naturally occuring mechanism of capitalism that keeps it going...

              the same thing happened during the mercantile era...except it evolved into more advanced forms of individuals having control in a more "free" market...hence, the capitalism we know today...

              youre trying to say that they are mutually exclusive realities and that mercantalism may be an alternate reality to what we currently have...

              i say that that mercantalism was part of a historical evolution in economy and i say that its evolved into what we have today

              you are out of context
              Damn You really haven't stepped into an economics class. I was just kidding around but obviously I was right.

              Mercantilism and Capitalism are fundementally different. Night and Day really, because of the advancements in economic theory in the 19th century.
              During Mercantilism the prevailing theory of wealth was displacement or the
              Archimedes principle of wealth/zero-sum game. Because mercantilists believed
              there was a finite amount of wealth in the world, they thought the only way
              to make themselves prosperous was to hoard giant stockpiles of gold and silver bullion.

              During the 19th century many economic philosophers particularly Keynes
              diproved the Archimedes principle of wealth. In addition, David Ricardo came
              up with the law of comparative advantage.

              During the 1600's when Adam Smith wrote wealth of nations, he theorized
              that a nation had to have an absolute effeciency advantage in order to trade
              with foreign nations (another reason people hoarded gold and resources).
              Ricardo proved that two nations could trade for mutual benefit even if one country had no absolute
              advantage. This breakthrough led to modern economic theory.

              RECAP:

              Mercantilism is about hoarding giant piles of finite wealth.

              Capitalism is about creating infinite wealth that can be spread around through mutually beneficial
              labor and trade markets.




              Originally posted by sacredawe78
              i dont see why we cannot have a morally perfect world, a utopia, and still not live in accordance with entropy...seeing that for sure at least this one variable would always be there...

              it seems mathematically possible
              It is mathematically possible. Utopia is attainable in the presence of 100%
              contentment or 100% indifference. Relativity and Emotion would have to be
              destroyed. They are the tools by which Utopia is destroyed. Of course,
              relativity and emotion can never be eliminated nor should they because they
              are part of the human condition. Freud tried to explain rational and irrational
              relationship and how they are reconciled when he wrote about id, ego, and
              superego. But even his simplistic postulations have been wrought with controversy.

              Originally posted by LobsterClan
              I don't know who you are, and I care not for your little economics lesson, but your views on lower class and impoverished people are despicable. Apparently to you, how much money one makes is the sole factor determing their worth.

              Believe it or not, there is more to life than money.
              Americans are relatively poor and relatively impoverished. Granted there are
              some Americans who are extremely poor, but in the grand scheme of global
              poverty you could actually consider them well-to-do. Which is why I get frustrated
              with the Democratic party. The energize their American base by saying that
              they have it rough, and that they are victims of capitalist raider barons. The
              hilarious irony is that the capitalists they hate and their fortunate birth into
              the USA is precisely what keeps them from being one of the 2-3 billion truly impoverished
              people who live all around the globe. Think about how much good could be
              done if we took the 400 billion we dedicate every year to "eliminating poverty" in America
              and actually invested it in the future of other discouraged nations abroad, in order to
              eliminate real poverty. Unfortunately, such progress would require us to drop our nationalistic legislation,
              but I suspect Democrats will probably never support the elimination of our
              narcissistic regression as long as there is an abundance of political power stemming
              from our disillusioned lower class and our "misenlightened" upper class
              (read Alec Baldwin; Susan Sarandon; Tim Robbins).

              What is it about celebrities and other wealthy socialists that makes them
              believe that the government is the only way they can give their money away?
              Oh wait, that's right. Their deep seeded narcissism leads them to do what makes
              them feel self-righteous and they know it is a lot easier to force America to
              participate in their moral crusade rather than trying to convince Americans
              that what they are doing is right.
              Be a vegan......eat freedom fries..

