Bleat bleat bleat, my names Christian, the un Christian, who wants the have nots to keep on having not
-
The issue is, what system benefits society the most. Only the top 1% benefits from a highly regulated market and socialism. Once you give government the power to command markets and manipulate money supplies it will be taken over and used to rob and enslave the public while the top 1% in control of the system enrich themselves with vast amounts of money and power. With a free market economy and sound money, all those babies will be better off.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Once you give government the power to command markets and manipulate money supplies it will be taken over and used to rob and enslave the public while the top 1% in control of the system enrich themselves with vast amounts of money and power.
Compared to the free market, in which the top 1% take their money to manipulate the market to enrich themselves with further funds and secure power. I'd take the system that pretends to stop them myself.
-
Again, you're changing the subject. The issue was defined in your original post:
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Everyone has the right to reproduce, but everyone has a responsibility to take care of their offspring.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Once you give government the power to command markets and manipulate money supplies it will be taken over and used to rob and enslave the public while the top 1% in control of the system enrich themselves with vast amounts of money and power.
Compared to the free market, in which the top 1% take their money to manipulate the market to enrich themselves with further funds and secure power. I'd take the system that pretends to stop them myself.
In a free market system, competition enables the little guys to team up against the big guys in a way that is nearly impossible in a regulated market. Today the regulators regulate in favor the the big guys and that is why we have a fascistic command & control corporatacracy instead of a constitutional republic.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Are we going to go 'round and 'round again? You admitted that you don't have a solution to the vast number of people who are NOT responsible enough to support their children and to only reproduce when they can afford to support their offspring. So are you ready to adjust your position yet?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
In a free market system, competition enables the little guys to team up against the big guys in a way that is nearly impossible in a regulated market. Today the regulators regulate in favor the the big guys and that is why we have a fascistic command & control corporatacracy instead of a constitutional republic.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Must be a magical little world this has all happened in. Last I checked the little guys generally only made it by hitting niches the big guys wouldn't touch, and then eventually getting wiped out by someone who's doing the same thing with a bigger budget.
-
Are we going to go 'round and 'round again? You admitted that you don't have a solution to the vast number of people who are NOT responsible enough to support their children and to only reproduce when they can afford to support their offspring. So are you ready to adjust your position yet?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
You admitted that you don't have a solution to the vast number of people who are NOT responsible enough to support their children and to only reproduce when they can afford to support their offspring.
The solution is having an economic environment where everyone can earn enough to have a home and put food on the table. That happens in a free market economy. Perhaps relatives or friends might feel the need to take the responsibility and persuade the parents to take appropriate actions. Perhaps the parents will become motivated enough to find a home and put food on the table. Maybe a mixture of the two? Charitable organizations might supplement food and housing costs as they set up a job interview for the parents. Or we could just forgo human rights, liberty, and prosperity and submit to megalomaniacs. Strap them down and render their reproductive organs useless, if they dare resist throw them in prison. Hell, throw them into a mobile execution van and harvest their organs right their as the body is being transported to the organ buyers. Let the government thugs take people's children and sell them on the market to rapist, only after the thugs have had their fun of course.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Must be a magical little world this has all happened in. Last I checked the little guys generally only made it by hitting niches the big guys wouldn't touch, and then eventually getting wiped out by someone who's doing the same thing with a bigger budget.
Distind wrote:
Last I checked the little guys generally only made it by hitting niches the big guys wouldn't touch, and then eventually getting wiped out by someone who's doing the same thing with a bigger budget.
Last time I checked we haven't had a free market since 1913.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
What if I told you that your son is a neo-Nazi and secretly hates you?
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
You admitted that you don't have a solution to the vast number of people who are NOT responsible enough to support their children and to only reproduce when they can afford to support their offspring.
The solution is having an economic environment where everyone can earn enough to have a home and put food on the table. That happens in a free market economy. Perhaps relatives or friends might feel the need to take the responsibility and persuade the parents to take appropriate actions. Perhaps the parents will become motivated enough to find a home and put food on the table. Maybe a mixture of the two? Charitable organizations might supplement food and housing costs as they set up a job interview for the parents. Or we could just forgo human rights, liberty, and prosperity and submit to megalomaniacs. Strap them down and render their reproductive organs useless, if they dare resist throw them in prison. Hell, throw them into a mobile execution van and harvest their organs right their as the body is being transported to the organ buyers. Let the government thugs take people's children and sell them on the market to rapist, only after the thugs have had their fun of course.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Let the government thugs take people's children and sell them on the market to rapist, only after the thugs have had their fun of course.
