Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 18 Jan 2008
Offline Last Active Sep 24 2016 02:57 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: The Problem With Capitalism

24 September 2016 - 02:57 PM

10 repetitions of "but greed is good, right?"

See, this is so typical for socialists. Take three words out of context, twist them, pervert them, and ridicule them. And yet, do not tell the truth.

You deliberately omit the part where I said "greed has its bad sides, but...". Yes of course, greed, and in particular excessive greed, can be bad. Nobody can deny that. But it also has good aspects. It drives people forward. Yes, it's not pretty, but it's a necessity. Without greed, we would have nothing (in fact, we would not even live).

Jealousy has no good aspects. It's just plain negative and destructive. Socialism is jealousy.

Socialism has no good aspects (in theory, it sounds like a good idea, yes...). Socialists take from those who work and produce (the "thieves who only steal") and direct their earnings into their own pockets. You know, it's not like socialists are against possesion. No, no... they just want to possess the same stuff as the others (and more), without working. What is yours is also mine, but stay away from my stuff.

I challenge you again: What about those good socialists that take 6-digit euro sums from the needy and even bigger 6-digit euro sums from the industry? What about the good socialists who waste close to 10k euros of tax money (per month, not per year!) on hosting their own permanent "coiffeur royal" in the style of Louis XIV? That, and eating from golden plates and having parades with gilded toy soldiers doing their ceremonial dance, but at the same time telling the people (mind you, those are the exploited workers, damn those capitalists!) that there is not enough money to pay for their retirement, and not enough money to build schools. There's also not enough money to repair those holes in the main street. But yeah, there's always enough money for me to bathe in champagne in a golden bathtub. From tax money.

Wasn't the French revolution exactly about abolishing that kind of thing? Now tell me why every mayor in France wears the Royal honor band? Every minister wears it, too (but on the opposite shoulder, for some reason?). Why do people who disapprove of nobility want noble titles and dress Napoleonesque? Why does a socialist need a medal on a ribbon? And what for, anyway? Did any single one of them save a million lives or find a cure for cancer? Did any single one of them ever produce anything but... words?
Why does every fucker in Germany get the order of merit, solely for doing a more or less ordinary, meaningless job for more than two years (and not even doing it good!), such as consul or minister? How can 30 orders or merit be reserved for haphazardly selected members of the parliament per legislative period, regardless of any actual merits, just like this? What have these people done? And why would they even want (being good democrats and socialists, after all) a symbol of totalitarism?

How can socialist ministers who (apart from being liars in every other respect anyway, like every politician) were caught lying not only about their imaginary PhD, but also about their imaginary highschool grade simply say "Yeah, you know what, fuck you. I'm not resigning, I'll still cash in 18k per month for the rest of my life"? If I did that kind of thing, I would not only be fired, but I would have to fear going to jail for unlawful assumption. But hey, for as socialist, that's perfectly OK.

If you want an example of why socialism/communism is evil, look at the very example that you have given yourself at the beginning: China.

Why are people in China so unhappy? I mean, it's the paradise, is it not? Why have people been fleeing from Russia (or the DDR, if you will) ever since the end of the second world war? I mean, it's just great there, isn't it. Why would you risk being shot by border guards? They must be crazy.

Why do the border guards shoot at them at all? After all, if they are fleeing from the paradise, they must obviously be mentally ill. No sane person would flee, would they.

Been to China recently and taken a deep breath? I hear there's people going to China for treating lung diseases. Try it. I've heard the water is really good there, too.

In Topic: The Problem With Capitalism

23 September 2016 - 07:36 AM

At the end of the day, the socialist view is it's not his "earned wealth", but has been accumulated through a system of exploitation, even if it's not apparent to those involved.

I guess this must be the reason why socialist politicians pay themselves monthly salaries of 18,000€ and a "honorary pay" upwards of 200k per year for life once they resign, even if that happens for no good reason or because they were caught with something criminal (all tax-free, of course).

It's a great step towards tax justice that they don't pay a dime, don't you think.

I guess it is also the reason why high-ranking work union representatives pay themselves such horrendous salaries (taken from the workers!) despite having a clear and present conflict of interest and despite being paid by the industry, too. I'll name as an example the head of Ver.di who, as a good socialist, takes 175k per year from his "worker comrades" and 427k in bribe, uh... I mean, supervisory board work from Lufthansa and RWE. Truly: Stand up, damned of the Earth, stand up, prisoners of starvation.

Surplus value, eh?

But I think we at least talked about how nobody can really earn, in any way, land ownership, for example, but nevertheless the right to own land(and huge amounts of it) exist as a a man-made and man-enforced law by the current society

It has been an agreement for many centuries (millenia?) that people own, and are entitled to own things, and this includes land.

Yes, you can lead a debate over how we are only visitors to this world and we do not truly possess anything, not even our lives. And in the end, we are just dust and bones, and we go to Nirwana or Krishna or whatever/whoever it is. But that esoteric stuff leads you nowhere. The world isn't like that, and people aren't like that.

It's a well-accepted fact that people own things (buy things, trade things, do things for things). It is also well-accepted that people can own land. Which means that even if they can't pick it up, they have the right to tell others to stay outside (or they can rent it, or whatever).

This is not something you will be able to change, owning land is natural. Every dog pisses on the next tree to mark its territory, do you really think we, the superior race of awesome evolved humans, are so distinctly different from this animal? If someone pricks you, do you not bleed? And if someone steals your bone, do you not growl? :)

It's a natural desire to own. Everybody wants to have something, no matter how small, and be able to say "this is mine, and mine alone". And sure, everybody wishes for his own "no trespassers" place. Why do you think most civilized nations have inviolability of the home as one of the first paragraphs in their constitution? It is exactly for that reason. Your home is sacred (note that it applies even though it may be possession, not ownership).

Yes, jealousy is also a very human trait, and although it has an ugly face, it sure is something that we will not be able to get rid off. But only because jealousy is (like greed) a natural thing, it doesn't mean we have to worship it. Greed does have its ugly aspects, but it also has positive sides. I find it hard to find a positive angle on jealousy.

Someone owns more than you do? Well, get over it. I bet there is also someone who is taller, fairer, better looking, has a prettier girlfriend, has a larger penis, is a better soccer player or a better chess player. Maybe he can play the piano, too. Geez, how I hate all these guys. They make me feel inferior. Let's kill them all!

Is that the ideal you want to worship?

The Greeks scammed me over a sunchair, and all I got was this stupid T-shirt

Wow, did you hear that? That was the world's saddest song, played on the world's smallest violin.

Look, if you decide to go to the most abusive little piece of tourist trap that you can find on one of the most well-known tourist-scam isles in the world, and someone asks 70€ for a sunchair, you have two options. You can just accept that you've been a fool for coming here in the first place, but now you're here and you still want to sit in this chair, so you pay. Or, you can go a hundred meters down the beach and sit on the sand, if you deem that sunchair a tidbit too expensive.

Even if that particularly obnoxious sunchair owner steals your wallet and your car keys, drives your car against a wall, comes back and rapes your girlfriend... how is that in any way related to the millions of people who acquire wealth through honest, ethical means every day? Such as "work" or "add value". How does it in any way justify to say that someone's house is not his house?

(Since I said "honest" means: Not like it's technically dishonest to take 70€ from a fool who is willing to pay that... but I certainly agree that it is outrageous. This is the same difference that I tried to point out earlier in the Apple example. There is a difference between what's "legal" and what's "right". This is what socialists usually get wrong when they point out how something is very much legal and good because they do things in their fucking legal constitutional-state way. But whatever it is, it is very, very rarely right in an ethical sense. Especially because usually when they play that card, they are only citing the 50% of the law that are advantageous to their ideology, and the 50% of the truth that seem to confirm their story.)

In Topic: Leveling up through mini-quests?

23 September 2016 - 05:19 AM

The problem that I have with these mini-quests is that someone has to generate them, and they will inevitably get boring (there's only so and so many things you can give as quest).

I somewhat like the way stats work in NetHack. Every XYZ you do will "exercise" a stat, and every so-and-so-many turns a check is made whether you have exercised, and there is a small (and diminiushing) chance that the exercised stat will go up.

Now, of course, NetHack wouldn't be NetHack if there wasn't "abusing" a skill, too. Which you can easily do, and there's like 10,000 things you need to keep in mind, or you'll regret.