              Comment

              • sacredawe78
                Getting Somewhere
                • Aug 2004
                • 150

                i appreciate your insight into the subtelties of these economic theories and the people who've created them, but i now i feel that we are saying the same things

                i feel capitalism is just an extension of mercantalism....mercantalism failed...capitalism was the inevitable conclusion

                you originally attacked me by saying that i was wrong for saying capitalism is the hoarding of natural resources by the individual...

                it terms of what is ultimately valued...i dont see any difference than mercantalism...the most valued goods/services set the scale for inflation...thats it...

                i suppose in mercantalism...there is no such thing as inflation because of the finite wealth...but what is the fucking difference in terms of value here?

                with capitalism you have infinite wealth, but it still depends upon the person with the highest control over the natural resources setting the value for which we must strive to stay ahead of inflation...

                because there are over 7 billion people in the world...and because our financial transactions are so complex...it is very difficult to pinpoint what these natural resources are and whom that person may be...it always changes, but that doesnt mean i am incorrect...they both depend upon a measuring stick...mercantalism has no inflation and limited wealth...capitalism does....in terms of values, its still about the individual shaping the measuring stick or trying to keep up with individual who created it

                capitalism is just an extension of mercantalism because mercantalism could not have lasted...trade is inevitable...natural resources dwindle...supply and demand...technology...they've all changed what we value....and they always will...

                mercantalism is not even a possibility anymore, so why bring it up

                and as far as what you said about emotion...ive already talked of how we need to reduce the illusion of relativity...we are more mathematically similar than dissimilar genetically...so we should be focusing on species flourishing and survival, not indivualization, that is so honored in capitalism


                and finally, with regard to your bullshit statement about the Democratic party and wealth in the usa..and how we really have it good, etc..

                your right, its stupid...we shouldnt complain right?? ...we have more wealth here than anywhere....BUT the world is becoming americanized...capitalism has spread everywhere...our dollars set the standards for everyone elses because were the epicenter of the capitalistic movement...we are a vortex...
                that is why Bin Laden wanted to destory the WTC

                it affects everyone else in this world...every poor person in Africa is poor because we cant invest there...there is no market...

                that is how we think...only in terms of profit and loss...not in terms of any moral sensibility or argument

                money has absolutely nothing to do with the species survival or flourishing in a perfect moral world...so why cant we use that form of thinking as a measuring stick...rather than profit or loss...seems a bit more rational to me in terms of what is good

                Comment

                • LobsterClan
                  Getting Somewhere
                  • Aug 2004
                  • 133

                  Originally posted by mylexicon
                  Americans are relatively poor and relatively impoverished. Granted there are
                  some Americans who are extremely poor, but in the grand scheme of global
                  poverty you could actually consider them well-to-do. Which is why I get frustrated
                  with the Democratic party. The energize their American base by saying that
                  they have it rough, and that they are victims of capitalist raider barons. The
                  hilarious irony is that the capitalists they hate, and their fortunate birth into
                  the USA is precisely what keeps them from being one of the 2-3 billion truly impoverished
                  people who live all around the globe. Think about how much good could be
                  done if we took the 400 billion we dedicate every year to "eliminating poverty" in America
                  and actually invested it in the future of other discouraged nations abroad, in order to
                  eliminate real poverty. Unfortunately, such progress would require us to drop our nationalistic legislation,
                  but i don't see the Democratic party ready to do that anytime soon.
                  A clever way to dance around the issues I raised. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not particularly interested in talking economics. I am talking straight up human worth. Who's to say that a pro athlete is a more valuable human being than a schoolteacher? Who's to say that a sanitation worker has less value than an investment banker?

                  I know people, personally, that work two full-time jobs and are still impoverished. These are decent, hard-working people, just trying to survive and take care of their families. You claim they are "worthless".

                  Yes of course, Americans have it better than third world countries, and sure I would like to see poverty alleviated elsewhere. But flat out, change starts at home.

                  Comment

                  • Kobe
                    I wish I had an interesting User title
                    • Jun 2004
                    • 2589

                    So who IS going to pay for the war on Iraq?
                    Beats are my crack.

                    Comment

                    • sacredawe78
                      Getting Somewhere
                      • Aug 2004
                      • 150

                      we are all our paying for the war in iraq

                      unfortunately

                      our taxes pay for it

                      we are all evil ultimately

                      that is another unfortunate reality of capitalism

                      lots of people with good intentions, but evil actions

                      hence, they are evil

                      their soul is not a measuring stick, only their actions...thats how it should be

                      Comment

                      • mylexicon
                        Addiction started
                        • Jun 2004
                        • 339

                        Originally posted by LobsterClan
                        A clever way to dance around the issues I raised. As I mentioned earlier, I'm not particularly interested in talking economics. I am talking straight up human worth. Who's to say that a pro athlete is a more valuable human being than a schoolteacher? Who's to say that a sanitation worker has less value than an investment banker?

