Random Thoughts, strictly Text
- Thread starter david starling
- Start date
conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
Frankly hard to masturbate to her
conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
Labels are fun
david starling
Well-known member
you really dislike him lol
Not because of that. His first wife, Ivana, revealed that he had plastic surgery done on his scalp. And, there was a picture of him getting off a plane where the wind blew his "hair" up and the back of his head was bald.
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
I just want to let all of you my dear forum members know that weekend is closing in on us and that is good news!
Have a great friday until then!
Y
I have a "thank God it's Sunday" thing goin' aun.
AppLeo
Well-known member
CT, the article you posted of this guy talking about reforming capitalism is a moron.
"Contrary to what populists of the left and populists of the right are saying, these unacceptable outcomes aren’t due to either a) evil rich people doing bad things to poor people or b) lazy poor people and bureaucratic inefficiencies, as much as they are due to how the capitalist system is now working."
Contrary to what he's saying, it actually is lazy poor people and bureaucratic inefficiencies.
"I believe that all good things taken to an extreme become self-destructive and everything must evolve or die, and that these principles now apply to capitalism. While the pursuit of profit is usually an effective motivator and resource allocator for creating productivity and for providing those who are productive with buying power, it is now producing a self-reinforcing feedback loop that widens the income/wealth/opportunity gap to the point that capitalism and the American Dream are in jeopardy."
Nonsense. First of all, the idea that just because something is extreme doesn't make it wrong or creates its inexorable death. I'm sure there's some obscure name for this logical fallacy, but just because something is extreme doesn't make it wrong.
Contrary to your idea that Rand is "outdated" her ideas are just as relevant as ever. She wrote an essay on "extremism" a long time ago
https://courses.aynrand.org/works/extremism-or-the-art-of-smearing/
We don't even have capitalism anymore. Capitalism is dead. There are small remnants of it.
We live in feudalism. That should be obvious by now. 100 of the wealthiest people in the world have as much as 3.1 billion people or some outrageous number like that. What reforms he's talking about AHAHA it's just a new way of feudalism.
It's incredibly difficult to start companies. In the United States specifically, we are quite regulated, have relatively high taxes... like jeez that check that Trump passed giving every American like 1000 dollars or whatever... that is the socialist dream. That is the rich keeping the poor in their place. It is making the poor dependent on the rich man. This is not capitalism.
The very idea that the top leaders and wealthy people need to DO SOMETHING about the bottom half of the world is exactly the reason why the bottom half will be poor. When you ask how the elites of the world should take care of the poor, you are in effect, making these people dependent on the elites. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
How do you think people become rich and wealthy? They don't rely on richer people than them to take care of them. They do it themselves.
"Bipartisan and skilled shapers of policy working together to redesign the system so it works better. I believe that we will do this in a bipartisan and skilled way or we will hurt each other. So I believe the leadership should create a bipartisan commission to bring together skilled people from different communities to come up with a plan to reengineer the system to simultaneously divide and increase the economic pie better. That plan will show how to raise money and spend/invest it well to produce good double bottom line returns."
This makes me so angry. This guy has no understanding of principles. You can thank his "practicality" and unfamiliarity with ideology. I don't really understand why people are anti-ideology. An ideology is a set of ideas and principles that leads to an ideal. Not having an ideology reduces you to pragmatism in which you achieve useless and contradictory goals.
It's WHY we are so polarized!! We have a sluggish mixed economy. We aren't moving in any direction. It's inevitable for one side to win. This guy only wants to prolong the agony. We either need free healthcare or privatized healthcare.
"Redisigning a system that works better"
What the hell are you talking about? So different regulations and controls? Taking money from some people and putting it somewhere else? What's the difference? What exactly are you changing?
DONT YOU UNDERSTAND?! Where does wealth come from? It comes from the mind. The human mind. When a person thinks and reasons he is able to produce something of value.
What are regulations? What are laws? What is a mixed economy? A system in which men is semi-free to think. He cannot think wholly. He is not allowed to think. He must comply to rules and standards regardless of what he actually thinks.
We don't need public education. We don't need any charity or welfare or whatever else.
Only rational self-interest. Selfish people will create win-win solutions automatically. Rich and rich, rich and poor, poor and poor. Everyone will rise. Some faster than others, but it really doesn't matter. Who cares if some people have way more than others? Why is that a problem? It's not a problem. It's perfectly fine.
Like what, are you going to tell me that if an elite human race came to Earth after a 1000 years had wealth equivalent to 100 times the 1%? They were so wealthy they could afford time travel. They could afford to mine rare minerals from planets far away. They could pay to have medical work done on them to allow them to live 1000 years? So what? Their wealth can only serve to help everyone else.
It should be obvious that you cannot regulate humanity into prosperity. And those that say you can, are the people who want to be at the top controlling humanity.
"Clear metrics that can be used to judge success and hold the people in charge accountable for achieving it. In running the things I run, I like to have clear metrics that show how those who are responsible for things are doing and have rewards and punishments that are based on how these metrics change. Having these would produce the accountability and feedback loop that are required to achieve success. To the extent possible, I’d bring that sort of accountability down to the individual level to encourage an accountability culture in which individuals are aware of whether they are net contributors or net detractors to the society, and the individuals and the society make attempts to make them net contributors."
Clear metrics that judge success? WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT SUCCESS? SUCCESS IS SUBJECTIVE. You cannot have this objective overly authoritarian approach in which a small group of people determine what is good or bad or What is contributing to or detracting from society. These small elite people are clearly with their ultra clear metrics are going to clearly benefit themselves because it's their clear standards. There's nothing more feudalistic and despicable than a wealthy educated person talking about how they're going to help the poor with their wealth and their education.
I have an idea, leave the poor people alone? Whatever you define to be "poor." Whatever you define any group to have whatever deficiency...
NOT TO MENTION, there is no such thing as society or groups. Society or collective success is irrelevant and stupid. Only individuals exist and only individual success matters. And that is determined by the individual by the use of his own mind and the choice to put in the work.
"Redistribution of resources that will improve both the well-beings and the productivities of the vast majority of people. "
More of the same marxist drivel
Spreading the wealth doesn't make people richer
All you've done is, well, spread the wealth
What makes someone rich is their character, work ethic and intelligence
You can't spread morality, you can't spread character, diligence, or intelligence
Those are Leo-like. They are either given to you at birth, or you pursue them from your own choice and thinking. They are not Aquarian or interconnected. They are not shared by humanity.
"Contrary to what populists of the left and populists of the right are saying, these unacceptable outcomes aren’t due to either a) evil rich people doing bad things to poor people or b) lazy poor people and bureaucratic inefficiencies, as much as they are due to how the capitalist system is now working."
Contrary to what he's saying, it actually is lazy poor people and bureaucratic inefficiencies.
"I believe that all good things taken to an extreme become self-destructive and everything must evolve or die, and that these principles now apply to capitalism. While the pursuit of profit is usually an effective motivator and resource allocator for creating productivity and for providing those who are productive with buying power, it is now producing a self-reinforcing feedback loop that widens the income/wealth/opportunity gap to the point that capitalism and the American Dream are in jeopardy."
Nonsense. First of all, the idea that just because something is extreme doesn't make it wrong or creates its inexorable death. I'm sure there's some obscure name for this logical fallacy, but just because something is extreme doesn't make it wrong.
Contrary to your idea that Rand is "outdated" her ideas are just as relevant as ever. She wrote an essay on "extremism" a long time ago
https://courses.aynrand.org/works/extremism-or-the-art-of-smearing/
We don't even have capitalism anymore. Capitalism is dead. There are small remnants of it.
We live in feudalism. That should be obvious by now. 100 of the wealthiest people in the world have as much as 3.1 billion people or some outrageous number like that. What reforms he's talking about AHAHA it's just a new way of feudalism.
It's incredibly difficult to start companies. In the United States specifically, we are quite regulated, have relatively high taxes... like jeez that check that Trump passed giving every American like 1000 dollars or whatever... that is the socialist dream. That is the rich keeping the poor in their place. It is making the poor dependent on the rich man. This is not capitalism.
The very idea that the top leaders and wealthy people need to DO SOMETHING about the bottom half of the world is exactly the reason why the bottom half will be poor. When you ask how the elites of the world should take care of the poor, you are in effect, making these people dependent on the elites. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
How do you think people become rich and wealthy? They don't rely on richer people than them to take care of them. They do it themselves.
"Bipartisan and skilled shapers of policy working together to redesign the system so it works better. I believe that we will do this in a bipartisan and skilled way or we will hurt each other. So I believe the leadership should create a bipartisan commission to bring together skilled people from different communities to come up with a plan to reengineer the system to simultaneously divide and increase the economic pie better. That plan will show how to raise money and spend/invest it well to produce good double bottom line returns."
This makes me so angry. This guy has no understanding of principles. You can thank his "practicality" and unfamiliarity with ideology. I don't really understand why people are anti-ideology. An ideology is a set of ideas and principles that leads to an ideal. Not having an ideology reduces you to pragmatism in which you achieve useless and contradictory goals.
It's WHY we are so polarized!! We have a sluggish mixed economy. We aren't moving in any direction. It's inevitable for one side to win. This guy only wants to prolong the agony. We either need free healthcare or privatized healthcare.