And what's to stop a so-called "charitable" organization from doing the same thing? Just because something isn't part of the government, doesn't mean it can't be corrupt.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
The solution is having an economic environment where everyone can earn enough to have a home and put food on the table. That happens in a free market economy.
Ok, since it looks like you can't do anything but divert to economics, let's tackle the free market. In a free market, the only form of power is wealth. Those with more money, gain more power. The more power you have, the easier it is to gain more money. Conversely, if you're unlucky enough to be born poor, you can't afford education or a healthy upbringing, so you inevitably remain poor. The stereotypical success story of someone getting a "great idea" and getting rich generally doesn't apply to the lower class, but rather to the middle class, who may have the ability to act on that idea. You like to talk about the little guys competing with the big guys... But that's not how it happens in a free market. Take Walmart, for example. Since they're so huge, they have the ability to strong-arm their suppliers for better rates, something that the little guys can't do. Since they're so huge, they benefit from efficiency of scale, further increasing their profits. Little guys just can't compete with that, and many are driven out of business when a Walmart moves into town. That's the result of a free market.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Let the government thugs take people's children and sell them on the market to rapist, only after the thugs have had their fun of course.
And what's to stop a so-called "charitable" organization from doing the same thing? Just because something isn't part of the government, doesn't mean it can't be corrupt.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
The solution is having an economic environment where everyone can earn enough to have a home and put food on the table. That happens in a free market economy.
Ok, since it looks like you can't do anything but divert to economics, let's tackle the free market. In a free market, the only form of power is wealth. Those with more money, gain more power. The more power you have, the easier it is to gain more money. Conversely, if you're unlucky enough to be born poor, you can't afford education or a healthy upbringing, so you inevitably remain poor. The stereotypical success story of someone getting a "great idea" and getting rich generally doesn't apply to the lower class, but rather to the middle class, who may have the ability to act on that idea. You like to talk about the little guys competing with the big guys... But that's not how it happens in a free market. Take Walmart, for example. Since they're so huge, they have the ability to strong-arm their suppliers for better rates, something that the little guys can't do. Since they're so huge, they benefit from efficiency of scale, further increasing their profits. Little guys just can't compete with that, and many are driven out of business when a Walmart moves into town. That's the result of a free market.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
In a free market, the only form of power is wealth. Those with more money, gain more power. The more power you have, the easier it is to gain more money.
The fundamental flaw in your argument is that in a free market economy government's cant force markets to do anything, and therefor business can't buy government power. The big guys need government power to retain and expand their wealth, otherwise market forces will threaten their monopolies. Also, just because a business is big that doesn't mean its bad, it only becomes bad when it can buy government power. That is why government power should be limited, because then they can't buy government power to influence the markets to their advantage.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
The stereotypical success story of someone getting a "great idea" and getting rich generally doesn't apply to the lower class, but rather to the middle class, who may have the ability to act on that idea.
Everyone starts out poor, even if you are born into a middle class or rich family, that doesn't mean your parents are going to give you money. You work, and earn a living. However if the markets are controlled by the government, the little guy is always going to be shafted because government power will be bought and used to rob and enslave the public to enrich the controllers with cast amounts of power and wealth. If someone has a great idea, and can persuade investors that he/she can make a profit, investors will certain invest capital.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Take Walmart, for example.
Walmart wouldn't be able to exist as it does now in a free market, because they would't be receiving indirect subsidies through their employees. They don't have to pay their employees much because their employees collect some type of welfare.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
The housing bubble is fueled by central banks pumping cheap credit into the market with fresh currency that it created out of thin air. If their were a free market (one without government intervention and central bank manipulation) home prices would normalize down to their true value, and prices of goods and services along with incomes would find their proper balance.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
In a free market, the only form of power is wealth. Those with more money, gain more power. The more power you have, the easier it is to gain more money.
