OCinBuffalo

No. Because... this.

Yeah, once again we see how worthless the "this post is too long" argument is. Only this time....it was egregiously misapplied...to a 4 sentence post?? But still, it's yet another example of: when you can't beat the content, TRY to beat the messenger, or talk about the process. Not gonna happen. Back to the content: why would Republicans not want everybody to make good money? More people making good money, means less tax burden for those making good money now. And more likely than not, more people making good money means even more money for those making good money now. Democrats are for only certain people making good money, and taxing money from others in order to artificially make that happen. Many Republicans are for ALL people making good money, or as many as possible, as that means that the tax rate can be cut for ALL people, while the revenue taken in, is still higher than it would have been had we simply raised taxes. Too many Democrats look at the economy as a "zero sum"...meaning you have to take from one place to give in another. This is flat out wrong, and ignorance-based. Some Republicans, correctly, understand that economics is NOT a zero sum game. After all: who did Yahoo take from when it first got started? Answer: nobody.

So, I shouldn't pay sales people 20% of the business they sell? Now, you said the sales guy is "labor" but...he doesn't produce any part of what we sell. Yet, he is getting 20% of the haul on what we sell. If I don't give him an additional share of the profits, on top of his commission....is he being exploited? And, is the loss of capital, that you traded for equity, a "democratic" loss as well? Meaning, if the company goes down, are all the workers going to pay the all the creditors out of their pockets? Why not? Aren't we being "democratic" here? Moreover, do all the workers pay in to create the initial capitalization of the company? Why not, if we are being "democratic"? If they don't, then, we aren't being "democratic" are we? No, the people who put up their money, take all the risk themselves, and have to cover all the losses themselves, depending on if that's how the corporation was organized. Show me workers who all pay into a company, to get it started. ...and I'll show you....an LLC. God forbid somebody already came up with a way to do this....and it wasn't Noam Chomsky Yes, another form of capitalist company....that has managers instead of stockholders....who all put in various sums of money or other assets, and receive equity in return. It's the simplest form of corporation...that was specifically created by Congress to help small business people, a small group of farmers, etc., who can't afford a big deal...get themselves protected by corporate laws....so now they can exploit their workers too. "It's just so ridiculous"

I have not yet begun to fight crayonz with crayonz. You may proceed when ready.

arbitrary.....management? WTF? Do you just take random words, and throw them together? Let me try.....random word generator. I got: Consumer Hobby, Sunk Ingredient, Clock Square I'm sure I could take that...and create one of your posts. Let's do it again. User Refusal. Yes, without my original core code...there would be a lot of User Refusal. And, all of the User Refusal we encounter, comes from the Sunk Ingredients that we have to work with, in the form of Clock Squared crappy 3rd party systems. Heh, this is fun. Now I see why you do it. I said you wouldn't understand. That doesn't mean...in the next post, you will. Your analysis is not only retarded, it is again, refuted by my existence. Yeah...and I have such power over them, that I help them not work for me anymore. It's an evil plan...losing well trained resources...to a large company...with no return. No, the cash I received, in return for equity, and/or the promise to repay on a credit line, is what allowed me to buy things like laptops for the new employees, who I wanted to hire...after I created my finished product. This is the only reason I bothered with it at all. That's how business works. But remember, I am not an accredited university. Although you will learn more here, and faster, I can't issue you a piece of paper. The risk involved in buying equity with your cash, in a startup IT company....almost makes it prohibitive. There are far too many charlatans out there, and, far too many "really good coders...who have no idea how to manage". At least with a loan, you have a permanent claim on somebody. They have to pay you back, if they personally guarantee the loan. With equity....if it fails, you're screwed. So, no, they are not the same thing. They will NEVER BE the same thing. I have explained the difference above. Now, whether you can understand simple concepts....remains to be seen. You still haven't explained how sales guys are being paid commissions for the specific business they sell, and often are being paid team bonuses for things they don't, and being exploited, at the same time. Good luck with that. I will not respond again, until you demonstrate a genuine effort to address that. Anything else is a waste of time.