                        I know people, personally, that work two full-time jobs and are still impoverished. These are decent, hard-working people, just trying to survive and take care of their families. You claim they are "worthless".

                        Yes of course, Americans have it better than third world countries, and sure I would like to see poverty alleviated elsewhere. But flat out, change starts at home.
                        Why do you regard the amount of consumer junk a person has as an
                        indication of their self-worth?

                        You've been poisoned with the juice of the liberal party. Liberals encourage
                        consumerism by declaring that money and junk are indications of what
                        society thinks of you. Therefore, if you don't have money and junk you
                        have been disenfranchised and disrespected.
                        Be a vegan......eat freedom fries..

                        Comment

                        • sacredawe78
                          Getting Somewhere
                          • Aug 2004
                          • 150

                          my lexicon what you just said is the essence of capitalism...stemming from the protestant movement Calvanism...the "visible signs"...the more stuff you own is symbolic of your right to salvation, therefore attain as much as you can

                          christianity was fuel for capitalism...they are inextricably bound at the moment

                          i dont think lobster feels the way you are saying he does...i think he feels humans have more self worth outside of materiality

                          Comment

                          • Jenks
                            I'm kind of a big deal.
                            • Jun 2004
                            • 10250

                            Originally posted by LobsterClan
                            [ Who's to say that a pro athlete is a more valuable human being than a schoolteacher? Who's to say that a sanitation worker has less value than an investment banker?
                            The market dictates worth. Fact is, there are not many wide receivers who can run a 4.1 / 40, hence why one who can is paid millions of dollars based on the value the sport and the revenue it generates. School teachers = bad example, they should be paid as much as doctors, but they're not. sad. Investment banker, lawyer, specialized people, are worth more, not in terms of human life, but in terms of how much they contribute to the society and their value in the marketplace.

                            I can go out today and find 10000 people who can push a broom. I can't very well find 10000 highly educated people to manage my investment portfolio aggressively.

                            Not that sanitation workers aren't needed too, but in terms of value, they're not worth as much. Sad, but true.

                            Comment

                            • mylexicon
                              Addiction started
                              • Jun 2004
                              • 339

                              Originally posted by Kobe
                              So who IS going to pay for the war on Iraq?
                              We will......

                              The irony is that our federal budget of 1.5 trillion dollars is more than ample
                              to cover our war debt. But our politicians are to busy running around trying
                              to create Utopia and buy votes with our money. Unfortunately they will ask
                              us to pay more instead of controlling their own spending. They know that when
                              they flash the national debt over and over and over they will scare the money
                              right out of our pockets. They've been doing for 3-4 decades now. And they
                              always succeed in blaming low taxes as the reason for our bloated defecit.
                              Be a vegan......eat freedom fries..

                              Comment

                              • Yao
                                DUDERZ get a life!!!
                                • Jun 2004
                                • 8167

                                Originally posted by mylexicon
                                It is mathematically possible. Utopia is attainable in the presence of 100%
                                contentment or 100% indifference. Relativity and Emotion would have to be
                                destroyed. They are the tools by which Utopia is destroyed. Of course,
                                relativity and emotion can never be eliminated nor should they because they
                                are part of the human condition. Freud tried to explain rational and irrational
                                relationship and how they are reconciled when he wrote about id, ego, and
                                superego. But even his simplistic postulations have been wrought with controversy.
                                Dammit, you beat me to it Mylexicon. I'm not as good with words as you are in English, but that's right on the spot. If Utopia is about living like a robot, I don't think I want to live in such a society. Emotion is what makes life worth living: for every negative emotion there is a positive one, it's the peaks and lows in your mental state that make it all worthwile.

                                Living without fear, anger, jealousy etc, but also without happiness, love, compassion etc. What a world. Utopia is a computer-generated world, in which things are always subject to a set of given rules and in which any decision is taken without emotion, only a cold win-lose analysis. Remember the film 'The Matrix'? Sounds stupid to bring it into the story, but they said one thing that is true in it: the first Matrix was a perfect world, but that one failed miserably because the human mind could't accept that one. It was too perfect.

                                We are not mathematical equations. We're humans.
                                Blowkick visual & graphic design - No Civilization. Now With Broadband.

                                There are but three true sports -- bullfighting, mountain climbing, and motor-racing. The rest are merely games. -Hemingway

                                Comment

                                Working...