The fundamental flaw in your argument is that in a free market economy government's cant force markets to do anything, and therefor business can't buy government power. The big guys need government power to retain and expand their wealth, otherwise market forces will threaten their monopolies. Also, just because a business is big that doesn't mean its bad, it only becomes bad when it can buy government power. That is why government power should be limited, because then they can't buy government power to influence the markets to their advantage.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
The stereotypical success story of someone getting a "great idea" and getting rich generally doesn't apply to the lower class, but rather to the middle class, who may have the ability to act on that idea.
Everyone starts out poor, even if you are born into a middle class or rich family, that doesn't mean your parents are going to give you money. You work, and earn a living. However if the markets are controlled by the government, the little guy is always going to be shafted because government power will be bought and used to rob and enslave the public to enrich the controllers with cast amounts of power and wealth. If someone has a great idea, and can persuade investors that he/she can make a profit, investors will certain invest capital.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Take Walmart, for example.
Walmart wouldn't be able to exist as it does now in a free market, because they would't be receiving indirect subsidies through their employees. They don't have to pay their employees much because their employees collect some type of welfare.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
The fundamental flaw in your argument is that in a free market economy government's cant force markets to do anything, and therefor business can't buy government power. The big guys need government power to retain and expand their wealth, otherwise market forces will threaten their monopolies. Also, just because a business is big that doesn't mean its bad, it only becomes bad when it can buy government power. That is why government power should be limited, because then they can't buy government power to influence the markets to their advantage.
I didn't say "government power." I said "power."
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Everyone starts out poor, even if you are born into a middle class or rich family, that doesn't mean your parents are going to give you money. You work, and earn a living. However if the markets are controlled by the government, the little guy is always going to be shafted because government power will be bought and used to rob and enslave the public to enrich the controllers with cast amounts of power and wealth. If someone has a great idea, and can persuade investors that he/she can make a profit, investors will certain invest capital.
Welcome to the real world, where the real wealth is passed down through generations. If an uneducated peasant has a great idea (Which is already a rare occurrence), where's he going to get the business sense to be able to pitch that idea to wealthy investors, without losing control over it? Remember, as you keep telling us, public education is a Bad Thing (tm), so education would cost money that the peasant doesn't have. He's lucky if he can do basic algebra, let alone design a new product.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Walmart wouldn't be able to exist as it does now in a free market, because they would't be receiving indirect subsidies through their employees. They don't have to pay their employees much because their employees collect some type of welfare.
Right. They'd pay even less. Their current salaries are limited at the bottom end by federal minimum wage laws, which you've said on more than one occasion that you oppose. According to the first Google result[^] I came across (Not going to waste hours researchi
-
Distind wrote:
Last I checked the little guys generally only made it by hitting niches the big guys wouldn't touch, and then eventually getting wiped out by someone who's doing the same thing with a bigger budget.
Last time I checked we haven't had a free market since 1913.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
In a free market, the only form of power is wealth. Those with more money, gain more power. The more power you have, the easier it is to gain more money.
The fundamental flaw in your argument is that in a free market economy government's cant force markets to do anything, and therefor business can't buy government power. The big guys need government power to retain and expand their wealth, otherwise market forces will threaten their monopolies. Also, just because a business is big that doesn't mean its bad, it only becomes bad when it can buy government power. That is why government power should be limited, because then they can't buy government power to influence the markets to their advantage.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
The stereotypical success story of someone getting a "great idea" and getting rich generally doesn't apply to the lower class, but rather to the middle class, who may have the ability to act on that idea.
Everyone starts out poor, even if you are born into a middle class or rich family, that doesn't mean your parents are going to give you money. You work, and earn a living. However if the markets are controlled by the government, the little guy is always going to be shafted because government power will be bought and used to rob and enslave the public to enrich the controllers with cast amounts of power and wealth. If someone has a great idea, and can persuade investors that he/she can make a profit, investors will certain invest capital.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Take Walmart, for example.
Walmart wouldn't be able to exist as it does now in a free market, because they would't be receiving indirect subsidies through their employees. They don't have to pay their employees much because their employees collect some type of welfare.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Wahahahaha, let me laugh to your arguments, Walmart is a perfect example of free market, size, money and power... you and your ideas, again, fail, you know nothing about economics, free market
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
-
The housing bubble is fueled by central banks pumping cheap credit into the market with fresh currency that it created out of thin air. If their were a free market (one without government intervention and central bank manipulation) home prices would normalize down to their true value, and prices of goods and services along with incomes would find their proper balance.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
go to wikipedia and read about this!!! you have no idea what you're talking about, it has hundreds of links to reliable resources where you can read what happened... stop reading your conspiracy sites that don't have a single way to support what they say!!! you're becoming the ignorant monkey that you despise so bad... get your facts right!!!