What? Look at Buffalo. You want more junkies running around trying to steal my car? Well, they wouldn't have to steal my whole car if the price of drugs wasn't made so high by the fact that it's illegal. If a pharma company was in charge, it would cost a lot less. All they would have to steal is a tire or 2. I would gladly pay for new tires, or have my insurance company do it, rather than losing my whole car. But you want whole cars to be stolen, so they can be chopped up, and used...for spare parts at Nascar. And, if drugs were less expensive smelly hippies could afford to go to that gross city, and since they like stuff like that, they might even stay there and not come back. See? You're working against yourself here.

show your work on those %s

Oh horseshit. You asked for a vice the coexists legally and illegally. Not too many illegal games in AC. If there are I can't imagine the degenerates that play there, and there's no way the average person chooses them, over going to the Taj. The only thing google produced: lots of people saying "it's like Atlantic City" in reference to illegal games elsewhere. And...a weird story about Tobey Macguire getting sued for winning lots of money in one of them. Now, if people do illegal things, that are legal elsewhere, and compare what they are doing to where it's legal...then, how does making it illegal do anything...other than turn regular people into criminals for doing something they will do no matter what? Yeah, you're 5 steps ahead....but also created Nascar. How far ahead should you have been to not create Nascar? Well, you were lazy then, weren't you? Pardon me while I laugh at you even harder.

How many illegal poker games....in Atlantic City?

You made Nascar happen....and you're calling me blind? Blind, is what you get from drinking Sterno. It may make you feel like you're on Mars, but you would rather have a coke. Comprehend that. And while you hesitate....remember that you are 5 steps ahead, so actually, you don't have time. The only thing a junkie cares about is the next hit, etc. IF that comes from you, the government, or whoever, it matters not. Now, if the government was smart, it'd hire junkies to do things nobody else wanted to do. Like talk to Chelsea Clinton, or keep Rosie O'Donnell occupied with simple tasks. This way, the junkie gets his hit, and, we don't have to put up with annoyance.

want to "avoid looking at DC_Tom's small pee pee" ?

nah, just silly

To make more of something, in a factory setting, I would always need more raw materials, so, yeah, I would. There is no need to make more of something, in my case. There is need to service it, train it, and integrate it to other things...but none of that would exist without it. So, my raw materials...actually more than u can probably understand....suffice it to say, I get raw materials from clients, not employees, or suppliers. No, new capital emerges from my ability to raise it. The labor does nothing in that regard. If I go to get a new line of credit from a bank....believe me...the very last thing I want to do is bring my "labor" along. For many, their mere appearance would cause the bank to call the police. Now, we are working on that. But, in the meantime...I deal with the getting of more capital...and making it "emerge" in my company's bank account. My labor is doing WTF I tell them, in hopes that they will learn from me, and then quit, and then start their own exploitation of labor activities. The sting of their lashes...will be interesting, to say the least. For example, one kid worked here for 3 years, and now he works at Google. He wanted the big time, told me before I hired him, and we got that done together. But yeah...he was so exploited...by doing integrations of my code, which he didn't write, with other people's code, that he didn't write. The people that paid us, were paying us for that work...out of which his salary/benefits was paid, but were also paying us for my code. How's he being exploited in that model? Like I said, my very existence proves you are full of schit. And, technically, so does DC_Tom's.

No, no, it's money that doesn't create equity....

Seriously. The worst part is that stuff like that is becoming so predictable....that it's losing all its humor value. I just hope we don't run out of absurdity. I'm counting on the debates....that should provide gallons.

No, but I see you are. We are having an interesting discussion. No one liners here for you. Now go torment MDP, or crayonz.

Yeah...I know. That's why I said..."the royal we". What? Do I have to explain Lebowski quotes to now? You are exactly wrong: having your own ideas about anything, especially who you want to be President...is what we DO want around here. We have plenty of turds who have other people's ideas...and re-post them in every friggin thread. Really? Ok, then from now on: means "avoid looking at DC_Tom's small pee pee". And, means "yes, I had Chinese yesterday, and it was great"! Hey, you said it's whatever we want it to be...

Never mind the fact that if drugs were legal, the guys being stopped searched would have no real way to make $ off of drugs, thus, no reason to commit crimes against the other gang that's trying to make $ off of drugs. So...how would crime....go up, if drugs were legal? Oh yeah, that's right, the legions of junkies, who aren't junkies already today, and only would become junkies if drugs were legal...would rise up and start stealing everybody's TV. Ridiculous. Yes, the great legion of "would-be junkies if drugs were legal"...stalking horse argument. What happened when prohibition ended....did crime go up or down? Meanwhile the weed-only crowd, would.....well, is sitting in your house all weekend, not taking a shower, and eating Hot Pockets exclusively...a crime? If so, then yeah, those smelly losers would be terrorizing....the people in their house. Edit: which is different than what happens today...how?

No, the average coked up loser can choose from Jack Daniels, or moonshine, because the market for alcohol exists, regardless of moonshine being illegal. The market for sterno drinking exists as well. You making one thing illegal, or not, has no effect on these markets. They exist. And, if you try to F around with them, all you will accomplish is moving the price, or, innovations that circumvent your emotion-driven laws. Nascar was started by moonshiners....now, you say you hate rednecks...but clowns like you are responsible for Nascar. And the last Nascar race I went to...there were a lot of hippies smoking pot...so now that's your fault too. Dudes are using death-trap submarines to bring coke here...and you think...that making coke illegal will curtail the market? Idiocy. Oh yeah, let's put them in prison for 4 years. Then, it's 8 years. Then, it's 16. That'll show em! Idiocy. In fact exponential idiocy, because the more risk you add in terms of prison sentences....the more the price goes up on the street. Last I checked, high school kids can't afford 8 balls of coke. The people who can, just absorb the higher price, because they can. What else are they gonna do? Complain to the FTC? Net result: All you've done is increase the $ incentive to get into the death-trap submarine and bring coke here. Nice work. But yeah, keep telling yourself your argument isn't based on emotion. Why is what they do...your problem? Unless they do something that effects others, who the F cares what they do? Yeah, all this invective....but you aren't emotional about this at all. In contrast, I don't care enough about hippy loser dirt bags....to care whether they are validated...or not. Why is that important to you? Nope...but I see in my absence, reading through the rest of the thread...GG has done a fine job of pwning you. And, I just called you emo above. 2 or 3 times. And, I also blamed you for Nascar. And hippies smoking weed at Nascar, and there's nothing you can do about it. So, no, you're getting pwned.

Wait a sec, if people make "good money" doesn't that mean they pay more taxes? So...the GOP is against people paying more taxes...so....they don't want people to make good money? Right? No, wait. When the GOP pays less taxes, that means less people make good money? No. Try it again. The GOP pays more taxes, so that means they don't want people to make good money...because...if more people make good money, then, more taxes will be paid, and the GOP doesn't want other people to pay more taxes, like they do. They want to pay more taxes all by themselves. Yeah, that's it.

LA grates on you and needs a good dicking? I'm sure that's news to him. Ahh....crap...already been done. Whatever. It's funny enough to do it twice.

I said "you guys" didn't I? "You know, the royal we"? Whatever, I don't hate the President. There are only a very small group(count on one hand) of people that I truly hate, and you don't know any of them. That is all.

That's a doh, as in "my mistake" Facepalm is different. It's like "I can't believe Obama followed Jimmy Carter's model, instead of Bill Clinton's"....:facepalm: Or, "I can't believe we are talking about Fitz/Vince Young, at this point in time, along the same lines as Flutie/Johnson"...yeah, that's a :facepalm:

This should be required reading. And, I love the looks on people's faces when they bash Laffer and call him an idiot....and then I tell them he voted for Clinton twice, like they did, so what does that make them? Obama basically repeated the Clinton presidency....until 2010. But, instead of hiring a Dick Morris type and being a real pragmatist like Clinton was the next 6 years...we got even more nonsense ideology. It's bizarre really. We are seeing what happens when you do the exact opposite of Clinton...yet, liberals seem to be completely baffled by, or oblivious to it. I don't understand why they would ignore the things Clinton actually did. They only talk about his results, not what he did to get them.

Jesus...H...Christ...you guys are taking something I thought was funny....as hatred? I don't hate Obama the way you hated Bush. Think about that, and deal with it already. I assure you: this is less about me, and more about you. I think Obama's a nice, smart, good guy...who is simply incompetent. You're not going to see me calling him a liar, stupid, or an excellent liar but completely stupid, at the same time , evil, or any of the ridiculous crap you guys said about Bush. No matter how much you wish I would, I'm not going to do it. I don't need to assassinate someone's character, because I can't construct a logical argument based on fact. Now, I have no trouble assassinating the characters here. That's because: they largely deserve it. Also, please refrain form the "Lincoln was a Liberal" canard on this board. It is historically ridiculous. Yes, the guy who created corporate America...was a liberal Perhaps the "killing vampires" thing is accurate? After all, he made it so that the vampires of England, France, those in the South, all could not continue to profit off of our natural resources, agricultural products, and cheap labor. Now...cue YOUR JOKE: he killed those vampires, just to replace them with new vampires. :facepalm: (God I wish we had that emoticon)