Basically, remember to carry around enough weight to get stressed (exercises strength) but avoid getting hungry (abuses constitution), and do not carry enough weight to get strained, or even overloaded, since dexterity (and eventually constitution) will be abused.

But yeah, in general, that's a cool concept. Only a tidbit too complex for me, with a little too many pitfalls (I guess that's just the challenge to a hardcore NetHack player, though).

In Topic: The Problem With Capitalism

23 September 2016 - 04:39 AM

Why should someone's earned wealth need to be used optimally?


And moreover, who should decide how someone else's wealth is to be used? Let me guess :)

champagne guns

Right. Apart from some nouveau riche which are admittedly decadent to a sheer unbearable extent, and Formula-1 pilots, who actually spills Champagne?

Surely not the wealthy who know the value of money. That kind of thing is something the lower class does (if they get a chance). I've never seen someone who worked for his wealth do such a thing.

This is the same question as "Who will stop and bow down to pick up 10 cents?". I do, I even go down for a single cent. Which is funny because nobody else in the street seems to do it (I've seen that maybe half a dozen times in my entire life!), and I am in all likelihood more wealthy than any single one of them. Ironically, I find most of the change (about 4-5 Euros per week total) near a refugee shelter. Honi soit qui mal y pense.

It's the "poor and needy" who will drive 500 meters to the gas station in the evening to buy beer for 4x the price, and it's their wealthy capitalist pig friends asking them "Huh, are you crazy? First, this is easily within walking distance, and second... that would be the world's most expensive beer, and it isn't even good beer" (yep, another anecdote from my life).

It's the same "poor any needy" who use public transports for free being 45-year old students awaiting hopefully soon retirement, who never cook at home but instead order meals, always have the newest phone and a ton of ringtones and apps, and who always moan they can't afford anything. Sure enough they can afford playing with gotcha guns, though. And every DVD of every new movie. Fuck, your kitchen is twice the size of my entire apartment, you captialist pig. How do you do this! That's unfair (... a verbatim quote that I've gotten once).

It's the same people who forget their wallet every single time during the first half of the month when friends go to surf 'n turf, but promise to make it up next time. The next time, of course they would pay, only just there happens to be no money left on the bank during the second half of the month. But no worries, they'll pay you a beer some time. Eventually. Maybe.

In Topic: The Problem With Capitalism

21 September 2016 - 03:10 PM

I don't see how a system where one kid can have so many privileges and opportunities against another kid simply based on the family they were born in as just and rational.

Your entire notion that everybody should be equal is not rational.

People are not equal, and they will never be, no matter how much you wish for it. I'm not talking about money. I'm talking about ability, about attitude. And yes, it's not their fault, but their parents'. But the issue is not about having more money, it's about caring.

You object that some people grow up with parents that have more money, and you make the allegation that the poor kids don't have a chance because they are poor and will always be poor because they're poor, and it's all the fault of the kids who have parents with more money.

At no point do you consider that people from families with money still earn their lives.

At no point do you consider the very real possibility that the "underprivilegued" kids are not in any way as able as the others. The typical proletarian gives a shit about whether his kid fares well in school, and of course the overwhelming majority of them which isn't accidentially gifted in a magical way like Mozart doesn't fare well. Because, surprise, unless you are the kinda one in a billion chance superhuman, you do not simply know everything and learn everything from nowhere. It takes care and feeding.

It's even more pronounced in "people with migration background" as they're nowadays called (used to be you called them just "foreigners"). Although admittedly, it is slowly getting better. Two decades ago, it was "normal" that these kids didn't understand a word. Because, you guess it, their parents still didn't care to learn the local language after living in that place for 10-15 years (and some don't care after 35 years either). Those people still exist, of course, but at least there are meanwhile some others, too. Silverline at the horizon, if you will.
So, how do you expect a child that doesn't understand a word in school to graduate? How do you expect that child to become anything but either a social parasite, or a criminal? It's not like they have much of a choice, do they. And no, it's not because of money. It's because of "I give a fuck".