"Redisigning a system that works better"
What the hell are you talking about? So different regulations and controls? Taking money from some people and putting it somewhere else? What's the difference? What exactly are you changing?
DONT YOU UNDERSTAND?! Where does wealth come from? It comes from the mind. The human mind. When a person thinks and reasons he is able to produce something of value.
What are regulations? What are laws? What is a mixed economy? A system in which men is semi-free to think. He cannot think wholly. He is not allowed to think. He must comply to rules and standards regardless of what he actually thinks.
We don't need public education. We don't need any charity or welfare or whatever else.
Only rational self-interest. Selfish people will create win-win solutions automatically. Rich and rich, rich and poor, poor and poor. Everyone will rise. Some faster than others, but it really doesn't matter. Who cares if some people have way more than others? Why is that a problem? It's not a problem. It's perfectly fine.
Like what, are you going to tell me that if an elite human race came to Earth after a 1000 years had wealth equivalent to 100 times the 1%? They were so wealthy they could afford time travel. They could afford to mine rare minerals from planets far away. They could pay to have medical work done on them to allow them to live 1000 years? So what? Their wealth can only serve to help everyone else.
It should be obvious that you cannot regulate humanity into prosperity. And those that say you can, are the people who want to be at the top controlling humanity.
"Clear metrics that can be used to judge success and hold the people in charge accountable for achieving it. In running the things I run, I like to have clear metrics that show how those who are responsible for things are doing and have rewards and punishments that are based on how these metrics change. Having these would produce the accountability and feedback loop that are required to achieve success. To the extent possible, I’d bring that sort of accountability down to the individual level to encourage an accountability culture in which individuals are aware of whether they are net contributors or net detractors to the society, and the individuals and the society make attempts to make them net contributors."
Clear metrics that judge success? WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT SUCCESS? SUCCESS IS SUBJECTIVE. You cannot have this objective overly authoritarian approach in which a small group of people determine what is good or bad or What is contributing to or detracting from society. These small elite people are clearly with their ultra clear metrics are going to clearly benefit themselves because it's their clear standards. There's nothing more feudalistic and despicable than a wealthy educated person talking about how they're going to help the poor with their wealth and their education.
I have an idea, leave the poor people alone? Whatever you define to be "poor." Whatever you define any group to have whatever deficiency...
NOT TO MENTION, there is no such thing as society or groups. Society or collective success is irrelevant and stupid. Only individuals exist and only individual success matters. And that is determined by the individual by the use of his own mind and the choice to put in the work.
"Redistribution of resources that will improve both the well-beings and the productivities of the vast majority of people. "
More of the same marxist drivel
Spreading the wealth doesn't make people richer
All you've done is, well, spread the wealth
What makes someone rich is their character, work ethic and intelligence
You can't spread morality, you can't spread character, diligence, or intelligence
Those are Leo-like. They are either given to you at birth, or you pursue them from your own choice and thinking. They are not Aquarian or interconnected. They are not shared by humanity.
AppLeo
Well-known member
You could have the best system in the world (which is free unregulated laissez-faire capitalism) and people can still be poor because the reality is that people are who they are, and you cannot change that. Only the person themselves can change themselves. That is if they can change themselves. Some people are born idiots and meant to die like idiots. Some people are born poor and are meant to die poor.
david starling
Well-known member
This post is too short!
I'd imagine a Virgo Moon could come up with something a little more voluminous!
Last edited:
conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
@App
Cool. For context, here is a quick rundown of the person who wrote the article.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Dalio
Cool. For context, here is a quick rundown of the person who wrote the article.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Dalio
conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
Also, are you familiar with how China has grown their economy exponentially over a 30 year time span? During that time many were lifted out of poverty and into the middle class.
Hint: It wasn't through pure Capitalism.
Russia has a National Debt to GDP ratio of 17%. As opposed to the US that is at 106%
Do you have any thoughts on the ideology of China and Russia, and how it informs their economic policy?
Hint: It wasn't through pure Capitalism.
Russia has a National Debt to GDP ratio of 17%. As opposed to the US that is at 106%
Do you have any thoughts on the ideology of China and Russia, and how it informs their economic policy?
conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
Got it
Did you happen to unstuck the writing of your program last night?
Did you happen to unstuck the writing of your program last night?
conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
Disenchanted? You mean disengaged?
No, I just know how you are. And I don't have the inclination to go through a back and forth with you all day, as time is so precious.
I take your points however, and through your answers see how you perceive these problems. Knowing more about your perspective is valuable.
No, I just know how you are. And I don't have the inclination to go through a back and forth with you all day, as time is so precious.
I take your points however, and through your answers see how you perceive these problems. Knowing more about your perspective is valuable.
Last edited: