DaveinElma Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Here comes "The poor are the real risk takers". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 That WTF Chillout look on that cute brunette's face around 30 seconds into the clip sums it up nicely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Someone want to explain to her that we have a social safety net? Is being poor risky? Sure. But you also have the chance using those safety nets to claw your way out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 You have to want to improve your situation. Expecting others to do it for you isn't the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 This is quite possibly the most intellectually vacant meme to come out in years. It's like something Joe Spaghetti would say; it sounds clever as long as you don't think about it. Where is the logical connection? Entrepreneur: I risked my life's savings on my business. Welfare mom: Well I risked my life to be poor. I mean really, this is just embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Come on, man. That's annoying & obnoxious. I highly doubt anyone reads all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 anarchist faq-- I saw MDP and a ridiculously long post. So I scroll wheeled down to the end. So did I miss anything? Yeah, I didn't think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 (edited) and this is why we cant have a real conversation about economics... yes, melissa was being emotional and quite frankly flipping out, but the moment someone offers a few pages on an alternate view explaining why something is flaud, people make vapid comments... ugh actually make an intellecutal argument... there are 5 that this website is making that i find cogent Edited September 3, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 there are 5 that this website is making that i find cogent Cogent, that's real intalkeshamul word you gots yourself there with plenty of silamabubbles Everytime a slow Southurnur like me done see me a edamakated intalkeshul like you using them thar fanshy dickshunary words, I think wow I dun know what that word means. It means you ur do durn smrt that you can outwit us dimwitted Southurnrs with your fancy degree from ITT Tech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Cogent, that's real intalkeshamul word you gots yourself there with plenty of silamabubbles Everytime a slow Southurnur like me done see me a edamakated intalkeshul like you using them thar fanshy dickshunary words, I think wow I dun know what that word means. It means you ur do durn smrt that you can outwit us dimwitted Southurnrs with your fancy degree from ITT Tech come on man, this is why ppp blows... u literally just attacked me because i used the word cogent? really man ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Cogent, that's real intalkeshamul word you gots yourself there with plenty of silamabubbles Everytime a slow Southurnur like me done see me a edamakated intalkeshul like you using them thar fanshy dickshunary words, I think wow I dun know what that word means. It means you ur do durn smrt that you can outwit us dimwitted Southurnrs with your fancy degree from ITT Tech I just say bull shlt. Yeah, that was long. I'm not going to read it right now. A bit of advice is for the poster to weed out the good stuff. Cut and paste it to a Word doc or such. Then trim that down some more. Put it in quote tags. Then post it. You know... With .... between where you cut. Give a disclaimer... Edited for us lazy folk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 long, it takes 5-10 minutes to read.... it goes into 5 different arguments. economics is not something you can trim down, its very complicated and involves a long disscussion on human nature and philosophy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 come on man, this is why ppp blows... u literally just attacked me because i used the word cogent? really man ? No, I dun attax u cuz u uzed da fanshy wurdz to pruve yur vocabmlary is biggur dan us simpel pr0les in teh souf Seriously dude, you want to gain some cred here stop trying to prove that you are so much smrtir than the rest of us because your professor enlightened you. Start learning how to think for yourself instead of regurgitating the absolute truth presented to you by somebody that has never held a job outside the insulated world of Academia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 (edited) This confirms it. MDP is FakeFatSunny. 1) This is copyright infringement to the Nth degree. If you're going to use someone else's writing, you can quote a few paragraphs at most, but certainly not more than 10 percent of the work. And provide a link. (I'm thinking you didn't because the source is known batshit crazy loony, even among batshit crazy loonies.) In no uncertain terms, this violates the Terms of Service of TBD. You can't just shrug this off and keep doing it under your many screen names. Copyright infringement is a crime and TBD can't be party to it. 2) You're quoting anarchist writings about risk/reward? Anarchists? The same people who throw Molotov cocktails every time there's a G-whatever summit? "We're going to argue that...." blah blah blah. So, investors who would be left paying the bills and going into serious debt if a business fails deserve jackshit versus the workers who simply move on to another job? Risk demands no reward? I reject that out of hand. Investors are supposed to just risk their assets because it's the 'right thing to do' to throw their money into ventures that create jobs for the proletariat and then give all the money to the workers and/government? Seriously, go !