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
-
go to wikipedia and read about this!!! you have no idea what you're talking about, it has hundreds of links to reliable resources where you can read what happened... stop reading your conspiracy sites that don't have a single way to support what they say!!! you're becoming the ignorant monkey that you despise so bad... get your facts right!!!
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
Gonzoox wrote:
|234d W1k1p3d14!!!!!!##@@~~!! 11nkz!@! U |\/|0nk3y!#
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Gonzoox wrote:
|234d W1k1p3d14!!!!!!##@@~~!! 11nkz!@! U |\/|0nk3y!#
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
If (someone points out you are ignorant)
{
smeghole.ActLickadouche.insultthem.usel33tsp33k.makenosense();
}
else
ignore.donothingandhopetheydontcallyouonit(); -
Mr Graus here, I have LOTS of money. So much in fact that I am going to buy ANOTHER house when prices drop, which I want them to, so I can make even more nonexistant wealth based on debt and speculation, just like I did with my existing pile of stone. And anyone who hasnt got a house FUCK OFF! You cant have mine! I might rent you my other one when I buy it, after I have converted it onto a set of rabbit hutches unfit for human habitation and scew you for exorbitant rent money because banks wont give you any HA HA! I am not a Christian, but I considder myself far more concerned with the plight of people forced to live in shitty housing (like flats in converted houses without propper noise insulation, and no where for the kids to play) than it appears Christians do. No. Make it a right for a family to have a home suitable for a family.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
Have you been drinking again ?
fat_boy wrote:
So much in fact that I am going to buy ANOTHER house when prices drop, which I want them to, so I can make even more nonexistant wealth based on debt and speculation, just like I did with my existing pile of stone.
Hmmm.... Well, not sure if it's any of your business but, I don't have a mortgage because I created a product and sold it, and that's how I used my money. I don't have enough money to outright buy another house, but I am young enough that I can afford to have another mortgage when prices are good. I would like to see prices drop because I think they are too high, and I do believe that affordability is in the toilet, which is one reason the prices are unsustainable. I don't think that every person has a 'right' to a home, some people will always find they can't afford to buy a house, and that's life. However, based on the fact I own two houses outright, my short term 'wealth' will obviously suffer when prices drop. It's not a case of what I want, it's a case of what I see is inevitable, and therefore, my plans for another investment property ( which are largely based on my having two kids and wanting a house per child, so I can help them enter the market ), involve waiting for the drop that I see likely.
fat_boy wrote:
And anyone who hasnt got a house f*** OFF! You cant have mine!
Unless you're one of my kids, hell yes. Why should you have mine ? I worked hard for it.
fat_boy wrote:
I might rent you my other one when I buy it, after I have converted it onto a set of rabbit hutches unfit for human habitation and scew you for exorbitant rent money because banks wont give you any HA HA!
Again, this is none of your business, however, the average rent for a house where I live is rising rapidly, 13% last year. It's now around $320 a week. The property I rent out is on 5 acres, and I've also been renovating it, so I should be able to get at least the average rent for it. I charge $240. I rent to a single mother with 2 kids, and every year I consider that I should put the rent up but I decide I don't need the money enough to cause her the hardship.
fat_boy wrote:
No. Make it a right for a family to have a home suitable for a family.
If families do not have the ability to put a roof over their head, then s
-
Gonzoox wrote:
|234d W1k1p3d14!!!!!!##@@~~!! 11nkz!@! U |\/|0nk3y!#
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
fat_boy wrote:
Make it a right for a family to have a home suitable for a family.
Bullshit. Generally people have a responsibility to ensure they can provide for a family before creating one. We would have liked to have children sooner but we choose to delay it so she could keep working and we could build up our savings. That's allowed her to remain a full time mum for almost two years rather than our son being stuck in day care from three months old.
That's ridiculous. It's almost like you're saying that people should be responsible for their own actions !!!!
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.