This is not just "some idea" of mine, by the way. It's what I've seen myself when teaching first aid at a junior high, and it's what one of the teachers told me "off the record" there: Some kids you just can't help.
That was on a day when we went to a gambling den to find a boy who couldn't be bothered to go to school because, you know, skool sux. I'm not sure how he got into that place because it's totally illegal for a 12 year old to be there, or for the owner to let him in. But apparently, that's not a problem in a constitutional democracy, the law is rather a guideline than something that's binding. At least as long as neither the owner of that location nor the parents of the kid give a shit.
Try and figure the trouble that I would have faced if my parents had ever caught me skipping school and going to a gambling den. That's unimaginable. And here, there you have the difference between the kids that get a privilegued job and those that don't. It's not money. It's parental care.

On the other hand side, people who don't have wealthy parents and who deliver a mere minimum very easily get very big privilegues here. I had to pay for my university studies myself, and I worked during all that time to earn my life and pay my studies. Not because we were poor, but because I was not elegible for governmental founding, and my father thought it was necessary for a young man to learn the value of money and how hard it can be to earn a living. I've done everything, got my hands real dirty, at the construction site, as care worker, and later as nurse. So don't you tell me about being privilegued. That being said, no, it wasn't a bad time, and in hindsight I believe my father made a wise decision back then.

Several from my highschool took up Bafög after graduating, which is a kind of governmental sponsorship. The basic qualification was, you had to be admitted to university (not really hard!), and your parents had to earn less than so-and-so much per month -- which ruled me out (that's regardless of whether your parents actually pay for you or not, by the way -- if they don't, then you are just unlucky).

The precise rules about what you get and what you have to pay back have changed about a dozen times during the years, and I don't know what they are now. But back then, you would get a generous monthly pay which was easily sufficient to live without needing to work, for up to one year longer than the regular study time. Longer than that if you had a good excuse. This was officially a "loan", but you did not have to pay any interest, and you only had to pay back 50% of the loan 10 years after leaving university. Which, in summary, means of course you were basically given around 100k for free.

You guess right, my comrades laughed at me because I, the stupid fool, had to work for my living, and nobody gave me the equivalent of a small apartment just like this. Fuck me, the capitalist pig.

asking for numbers/data while giving improbable excuses to a common scenario.

Hahaha yes, that's typical :)

If you want "numbers", just take a day off from work and go to the next social assistance office. Just look how many people have no trouble sitting there in the morning when you'd think they should be at work. You will be surprised how many people have that time -- after all, you had to take a day off to see them!

Go to a social housing site (but leave your wristwatch and your cell phone at home) and just have a careful look. You don't get the impression that it's poor people who live here. Not from the size of their plasma TVs anyway, or from their washing machine or kitchen machine brands. Heck, half of them have a bigger TV than I have.

I could tell you of a tenant (not in a social housing, but living from welfare anyway). One of those people who complain that they only get 364 euros per month which isn't enough for living. Except that's not for living but for cinema, cigarettes, and drugs. For living, they get extra, and the welfare office pays the rent, the TV, and the refridgerator. And, of course, the washing machine.
Because yeah, they're valuable human beings, and they must have the same privilegues as someone who is working.

So this guy orders his washing machine. He wants a Miele (well... of course, only the best), which costs over 800€. The guy at the social care office gives him a Bauknecht for under 300€. Incidentially, I see him on his way home (...let's say from the grocer, although something else is more likely) the day the machine is delivered, and he tells me: "Look, these fuckers will see how long this machine will last", he picks up a couple of cobblestones, and "washes" them. I can't believe what I see. Machine is broken after this special treatment, of course (you're not surprised, are you).
So he laughs and tells me "See, if they had bought the Miele right away, it would have been cheaper", and off he goes to the social care office again. I'm angry, quite obviously (since it's my tax money that is being burned) and call the social care office.
Social worker tells me: "Uh huh, well, do you have any evidence he did that on purpose? Uh huh, he told you, you watched him do it. Aright. Did anyone else see it, I mean, do you have a witness?". -- I'm stumped. The machine is not just somehow broken, it's anihilated, there are scratches from heavy rocks on the metal and rock splinters all over. And that fucking socialist tells me "Oh well, without evidence, you know, or a witness, I guess there's not much we can do". End of story, they bought him a Miele.

Dude, really, we totally need to give that type of human more money. It's so rewarding, and it surely turns them into better humans.