@#$ yourself, bringing that **** here. Economics at heart has little or nothing to do with human nature or philosophy. If that's what you're basing a system of monetary circulation around, you're doing it wrong. Edited September 3, 2012 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 long, it takes 5-10 minutes to read.... it goes into 5 different arguments. economics is not something you can trim down, its very complicated and involves a long disscussion on human nature and philosophy... Some sections are accurate, in part, but more are built on the backs of flawed premises or leap to false conclusions; the most glaring of which is a fundamental misunderstanding of the organic evolution of the concept of property. Also, that isn't original work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 (edited) Economics at heart has little or nothing to do with human nature or philosophy. If that's what you're basing a system of monetary circulation around, you're doing it wrong.Actually this is one of the areas where the work MDP plagiarised is correct. The economy is nothing more than an aggregate of all mirco-transactions, interactions, value judgements, and decisions made on an individual level by every single human being on the planet. These "inputs" are all predicated on individual personal preferces and moral sytems. Human nature and motivation not only "has a great deal to do" with economics; it essentially is economics. Edited September 3, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Some sections are accurate, in part, but more are built on the backs of flawed premises or leap to false conclusions; the most glaring of which is a fundamental misunderstanding of the organic evolution of the concept of property. Also, that isn't original work. No shite. Neither is MDP's post which is a blatant copy and paste of drivel from: http://www.infoshop.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 (edited) This confirms it. MDP is FakeFatSunny. 1) This is copyright infringement to the Nth degree. If you're going to use someone else's writing, you can quote a few paragraphs at most, but certainly not more than 10 percent of the work. And provide a link. (I'm thinking you didn't because the source is known batshit crazy loony, even among batshit crazy loonies.) In no uncertain terms, this violates the Terms of Service of TBD. You can't just shrug this off and keep doing it under your many screen names. Copyright infringement is a crime and TBD can't be party to it. 2) You're quoting anarchist writings about risk/reward? Anarchists? The same people who throw Molotov cocktails every time there's a G-whatever summit? "We're going to argue that...." blah blah blah. So, investors who would be left paying the bills and going into serious debt if a business fails deserve jackshit versus the workers who simply move on to another job? Risk demands no reward? I reject that out of hand. Investors are supposed to just risk their assets because it's the 'right thing to do' to throw their money into ventures that create jobs for the proletariat and then give all the money to the workers and/government? Seriously, go !@#$ yourself, bringing that **** here. giving permission is not a productive act, its hierarchy... when letting someone borrow your capital, the reason it is productive is because of labor creating " use value" ( this is where profits come from)... its the same concept if the person on his own, took his own raw materials and added use value, ( surely he wouldnt pay the land or sky god or raw materials) otherwise the raw materials or capital just sits there. that person would keep the value from his labor. raw materials sold would be worth raw materials.... this is why anarchists oppose private capital, because it creates systems of interest, rent, exploitation and stratification in the system. this does not mean labor is not subject to market value, some people would make more than others, through co-ops in competition. community banks elected democratically would give free credit through taxes. ( obviously banking reps would be subject to market discipline and regs on what would be a quality investment)... removing interest would remove massive debt from the economy... providing capital and then gaining interest is simply making someone else do your work( ie an extension and them claiming a piece of that work without doing anything) you deserve the reward of selling raw materials, not other labor... this surplus value creates the new capital and capital accumulation and class struggle... Economics at heart has little or nothing to do with human nature or philosophy. If that's what you're basing a system of monetary circulation around, you're doing it wrong. dude, that was 1 section out of about 50 topics on economics. it was a few pages out of about 100... i also cited the page, which is public and didnt claim it was my own. literally the complete opposite of plagarism lol seriously man, if you dont have an argument and want to shut people down, then obviously u dont want to engage in the exchange of ideas... Edited September 3, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 here james, papa noam explains it better than me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 dude, that was 1 section out of about 50 topics on economics. it was a few pages out of about 100... i also cited the page, which is public and didnt claim it was my own. literally the complete opposite of plagarism lol seriously man, if you dont have an argument and want to shut people down, then obviously u dont want to engage in the exchange of ideas... That doesn't mean you get to post it here. IIRC, SDS or one of the admins had a pinned thread on this on the main board for awhile because people were doing exactly what you're doing. Quote a few pertinent paragraphs, and then provide a link. You'd better learn this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts